Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.


Skip to comments.

JUDICIAL WATCH FIGHTS CLINTON IRS ATTEMPTED AUDIT
Judicial Watch ^ | April 18, 2002

Posted on 04/18/2002 10:49:16 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist

For Immediate Release

Apr 18, 2002

Press Office: 202-646-5172

JUDICIAL WATCH FIGHTS CLINTON IRS ATTEMPTED AUDIT

IRS OFFICIAL ADMITS: “WHAT DO YOU EXPECT WHEN YOU SUE THE PRESIDENT?”

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the non-profit educational foundation that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it was fighting in court an audit attempt instituted by the Clinton IRS in retaliation for Judicial Watch’s litigation against President Clinton. Judicial Watch first received notice of an attempted IRS audit on October 9, 1998, a few days after its “Interim Impeachment Report,” which called for Bill Clinton’s impeachment for misuse of the IRS, was officially made part of the Congressional record. The IRS’s initial audit letter demanded that Judicial Watch “[p]rovide the names and addresses of the directors and their relationship to any political party or political groups.” In January, 1999, an IRS official admitted to Judicial Watch representatives, in the context of the propriety of the audit, “What do you expect when you sue the President?” Another IRS official admitted in June, 1999, that the political affiliations of Judicial Watch’s directors is a factor in any IRS audit.

After Judicial Watch scored legal victories against the Clinton Administration, Judicial Watch received audit notices and warnings from the IRS. For instance, immediately following its uncovering of the Clinton-Gore White House e-mail scandal in February, 2000, Judicial Watch lawyers received a call from an IRS official to inform them that Judicial Watch was still on the IRS’s “radar screen.” The IRS finally agreed to defer on deciding whether to audit Judicial Watch until after the Clinton Administration ended. Despite this agreement, in one of the last acts of the Clinton Administration, the IRS sent Judicial Watch another audit notice on January 8, 2001. The IRS also sent new audit notices throughout 2001 after Judicial Watch criticized IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti. Rossotti is a Clinton appointee who “inexplicably” continues to serve under President Bush. In addition to presiding over the audits of perceived critics of the Clinton Administration, Judicial Watch requested criminal and civil investigations of Rossotti for his criminal conflict of interest in holding stock in a company he founded, AMS, while it did business with the IRS.

Judicial Watch now is fighting the attempted audit in federal courts in the District of Columbia and Maryland. As Robert Novak reports in his April 18th column, despite repeated requests to Attorney General Ashcroft to investigate, his Bush Justice Department has thus far refused to do so. (See Judicial Watch's letter to Attorney General John Aschroft) Instead, in the context of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit against the Cheney Energy Task Force, a Bush Administration official told Novak, “I don't know what we are going to do with this Klayman.” A copy of Judicial Watch’s complaint against IRS officials is available by clicking here.

“Judicial Watch has no objection to IRS audits at the proper time and place, under correct, non-political circumstances. We have nothing to hide. But when we were told that we were being audited because we sued Bill Clinton, we had no choice but to stand up and fight in court. Now, for its own reasons, the Bush Administration is content to let Clinton appointee Rossotti continue to harass Judicial Watch. Our lawsuits in response are intended not only to protect Judicial Watch, but are for the good of all Americans,” stated Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman.

© Copyright 1997-2002, Judicial Watch, Inc.


TOPICS: Announcements; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Free Republic; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: judicialwatch
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 2,001-2,014 next last

1 posted on 04/18/2002 10:49:16 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
Whachya hidin' Lar?

Given Judicial Watch's hyperactive legal machinations against the Bush administration, I don't expect Aschcroft to lift a finger.

And, I'm glad he's not. I'd like to see some of those financials myself.

2 posted on 04/18/2002 10:53:27 AM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
Sorry, I don't care about Judicial Watch anymore...
3 posted on 04/18/2002 10:53:51 AM PDT by Drango
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
The JW campaign to try and shift tactics to raise donations from Democrats by bashing Bush Admin. has tremendously failed; now hey're having to come back and try and re-establish support amongst conservatives for this latest fundraising drive.
4 posted on 04/18/2002 10:54:31 AM PDT by Steven W.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Do you believe that politically motivated IRS audits are beneficial to our country?
5 posted on 04/18/2002 10:56:41 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: Steven W.
During their attempts and eventual success in releasing the Energy Documents from Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force, Judicial Watch had never put the Clinton crimes on the back burner.
7 posted on 04/18/2002 10:57:58 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Drango
Well, then don't comment.
8 posted on 04/18/2002 10:58:43 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
Do you believe that politically motivated IRS audits are beneficial to our country?

