The IRS Scandal Began in Washington

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released excerpts from transcribed interviews between committee investigators and Cincinnati IRS employees. In these interviews Cincinnati IRS employees reject the White House’s and Lois Lerner's ridiculous claim that the targeting was merely work of “rogue” agents and say targeting of conservative political groups came from Washington, D.C. Intuitively we already knew as much. There were far too many employees involved for this to have been a rogue, low level, operation.
How long did the targeting go on? Inasmuch as more than 20 groups are still waiting for approval it's fair to say it's still going on. So set the beginning at March 2010 and it looks like 38 months and counting.

One Cincinnati IRS employee interviewed by the Oversight Committee rejects the White House assertion and points to Washington as being responsible for targeting effort:

Q: In early 2010, was there a time when you became aware of applications that referenced Tea Party or other conservative groups?
A: In March of 2010, I was made aware.
Q: Okay. Now, was there a point around this time period when [your supervisor] asked you to do a search for similar applications?
A: Yes.
Q: To the best of your recollection, when was this request made?
A: Sometime in early March of 2010.

Where did the targeting originate?

Q: Did [your supervisor] give you any indication of the need for the search, any more context?
A: He told me that Washington, D.C., wanted some cases.
Q: So as of April 2010, these 40 cases were held at that moment in your group; is that right?
A: Some were.
Q: How many were held there?
A: Less than 40. Some went to Washington, D.C.
Q: Okay. How many went to Washington, D.C.?
A: I sent seven.

The agent then explained that he or she sent hard copy versions to Washington, selecting the first 7 in his file. Then the agent was asked for 2 specific application. It's not random when someone asks for an application by name.

Q: Did anyone else ever make a request that you send any cases to Washington?
A:  [Different IRS employee] wanted to have two cases that she couldn't ‑‑ Washington, D.C. wanted them, but she couldn't find the paper.  So she requested me, through an email, to find these cases for her and to send them to Washington, D.C.
Q: When was this, what time frame?
A: I don't recall the time frame, maybe May of 2010.
Q: But just to be clear, she told you the specific names of these applicants. 
A: Yes.
Q: And she told you that Washington, D.C. had requested these two specific applications be sent to D.C. 
A: Yes, or parts of them. 
Q: Okay.  So she asked you to send particular parts of these applications. 
A: Mm‑hmm.
Q: And that was unusual.  Did you say that? 
A: Yes.
Q: And she indicated that Washington had requested these specific parts of these specific applications; is that right?
A: Correct. 

And evidently Washington was setting up the fall guy by giving him or her more applications than he or she could possibly process in a timely manner.

Q: You have stated you had concerns with the fairness and the timeliness of the application process.  Did you have concerns with just the fact that these cases were grouped together and you were the only one handling them? 
A: I was the only one handling the Tea Party's, that is correct. 
Q: Did that specifically cause you concern? 
A: Yes, it did.  And I was the only person handling them. 
Q:  Were you concerned that you didn't have the capacity to process all of the applications in a timely manner? 
A: That is correct.  And it is just ‑‑ I mean, like you brought up, the micromanagement, the fact that the topic was just weirdly handled was a huge concern to me. 

In a future post I'll pursue the notion that has been advanced by both CBS News and McClatchy News Services that the IRS was just part of a government wide action that brought the full force of the government to bear on those opposing the Obama administration. That list would include, aside from the IRS, the FBI, ATF, EPA and OHSA.