THE IRS SCANDAL AND MEDIA COMPLICITY

Is there such a thing as media depraved indifference?  Or is it just that they root so hard for Obama – his administration and his tactics, however dirty and illegal – that, rather than indifference, it is a proactive involvement in the cover-up?

Two excerpts for you. 

The first is from judicialwatch.org, dated July 7th: 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released new Department of Justice (DOJ) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) documents that include an official “DOJ Recap” report detailing an October 2010 meeting between Lois Lerner, DOJ officials and the FBI to plan for the possible criminal prosecution of targeted nonprofit organizations for alleged illegal political activity.

The newly obtained records also reveal that the Obama DOJ wanted IRS employees who were going to testify to Congress to turn over documents to the DOJ before giving them to Congress. Records also detail how the Obama IRS gave the FBI 21 computer disks, containing 1.25 million pages of confidential IRS returns from 113,000 nonprofit social 501(c)(4) welfare groups – or nearly every 501(c)(4) in the United States – as part of its prosecution effort. According to a letter from then-House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) to IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, “This revelation likely means that the IRS – including possibly Lois Lerner – violated federal tax law by transmitting this information to the Justice Department.”

The documents were produced subsequent to court orders in two Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits: Judicial Watch v. Internal Revenue Service (No. 1:14-cv-1956) and Judicial Watch v. Department of Justice (No. 1:14-cv-1239).

The new IRS documents include a October 11, 2010 “DOJ Recap” memo sent by IRS Exempt Organizations Tax Law Specialist Siri Buller to Lerner and other top IRS officials explaining an October 8 meeting with representatives from the Department of Justice Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section and “one representative from the FBI” to discuss the possible criminal prosecution of nonprofit organizations for alleged political activity… 

Got that?  Judicial Watch, only through the Freedom Of Information Act (Obama & Co. certainly weren\’t offering) has obtained records indicating that the IRS may have conspired with the Department of Justice and the FBI to go after nonprofits – the nonprofits clearly being any 501(c)4 with a name that suggested it would be opposed to the Obama administration.

Two days later, however, not one network has covered this for even one second.  In other words, they are continuing their years-long effort to bury the IRS scandal as if it did not exist – which it so clearly does – and protect its go-to person, lois “liar” lerner, who should be rotting in a jail right now instead of enjoying her sudden “retirement” on a fat taxpayer-funded pension.

The second excerpt is a statement issued the Media Research Center\’s Brent Bozell, regarding the complete blackout of information about this scandal by all three networks:

“The networks\’ refusal to cover these devastating revelations borders on being complicit in a cover-up of criminal misconduct by a tyrannical administration using Stalinist tactics against its political opponents. The documents obtained by Judicial Watch – through a Freedom of Information lawsuit that should have been initiated by a supposedly independent media – reveal criminal coordination between the IRS, FBI and the Department of Justice in an effort to politically persecute innocent, law-abiding Americans and independent organizations. How different is this from regimes run by iron-fisted dictators? Where are the media, whose professional charter is to be a watchdog of government? They seem to have no problem fulfilling that mission when a Republican is in the White House. Why are they protecting President Obama instead of looking out for the American people? The networks have an obligation to cover and pursue this story to its fullest extent on behalf of a public they claim to represent. If they won\’t do it, then they\’re complicit in a criminal cover-up.”

My only problem with that statement is the suggestion, in the first sentence, that it “borders on being complicit in a cover-up of criminal misconduct”.  The last sentence – “If they won\’t do it, then they\’re complicit in a criminal cover-up” is far more apropos:  after two full days of burying this information, it is no longer on a border, it has crossed over.

How can these people call themselves journalists?  How can they even face themselves in the mirror?

And, if not them, then who is protecting the people of this country?