I believe that a financial audit of Judicial Watch has been in order for a very long time. That it comes from the IRS is juicy, indeed.

Larry's running a political organization. Any investigation of it will be met with cries of "politics."

9 posted on 04/18/2002 11:04:15 AM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
I am curious to know just how many other conservative non-profits are audited by the IRS. This sounds politically motivated to me, especially given the comments by some of the IRS officials above. My question to you is: Do you believe that the Clinton Administration audited various conserivative organizations and individuals for political reasons? If so, do you believe that this is a good trend for our country?

I do not believe that Judicial Watch is spouting some conspiracy theory here, even the National Review complained that they were audited unfairly because of political reasons during the Clinton era.

10 posted on 04/18/2002 11:08:28 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
Clinton's gone. Has been for over a year.

It's an audit. People and businesses get audited for lots of reasons.

Larry's been out of the news for a week or so; this must an attempt to gin up some dudgeon among his sap followers (like you).

You haven't changed a bit, Rebeckie.

11 posted on 04/18/2002 11:11:51 AM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
I think that you are oversimplifying the issue at stake here. By the way, you still haven't answered my oh so inquisitive questions to you.

As for your other comment, of course I haven't changed a bit. I am in college now and long past that adolescent stage in life and if you insist on calling me a name, just call me Beckie.

12 posted on 04/18/2002 11:16:02 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
If they do end up getting audited, I can only hope that they have had perfectionist accountants and tax gurus working for them.
13 posted on 04/18/2002 11:20:10 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Clinton's gone. Has been for over a year. It's an audit. People and businesses get audited for lots of reasons.

Tell it to Judicial Watch, Joe Farah's Western Journalism Center, Paula Jones, Gennifer Flowers, Katherine Prudhomme, Juanita Broaddrick, etc.

I can’t understand how you, Bush, or Ashcroft would not support Judicial Watch’s contention that these audits were politically motivated.

14 posted on 04/18/2002 11:20:13 AM PDT by dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
These replies again show me that there really isn't much different in a dem or a pubbie follower. No matter who or what YOUR guy is you will support or villify if they don't tout YOUR (R) or (D) agenda. Such hippocrites.
15 posted on 04/18/2002 11:20:40 AM PDT by Digger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dead
Thank-you for calling a spade a spade. Anyone who does not believe that these audits were politically motivated, is being purely delusional or outright hostile to these conservative maverick organizations.
16 posted on 04/18/2002 11:22:26 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Digger
Is Jessie Jackson or NOW etc being audited? BTW why would anyone want to support this abtrusive organization stick'in it face in anyones business.
17 posted on 04/18/2002 11:24:41 AM PDT by Digger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Digger
Judicial Watch is having a tough time right now--because they are consistent and go after both parties, the powerful hypocrites on both sides will not help or stand up for them. In politics, it seems that the powerful elite protect the powerful elite and my opinion of both Bush and Ashcroft has gone considerably down because they will not do anything about the traitors in our country.

People always yell and scream when Judicial Watch cannot rack up numerous court wins, but they fail to hold the Justice Department to the same impossible standard that they hold to Judicial Watch.

18 posted on 04/18/2002 11:27:41 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Digger
You now something has gone horribly wrong with the Republican Party when they would rather side with the IRS, than a conservative maverick organization such as Judicial Watch.
19 posted on 04/18/2002 11:28:56 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: zog, Fred Mertz, Ken H, Thanatos, poet, Let Loose the Dogs of War, Nunya bidness, Chu Gary
Ping!
20 posted on 04/18/2002 11:30:42 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Bill, BeAChooser, timestax, ChaseR, goldilucky, Mercuria, Doughty One, Onyx, ratcat
Ping!
21 posted on 04/18/2002 11:31:41 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: A.J. Armitage, rdavis84, rdf, Revel, Lulu, backhoe
Ping!
22 posted on 04/18/2002 11:32:37 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
GO Larry GO!!

I won't be surprised if JW gets pursued by the Bush administration's IRS gestapo.

