IRS Exec at Heart of Targeting Scandal Collected Big Bonuses
Thursday, 16 May 2013 10:07 AM
The IRS, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from The Washington Examiner, provided data showing that Lois Lerner, who is director of the agency's exempt organizations division, collected $17,220 in 2010, $14,691 in 2011, and $10,620 in 2012.
Lerner oversees the department that processes applications from groups seeking tax-exempt status. She is at the center of the growing scandal involving its targeting of tea party and other conservative nonprofit groups.
According to the information obtained by the Examiner, her salary in 2009 and 2010 was $172,200, and in 2011 and 2012 was $177,000. That brought her total pay for the four-year period to $740,931, including the bonuses.
Lerner acknowledged last week that her department had targeted conservative groups with words such as "tea party" and "patriot" in their names, delaying their applications in many cases by several months.
© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/irs-scandal-lerner-bonuses/2013/05/16/id/504839?s=al&promo_code=13840-1#ixzz2TUKvSYQw
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!
Lerner must be fired. Obama should have fired her the same time he fired Miller.
ReplyDelete-David
We agree!
ReplyDeleteAnother IRS exec bites the dust...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/05/16/obama-new-irs-commisioner/2165901/
Maybe Lerner will be next. I hope so.
--David
The scandals are falling apart…
ReplyDeletehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/16/the-scandals-are-falling-apart/
….unless more evidence appears.
--David
Anyone with two brain cells can see this article was written by the Obama Administration or by one of its stooges! If someone can't see that the IRS was going after ONLY right wing groups--not left wind. That is wrong. The AP story is about freedom of press, something Obama hates, especially if they write about Obama. And Benghazi, do they forget that 4 people died as part of incompetence or irresponsible handling of a attack on consultant.
ReplyDeleteThese scandals WILL NOT go away anymore than Clinton's issue or Nixon's use of the IRS and lying. The trouble is that these cases are worse than either of these two other Presidents.
Ezra Klein is no White House stooge. He is critical of Obama when deserved, but he is also very astute about keeping with the facts. That is why I read him regularly. Everything in that article is factually correct.
ReplyDeleteEveryone knows that conservative groups were wrongly selected by IRS. There is no evidence -- not according to me or Ezra Klein -- but according the the Inspector General who invested the matter for over a year that none of this was directed by Obama. That is the difference between this and Watergate and Nixon. Zero evidence. Of course, like all other Obama conspiracy theories, it will go on forever with zero evidence.
--David
Do you really think that the White House will give up all the information, all the evidence of tampering with people's tax returns and tax exempt organization denials at first blush. If you do, you do not understand how Washington guards its information.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very typical move to try to kill the story by leaking only a small part of the story and hoping the story will die. Fortunately for those of us who are seeking the truth, the story did not die but only got bigger!
There is plenty of evidence out there and it will turn up over the next couple months as it is dragged out of those who are currently hiding it! Be patient and you will see that ole Conservative Tom is right!
You lack the courage of your "convictions." Let's put this in propositional form and bet $20. I keep calling you on these Obama conspiracy theories, and you always have a reason not to put your money where your mouth is. You've never been right yet on any of them.
ReplyDeleteProposition: Evidence will be produced "in the next couple months" that Obama directed the IRS to target conservative c(4) applications. If you don't like my wording, feel free to edit.
The evidence I would accept would be some White House written directive to IRS, or testimony under oath to Congress by the White House lawyer (such as John Dean did to Nixon), or some email/memo, etc. from the Secretary of Treasury or IRS commissioner indicating that this policy was directed by the White House, or maybe an email from chief of staff to anybody at IRS following up on Obama's orders. In other words, I am expecting something as clear as Nixon in Watergate, or Reagan on Iran-Contra, or Bush ordering Alberto Gonzales to fire 7 U.S. district attorneys for political reasons. Endless speculations and conjectures on Fox News, Newsmax, etc. do not count. So, instead of backing out of the bet by claiming apriori that we could never agree on what evidence would be acceptable to both of us, tell me what 1,2,3 general sorts of evidence YOU think is going to come out in the "next couple months." Pray tell, sir. I'll probably accept it as the basis for our bet if ANY of them materialize, unless one is laughably flimsy.
--David
So testimony by those directed or by those who directed the operation would not be enough for you? It must be a big wig not one of the "slaves."
ReplyDeleteNot necessarily. For the bet, we should use ordinary courtroom rules of evidence. Hearsay evidence is not allowed. Only testimony from persons with direct knowledge is admissible. Okay? That is what we SHOULD do. But if you won't agree to ordinary courtroom rules of evidence, I might allow hearsay evidence from somebody high enough in the chain of command WH>Treasury>IRS to have plausibly been told by someone who did have direct knowledge. Let me know what YOU would accept, and we can go from there.
ReplyDeleteAlso, is the wording of the proposition acceptable to you? Giving you "a couple months," the $20 would be payable to me on August 1.
--David