When asked last week when he first heard of the IRS targeting conservative groups, President Obama responded: “I first learned about it from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this. I think it was on Friday.”
A sentiment upheld yesterday by White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer, who told “Fox News Sunday” that Obama learned about it only after it had come out in the media.
However, the Wall Street Journal reported Sunday that a White House official said the president’s chief lawyer learned weeks ago that an audit of the IRS likely would show that conservative groups were inappropriately targeted.
In the week of April 22, the Office of the White House Counsel and its head, Kathryn Ruemmler, were told by Treasury Department attorneys that an inspector general’s report was nearing completion, the White House official said. In that conversation, Ms. Ruemmler learned that “a small number of line IRS employees had improperly scrutinized certain…organizations by using words like ‘tea party’ and ‘patriot,’ ” the official said.
Such an admission suggests that Obama was never notified of this news, but is that believable? Or was he intentionally not told? It seems many are skeptical, as a new White House petition was filed on Friday asking for an explanation for such glaring inconsistencies.
All of which raises the ever-familiar question: “What did the president know and when did he know it?”
Keep in mind that the IRS effort of selectively targeting Tea Party groups for scrutiny began more than three years ago, and that the Treasury Department was informed in June. U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) has also known for a year about the allegations.
As the Wall Street Journal notes, the White House declined to make Ruemmler available for comment and wouldn’t say whether she shared the information with anyone else in the senior administration staff.
Most transparent administration ever? Not so much.
Is this new revelation more proof of Obama’s ineffective management style? Perhaps a sign of his incompetence? Or is it a concerted effort to keep him uninformed about such matters to establish deniability?
The lawyers will say that by not telling Obama, the appearance of him meddling in an independent investigation is avoided, however, is the appearance of the president and his administration acting guilty until proven innocent not equally troublesome?
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
- Did Sunny Hostin just admit on air to breaking the law by voting for her son? - November 8, 2022
- Stacey Abrams justifies trailing in the polls by suggesting black men are too stupid to back her - November 7, 2022
- Kevin McCarthy has message for Pelosi telling Dems to ‘change the subject’ away from inflation - October 24, 2022
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.