23 posted on 04/18/2002 11:33:58 AM PDT by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
Well, it has become obvious that the IRS is a political whore, pandering to whatever party is currently in power. Politicians know that the IRS is a powerful political tool for which to harass their enemies. That is why the IRS needs to be well, abolished.
24 posted on 04/18/2002 11:38:08 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
God bless Larry Klayman for still believing the crimes billclinton committed do matter
thank God for those who had the courage to stand up to clinton when he was the most powerful man in the world
they are the heroines and heros who saved our Republic
Love, Palo
25 posted on 04/18/2002 11:41:00 AM PDT by palo verde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
you are wonderful
26 posted on 04/18/2002 11:43:21 AM PDT by palo verde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: palo verde
It is always much easier to stand on the sidelines and bark, rather than actually do something about the things we that we wrong with this world. Larry Klayman and Judicial Watch are prime examples of the mavericks and underdog fighters who actively stand up against the evil in this world.

You are absolutely correct, God Bless the staff of Judicial Watch and Larry Klayman.

27 posted on 04/18/2002 11:55:02 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
"You are absolutely correct, God Bless the staff of Judicial Watch and Larry Klayman."

Agreed. It's incredible to see posters actually gleeful that the Bush Administration is no Different than the Clinton Admin. WRT using the IRS as THEIR tool for intimidation and harrassment.

28 posted on 04/18/2002 12:00:53 PM PDT by rdavis84
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
After Judicial Watch scored legal victories against the Clinton Administration,

Does anyone remember these? I can't seem to recall them off the top of my head.

He probably can't list them now because funds are a little tight, sounds like it's time for a fundraising letter.

29 posted on 04/18/2002 12:02:45 PM PDT by Cable225
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alamo-girl

"...Another IRS official admitted in June, 1999, that the political affiliations of Judicial Watch’s directors is a factor in any IRS audit..."


30 posted on 04/18/2002 12:04:54 PM PDT by vannrox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
I see nothing wrong with pursuing government corruption. I don't care who's ox is being gored.
31 posted on 04/18/2002 12:07:34 PM PDT by CyberSpartacus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
It seems pretty clear to me. As long as Judicial Watch keeps suing the Government, it should be exempt from any audits. Why can't the Government just wait until Judicial Watch quits suing them?

;-)

32 posted on 04/18/2002 12:16:08 PM PDT by humbletheFiend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Fascinating! Thanks for the heads up!
33 posted on 04/18/2002 12:27:50 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
Heard Bill O'Reilly say he was audited three times during the Clinton administration. There were some very suspicious audits during that time. I don't have the list in front of me right now.
34 posted on 04/18/2002 12:28:35 PM PDT by Texas Mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
Last night on O'Reilly there was this doofus lawyer who was defending the woman who received a $500,000 IRS refund. It seems that she claimed a slavery tax credit and the lawyer spoke as if he got his law license on the back of a box of Wheaties.

During the conversation O'Reilly tried to get this lawyer to admit that FRAUD!!!was involved. He also noted that the IRS was acting quite timidly with regards to this woman while he, (O'Reilly), had been audited three times during the Clinton Administration. O'Reilly implied that those audits were politically motivated. I believe!!

35 posted on 04/18/2002 12:37:59 PM PDT by Young Werther
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
Do you believe that politically motivated IRS audits are beneficial to our country? What do you mean by "beneficial?" The qestion is whether they are compatible with the very foundation of this "country of laws not men."
36 posted on 04/18/2002 12:39:58 PM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

To: FreedominJesusChrist
Well, then don't comment.

It's not your place to tell people whether or not they can post on threads. Even yours.

38 posted on 04/18/2002 1:19:40 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
If they do end up getting audited, I can only hope that they have had perfectionist accountants and tax gurus working for them.

I can hardly wait to read your rationalizations about why Klayman has been hiding his financial statements. It should be interesting.

39 posted on 04/18/2002 1:22:13 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
This is larger than JW, for which I personally have no love.

Let's ignore JW for a moment and address what Novak writes.

The Justice Department's stonewall fortifies considerations of privacy and lack of congressional interest in protecting the IRS from scrutiny. The IRS never has explained its intrusion during the Clinton administration's first year when the new president reshaped the White House travel office. Two days after White House sources suggested kickbacks were paid to travel office functionaries from charter airlines, a charter used by the White House--Ultrair of Nashville, Tenn.--was visited by IRS agents for an unannounced audit.

In 1996, the conservative (and anti-Clinton) Western Journalism Center in Los Angeles was hit by an IRS audit from which it never fully recovered. Judicial Watch filed a complaint in behalf of the WJC on May 13, 1998, and the IRS audit of Klayman's organization was launched Oct. 9, 1998. Also swiftly visited with audits were Clinton accusers Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones and Gennifer Flowers, former travel office chief Billy Dale, and even Katherine Prudhomme, who once bothered Vice President Al Gore by asking about Broaddrick--plus assorted conservative organizations.

Your absence on the Novak thread is conspicous....or will you also criticize him and avoid the larger issue?

Justice turns blind eye to IRS

40 posted on 04/18/2002 1:26:12 PM PDT by RJCogburn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
See my #40.
41 posted on 04/18/2002 1:26:51 PM PDT by RJCogburn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: one_particular_harbour
In January, 1999, an IRS official admitted to Judicial Watch representatives, in the context of the propriety of the audit, “What do you expect when you sue the President?” Another IRS official admitted in June, 1999, that the political affiliations of Judicial Watch’s directors is a factor in any IRS audit.

There seems to be some information missing there, doesn't it? Likes names. Seems like if that was true, he'd print who said it.

42 posted on 04/18/2002 1:27:13 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
My absence? Sorry, I didn't realize it was required. However, I do have an excuse; the downstairs AC is out and we're trying to get it fixed.

However, I agree with you about politically motivated audits; Western Case is a prime example, IMO.

Politics aside, I still think JW should publish their BofD and who donates to them.

43 posted on 04/18/2002 1:29:40 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
Your absence on the Novak thread is conspicous....or will you also criticize him and avoid the larger issue.

Didn't see it and will read it later.

44 posted on 04/18/2002 1:33:58 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
My absence? Sorry, I didn't realize it was required

Not required, but appreciated, as you are one of the more rational and temperate Bush defenders.

Sorry about the AC. I don't disagree with you regarding JW.

45 posted on 04/18/2002 1:41:07 PM PDT by RJCogburn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
I just read that post; my problem with it is that I don't know how much of that information Novak got from Klayman, and, IMO, Klayman's words don't always turn out to be the actual facts, unspun, if you get my drift.

That being said, I do trust Michael Chertoff.

46 posted on 04/18/2002 1:43:25 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Heck the 'eWW' has only four directors and three of them are employees of JW. Now that wouldn't be considered ethical in any publically held corporation. But for the 'eWW' that is pure ethics.... sheesh.

The four directors and their salaries per the 2000 form 990 filing.....

Larry E Klayman.....$250,000+
Paul J Orfandes...... $155,214+
Thomas Fitton.... $128,646+
John Marnua..... $0.....

Heck it used to be that Judicial Watch even paid his law firm Klayman and Associates over $300,000 for rent and supplies, etc. Ethics where art thou..... Now it's reversed and Klayman and Associates is paying "fair value" to JW for the same....

Heck if they are above board and nothing wrong then an audit shouldn't be feared.... it would only boast their claim of being the "eWW"....

47 posted on 04/18/2002 1:48:23 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark, Howlin
By using the word "Beneficial", I was questioning whether or not politically motivated IRS audits do anything to advance the cause of freedom and liberty in this country. The answer is that it doesn't. When the IRS picks and chooses who to audit, without any proof of criminal wrongdoing and without any set publically published guidlines on how they decide who to audit, that is not Equal Protection under the Law, it is instead blatantly biased law.

The IRS isn't even a Constitutionally valid entity.

48 posted on 04/18/2002 1:48:33 PM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
"I can hardly wait to read your rationalizations about why Klayman has been hiding his financial statements. It should be interesting."

Howlin, if Klayman is hiding his financial statements, then I would like you to show me the law that requires him to publish this information publically.

49 posted on 04/18/2002 1:52:27 PM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
Hiding behind the law, are you? The right thing to do would be to publish WHO gives him money, who might be behind him. A lot of us would like to see it.

I'd also like to know how it is that it only costs him less than two million dollars to keep "all" these lawsuits going, and why he doesn't spend the OTHER twenty-three million he gets on lawsuits; perhaps he'd win some then. Most of us that you call Klayman bashers would shut up if he could justify that that money isn't going to a coporation he or somebody he knows runs and is legit.

Of course, you do realize, don't you, that EVERYBODY that gets audited thinks it's political.

50 posted on 04/18/2002 1:56:33 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 2,001-2,014 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson