Khoa học tổng hợp: tháng 5 2013

Thứ Tư, 15 tháng 5, 2013

Five ways the IRS scandal will change Washington

Toss a pebble into a lake and the ripples spread far and wide. Lob a scandal, in which the anti-tax tea party is under attack by its nemesis, the Internal Revenue Service, into the shark-infested waters of Washington, and well, the political ramifications are huge.

Whatever comes of the investigations into the IRS’s inappropriate targeting of conservative groups in the 2012 election cycle, this much appears certain: the scandal will unite conservatives, invigorate the tea party, and potentially affect the 2014 midterm elections.

Here are five ways the IRS scandal will change Washington:

1) INVIGORATE THE TEA PARTY AND ITS SMALL-GOVERNMENT MOVEMENT

For thousands of tea party members across the nation, it’s an “I told you so” moment. You have to admit the scandal is perfectly scripted. Big government, and taxes in particular, are the movement’s central grievance. Heck, the group even takes its name from the Boston Tea Party, the iconic historical protest against unfair taxation.

How perfect, then, that the latest scandal to hit Washington confirms the tea party’s anti-big government, anti-tax, anti-IRS crusade. What’s more, it confirms countless complaints by tea party groups and allegations by right-leaning websites like The Blaze that the IRS was going after conservative groups.

In Washington, the tea party had been losing its luster almost ever since the shining glory of the 2010 midterms. The IRS scandal could be the rallying cry of a reinvigorated movement.

2) UNITE CONSERVATIVES

The GOP’s 2012 election square dance – two steps to the right in the primary, one step to the left in the general election – exposed a rift between the Republican Party and its conservative base, one that’s only widened as the party is forced to reconsider issues like gay marriage and immigration.

Yet, as every tactician knows, nothing unites like a common enemy. As such, the IRS scandal unleashed a golden opportunity for conservatives.

“The accusations of IRS abuse are sure to fuel an effort that appears to be uniting dispirited Republicans and their conservative political base: investigating Mr. Obama and his administration,” The New York Times reported Monday. “Republicans are pushing a portrayal of an administration overreaching its authority and punishing its enemies.”

Enemies that are sure to leverage the situation to their advantage.

3) IMPACT MIDTERM ELECTIONS

Yes, believe it or not, it’s true. If conservatives can sustain, even strengthen, that unity, and launch a big-government attack on Democrats, the IRS scandal could influence the 2014 midterm elections.

In a recent column, political polling guru Nate Silver predicts the IRS debacle “could have a substantial political impact,” and has “the potential to harm Democrats’ performance in next years’ midterm elections, partly by motivating a strong turnout from the Republican base.”

He uses a five-point test to argue that the scandal “has legs”: it can be described in one sentence, cuts to the core of a candidate or party’s brand, and reinforces a negative perception about a candidate, among other points.

Expect reverberations in 2014.

4) INVIGORATE THE TAX CODE REFORM MOVEMENT

For years advocacy groups and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle – from Democratic Sen. Max Baucus of Montana to libertarian Rep. Ron Paul of Texas to Republican Gov. Rick Perry of Texas – have advocated for tax reform. It’s an uphill, if not vertiginous, climb and a goal that has remained elusive for decades.

If they’re smart, lawmakers and tax advocacy groups will use the IRS scandal – and its revelations about tax code loopholes (recall that 501(c)(4)s are often used by political groups to avoid paying taxes and to hide donors) – to invigorate their cause.

A case in point: For the first time in more than 25 years, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Baucus wants to launch the first full-scale rewrite of the 5,600-page US tax code.

Ambitious? Yes. But given the current climate in Washington, the timing couldn’t be better.

5) DERAIL BIPARTISAN COOPERATION

Alas, as if partisan bickering and congressional gridlock weren’t enough, the IRS fiasco throws another wrench into legislative wrangling on issues like gun control, immigration, and the debt ceiling debate.

President Obama’s chummy dinners and golf games with Republicans? All for naught, as Politico explains.

“The IRS developments couldn’t come at a worse time for the White House, which has spent months courting GOP support for everything from gun control to an overhaul of immigration laws,” it reported. “If the administration’s recent GOP charm offensive bought any goodwill, it seems to be on short supply now.”

Or, as the Washington Post said, “We aren’t likely to see Republicans and Democrats in Congress join hands and sing Kumbaya any time soon.”

IRS commissioner ousted over tea party targeting

WASHINGTON (AP) — Hurrying to check a growing controversy, President Barack Obama ousted the acting commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service late Wednesday amid an outcry over revelations that the agency had improperly targeted tea party groups for scrutiny when they filed for tax-exempt status.

Obama said Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew had asked for and accepted Steven T. Miller's resignation. Obama made no public criticism of Miller but spoke of inexcusable "misconduct" by IRS employees and said new leadership at the agency was critical.

"Americans are right to be angry about it, and I am angry about it," Obama said in a televised statement from the White House. "I will not tolerate this kind of behavior in any agency but especially in the IRS, given the power that it has and the reach that it has into all of our lives."

Meanwhile, the FBI is investigating potential civil rights violations at the IRS, Attorney General Eric Holder said earlier Wednesday. Other potential crimes include making false statements to authorities and violating the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from engaging in some partisan political activities, Holder said.

Miller, a 25-year IRS veteran, took over the agency in November, when the five-year term of Commissioner Douglas Shulman ended.

In an email to employees, Miller said, "This has been an incredibly difficult time for the IRS given the events of the past few days, and there is a strong and immediate need to restore public trust in the nation's tax agency. I believe the Service will benefit from having a new acting commissioner in place during this challenging period."

At the time when tea party groups were targeted, Miller was a deputy commissioner who oversaw the division that dealt with tax-exempt organizations.

An inspector general's report does not indicate that Miller knew conservative groups were being targeted until after the practice ended. But documents show that Miller repeatedly failed to tell Congress that tea party groups were being targeted, even after he had been briefed on the matter.

The IRS said Miller was first informed on May, 3, 2012, that applications for tax-exempt status by tea party groups were inappropriately singled out for extra, sometimes burdensome scrutiny.

At least twice after the briefing, Miller wrote letters to members of Congress to explain the process of reviewing applications for tax-exempt status without revealing that tea party groups had been targeted. On July 25, 2012, Miller testified before the House Ways and Means oversight subcommittee but again was not forthcoming on the issue — despite being asked about it.

Miller was scheduled to testify Friday at a Ways and Means hearing. It was not immediately clear whether he would still testify.

Holder announced Tuesday that the Justice department had opened a criminal investigation, joining three committees in Congress that are looking into the matter.

"I can assure you and the American people that we will take a dispassionate view of this," Holder told the House Judiciary Committee at a hearing Wednesday. "This will not be about parties, this will not be about ideological persuasions. Anybody who has broken the law will be held accountable."

But, Holder said, it will take time to determine if there was criminal wrongdoing.

Legal experts, however, said it could be difficult to prove that IRS officials or employees knowingly violated the civil rights of conservative groups. If there is a violation, the experts said, investigators can sometimes prove more easily that officials made false statements or obstructed justice in some other way.

"I think it's doubtful that any of these knuckleheads who engaged in the conduct that gave rise to this controversy knowingly believed that they were violating the law," said David H. Laufman, a former Justice Department lawyer. "But that remains to be seen. That's what investigations are for."

"It's more likely than not that," he said, "the conduct at issue here may constitute violations of IRS rules or standards or protocols or procedures but may fall short of what is necessary to constitute a criminal offense."

Even if IRS agents broke criminal laws in targeting conservative groups, investigators may have to prove they knowingly did it, a high standard, said Brian Galle, a former Justice Department lawyer who teaches law at Boston College.

"If the reason they were pursuing them was in order to punish them for their political activity, there might be a First Amendment concern there," Galle said. "On the other hand, if the reason that they were looking for tea party groups is because there had been press reports about this new group, the tea party, who was aimed primarily at getting more conservative people elected to office, then they were just responding to the evidence. It really depends on what their motives were."

Wednesday's hearing was the first of several in Congress that will focus on the issue.

The House Oversight Committee announced Wednesday that it would hold a hearing May 22, featuring Lois Lerner, the head of the IRS division that oversees tax exempt organizations, and former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, whose five-year term ended in November.

The Senate Finance Committee announced a hearing for next Tuesday.

At Wednesday's hearing, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said Lerner misled him and his staff when they asked her about complaints from conservative groups that they were being harassed by the IRS.

"I know for a fact, Lois Lerner lied to me, she lied to our personal staff, she lied to committee staff, she lied in correspondence," Jordan said.

Lerner learned about the targeting on June 29, 2011, according to a report Tuesday by the inspector general.

The report said ineffective management at the IRS allowed agents to improperly target tea party and other conservative groups for more than 18 months.

The report said that while their applications for tax exempt status languished, tea party groups were asked a host of inappropriate questions, including: Who are your donors? What are the political affiliations of officers? What issues are important to the organization, and what are your positions on those issues? Will any officers in the group run for public office? Where do you work?

The IRS started targeting groups with "Tea Party," ''Patriots" or "9/12 Project" in their applications for tax exempt status in March 2010, the inspector general's report said. By August 2010, it was part of the written criteria used to flag groups for additional scrutiny.

Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, said Wednesday that no union employees had been disciplined, as far as she knew. She noted that the IG's report said agents were not motivated by political bias.

Kelley told The Associated Press that low-level workers could not have specifically targeted conservative groups for long without the approval of supervisors. However, she noted, there are many levels of supervisors at the IRS.

"No processes or procedures or anything like that would ever be done just by front-line employees without any management involvement," Kelley said. "That's just not how it operates."

___

Associated Press reporter Andrew Miga contributed to this report.

___

Follow Stephen Ohlemacher on Twitter: http://twitter.com/stephenatap

View the original article here

Poll: 61% say ‘no’ to guns in homes of kids with mental health problems

The Lanza home, March 28, 2013. (Dylan Stableford/Yahoo News)

In the wake of the Newtown, Conn., school shootings, gun control advocates called for more background checks. Gun rights advocates called for more school security. And mental health advocates called for more dialogue about mental health.

While the first two calls have gone largely unanswered, it appears the third is beginning to be addressed, at least on the family level.

According to a recent survey of 1,600 parents conducted by the Child Mind Institute and Parents magazine, 60 percent are concerned that kids who have a mental illness—like Asperger’s Syndrome, which Newtown gunman Adam Lanza reportedly had—are more likely to hurt themselves or others. And 61 percent of parents said that parents of children with mental health problems should not be allowed to have a gun in their home.

But according to an oft-cited American Psychiatric Association study, "the vast majority of people who are violent do not suffer from mental illnesses."

"The truth is that most violent crimes are not actually committed by people who are mentally ill," Parents deputy editor Diane Debrovner, who helped coordinate the survey, told Yahoo News.

In fact, "people with serious mental illnesses are actually at higher risk of being victims of violence than perpetrators," Thomas Insel, director of the National Institute on Mental Health, wrote in the wake of the shootings in Tuscon, Ariz., in 2011.

And, Debrovner said, “kids with mental health disorders can grow up to lead happy, productive lives when they get proper care."

But it's unclear what kind of mental health care Lanza was getting, if any, on Dec. 14, 2012, when police say he shot his mother in her bedroom of the Newtown home they shared, forced his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School and opened fire, killing 20 first graders and six adults before shooting himself. Earlier this week, the Hartford Courant reported that an autopsy performed on Lanza revealed he did not have antidepressants or anti-psychotic medications in body.

The stigma surrounding mental health issues prevent many parents and teachers from getting kids the support—and medication—they need, according to Dr. Harold Koplewicz, president of the Child Mind Institute.

“The Newtown shooting has lead to a national conversation about mental health,” Koplewicz said in a release announcing the findings. “What we hope will come from the tragedy is openness that starts in each family and community, when we acknowledge our worries about our own children, and help make other parents feel safe enough to speak up about their worries, too.”

To that point, the results were encouraging: 66 percent of respondents "believe that parents are now more likely to seek help if their child’s behavior worries them."

"We've heard that an increasing number of pediatricians and primary care doctors have mental-health providers in the same office," Debrovner added, "just down the hall."

Click here to see the full results.

View the original article here

‘Angry’ Obama says acting IRS chief fired over conservative targeting

President Barack Obama will make previously unannounced remarks on the IRS scandal at 6 p.m. Wednesday, his press office said. The president's statement from the East Room of the White House will come a little more than an hour after a meeting with senior Treasury Department officials to discuss the controversy, which centers on the IRS' acknowledgement that it improperly targeted conservative groups for scrutiny.

In a written statement late Tuesday, Obama called the IRS' behavior "intolerable and inexcusable," and said that he had directed Treasury Secretary Jack Lew "to hold those responsible for these failures accountable."

On Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder promised angry lawmakers that the Justice Department will undertake a national investigation into the IRS wrongdoing.

"We will take a dispassionate view of this," said Holder, who faced tough questioning from the House Judiciary Committee. "This will not be about parties ... anyone who has broken the law will be held accountable."

Holder said he had launched an investigation last Friday into why the IRS subjected conservative groups to more review when they applied for tax-exempt status. The IRS inspector general's report said that a group of low-level staffers in an Ohio office were responsible, and a top IRS official has apologized on their behalf.

But Holder promised that the investigation will look well beyond Ohio, and suggested that civil rights laws could have been violated.

Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., asked Holder at the hearing whether an "apology" from the IRS protected them from criminal prosecution. Holder answered, "No."

The Obama Administration is under fire over the IRS, the president's handling of the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, and the Department of Justice's secret collection of telephone records of Associated Press reporters and editors.

Republicans have been hammering Obama on all three matters. While Democrats have largely defended him—and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton—on Benghazi, they have joined their GOP colleagues in denouncing the IRS and in expressing deep concerns about the AP phone records.

On Monday, Obama dismissed Republican charges of a cover-up in the Benghazi situation as a "sideshow" lacking any merit. He has yet to comment directly on the AP issue.

View the original article here

USW Members Ratify Contracts at ExxonMobil Baytown Complex

BAYTOWN, Texas, May 15, 2013 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- United Steelworkers (USW) local 13-2001 members tonight ratified three separate agreements with ExxonMobil Baytown for the operations, maintenance and laboratory groups.

(Logo: http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20080131/DC12982LOGO )

The three-year agreements expire May 15, 2016 and cover about 850 workers at the Baytown complex. They met the provisions of the National Oil Bargaining (NOB) policy, and the local 13-2001 bargaining committee recommended them for approval.

ExxonMobil agreed to bargain over the American Petroleum Institute's recommended practice on fatigue, RP 755, and to establish a limit on the number of consecutive days an employee can work. The company also agreed to a full-time union process safety representative position to address process safety concerns. These two issues had been in contention during negotiations.

Other contract provisions included wage increases of 3 percent the first year, 3 percent the second year and what is negotiated in 2015 for process and maintenance employees at ExxonMobil's locations in Beaumont, Texas, Billings, Mont., Chalmette, La., and Torrance, Calif. that are NOB program sites. Active and retired workers will have access to the same health care plans as non-represented employees. ExxonMobil will pay 76 percent of the premiums with the plan participants paying the remaining 24 percent of the cost.

"We look forward, as a USW NOB program site, to working with ExxonMobil, and within the confines of this agreement, to achieving a higher level of health and safety in the facility," said local 13-2001 President/Business Agent Ricky Brooks. "With the USW's NOB program and all of its participating locals, the petrochemical and oil industry in this country can achieve a workplace where no one gets hurt or killed, and all go home just as they reported to work."

The ExxonMobil Baytown refinery is the second largest in the country behind the Motiva refinery in Port Arthur, Texas, that is jointly owned by Shell and Saudi Aramco.

The USW is the largest industrial union in North America and has 850,000 members in the U.S., Canada and the Caribbean. The union represents workers employed in metals, rubber, chemicals, paper, oil refining, atomic energy and the service sector.

Contact : Lynne Hancock, USW, 615-828-6169, lhancock@usw.org

SOURCE United Steelworkers (USW)

View the original article here

Woman: China police ask to ax White House petition

BEIJING (AP) — Upset about plans for a petrochemical plant near her hometown in China, a woman turned to a new method that Chinese are using to air their complaints: she posted a petition on the White House's website. Then, Chinese police asked her to remove it.

Last week's run-in with internal security agents turned into an unexpected lesson for the woman.

"I didn't think (the petition) was a big deal and didn't foresee the ensuing events," said the woman, who asked to be identified only by the initials she used on the petition, B.Y., for fear of further angering the police.

B.Y., who is in her late 20s and works in the finance industry in the central city of Chengdu, said the officers asked her last Friday to delete the petition from the White House open petition site.

Set up in 2011, the "We the People" site allows the public to directly petition the White House. But she said she discovered the site does not allow people to remove petitions so she was unable to comply.

The Chengdu police department declined comment and would not provide the unlisted number for its domestic security protection branch.

B.Y.'s petition problem, which was first reported by Hong Kong's South China Morning Post newspaper, shows how prickly Chinese authorities are about Internet dissent, probably particularly when it involves the White House.

Chengdu, the capital of Sichuan province, has been on edge over plans to build a petrochemical plant 40 kilometers (25 miles) northwest of the city. The plant is expected to produce 10 million tons of oil and 800,000 tons of ethylene per year. Residents are concerned that the plant, operated by state-owned PetroChina, will aggravate air and water pollution, and question its safety because it is near a seismic fault where two deadly earthquakes have occurred in the past five years.

Authorities thwarted a planned demonstration over the plant on May 4 by filling the streets with police for a supposed earthquake drill, and have censored discussions of protest on the Internet.

Internet sites, particularly social media, are China's most unfettered forums for discussion, and many, especially younger Chinese, chafe at increasingly intrusive censorship.

At about the same time, Chinese discovered that the White House petition site was beyond the censors' reach. Discussions about an unsolved case involving the poisoning of a university student named Zhu Ling in Beijing 18 years ago were being deleted from Chinese sites, so someone turned to the White House site. In a few days, a petition calling for an investigation of a suspect living in the U.S. gathered 100,000 online signatures — the threshold for an official White House response — and kept the discussion alive in China.

B.Y. said she went to the White House site to sign the petition for Zhu Ling. Then, she saw she could start her own petition as well.

"So, I wrote about Chengdu," B.Y. said in an interview conducted by instant message. Her petition, posted in English on May 7, notes public concern about the project and urges the international community to evaluate the plan and monitor its environmental impact.

The next day, she received a call from the domestic security personnel. "I got a shock today," she wrote on her Sina Weibo microblog. Two days later, she met with the officers at a police station near her workplace.

"I will be out to have some tea," she wrote Friday. "If I should not return in two hours, please report me as missing." Having tea usually means someone has been called by the domestic security personnel for a talk.

"It was merely a chat," B.Y. said in the interview. "They wanted to know what the opposing views were and if there were other issues the public are worried about."

Asked whether the White House had provided any information to Chinese authorities to help them identify the petition writer, White House spokesman Matt Lehrich said it does not disclose users' information to any outside person or organization.

Unable to remove the White House petition, B.Y. attempted to comply with the police request by deleting a Sina Weibo post that had called attention to the petition. But she is also continuing to post Chengdu pollution levels on her microblog.

Quoting a well-known Chinese author, Hao Qun, who goes by the pen name Murong Xuecun and whose own microblog was recently censored, B.Y. said, "I am going to stay here until the stone blossoms."

View the original article here

Petraeus email objected to Benghazi talking points

WASHINGTON (AP) — Then CIA-Director David Petraeus objected to the final talking points that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice used five days after the deadly assault on a U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya, because he wanted to see more detail publicly released, including a warning issued from the CIA about plans for an embassy attack, a newly released email shows.

The White House on Wednesday released 99 pages of emails and a single page of hand-written notes made by Petraeus' deputy, Mike Morell, after a meeting at the White House the day before Rice's appearance. On that page, Morell scratched out from the CIA's early drafts of talking points mentions of al-Qaida, the experience of fighters in Libya, Islamic extremists and a warning to the U.S. Embassy in Cairo on the eve of the attacks of calls for a demonstration.

"No mention of the cable to Cairo, either?" Petraeus wrote after receiving Morell's edited version, developed after an intense back-and-forth among Obama administration officials. "Frankly, I'd just as soon not use this, then."

Senior administration officials told reporters Wednesday that Morell made the changes to the talking points because of his own concerns that they could prejudge an FBI investigation into who was responsible for the Sept. 11, 2012, attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

The officials said Morell also didn't think it was fair to disclose the CIA's advance warning without giving the State Department a chance to explain how it responded.

The officials spoke on a condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about the emails on the record.

Critics have highlighted an email by then-State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland that expressed concern that any mention of prior warnings or the involvement of al-Qaida would give congressional Republicans ammunition to attack the administration in the weeks before the presidential election. Fighting terror was one of President Barack Obama's re-election strong points.

That email was among those released by the White House, sent by Nuland on Sept. 14 at 7:39 p.m. to officials in the White House, State Department and CIA. "I have serious concerns about all the parts highlighted below, and arming members of Congress to start making assertions to the media that we ourselves are not making because we don't want to prejudice the investigation," she wrote.

The emails were shared with Congress earlier this year as a condition for allowing the nomination of John Brennan for CIA director to move forward.

The general counsel for the national intelligence director's office briefed members and staff from the Senate Intelligence Committee and leadership on the emails on Feb. 15 at a session in which staff could take notes. A similar briefing took place March 19 for the House Intelligence Committee and leadership staff.

An interim report last month from the Republicans on five House committees criticized the Obama administration and mentioned the emails, but the issue exploded last Friday when new details emerged.

Republicans on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee read some of the emails aloud last Wednesday at a hearing with State Department officials. The next day, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, called on the White House to release the emails.

Congressional officials selectively shared parts of the emails, and new revelations emerged Friday that showed State Department and other administration officials pressing for references to terror groups and prior warnings be deleted, expressing concerns about the political implications.

The White House released the full set of emails sent to Congress under the pressure in hopes of putting an end to the controversy that has dogged the administration for months. The White House says congressional Republicans have misrepresented some of them.

The emails released by the White House were partially blacked out, including to remove names of senders and recipients who are career employees at the CIA and elsewhere. The names were replaced with references to the office where they worked.

The talking points were used by Rice in her appearance on five news shows on Sunday, Sept. 16, and also sent to Congress. An official with the CIA's office of congressional affairs whose name was blacked out sent the final version to Petraeus on Saturday, Sept. 15, at 12:51 p.m.

"As mentioned last night, State had voiced strong concerns with the original text due to the criminal investigation," the official wrote.

Petraeus responded at 2:27 saying he'd prefer not to even use them in that form.

But he said the decision was up to the White House's national security staff.

"NSS's call, to be sure; however, this is certainly not what Vice Chairman (Dutch) Ruppersberger was hoping to get for unclas use. Regardless, thanks for the great work."

Ruppersberger is the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.

___

Associated Press writer Donna Cassata contributed to this report.

View the original article here

Mutts no more. In D.C., they call them ‘Xoloitzcuintli’

Xoloitzcuintli (photo via Wikimedia Commons)

Say you've got a dog and you're not sure what breed it is. Maybe it's part poodle? With a little bit of Labrador? And it drools a lot, so maybe there's some St. Bernard mixed into the DNA?

Most people call these dogs "mutts." But in Washington, D.C., owners are being asked to refer to them as "Xoloitzcuintli" when filling out pet-licensing paperwork with the District's health department, according to the Washington Post.

Letters explaining the name change were sent to D.C. dog owners.

Via the Washington Post:

"Our new system requires a primary breed be entered. If your dog was previously entered as a ‘Mix,’ the pet is now entered as a Xoloitzcuintli (a rare, hairless dog)."

OK, but why? According to the Washington Post, the breed finder is used in the event a dog becomes lost. But, as the Post puts it, "it’s not at all clear how listing a non-Xoloitzcuintli dog as a Xoloitzcuintli—that’s pronounced show-low-eats-QUEENT-lee—will help anyone find anything."

A phone call to the health department was not immediately returned.

View the original article here

Holder promises ‘nationwide’ investigation into IRS targeting

Attorney General Eric Holder will face tough questioning from a House committee Wednesday afternoon over twin scandals that have dogged the Obama administration this week: the seizure of phone records of Associated Press reporters and editors and the revelation that IRS employees singled out conservative nonprofits for extra scrutiny.

On Tuesday, Holder said at a news conference that the national security leak that prompted the department to seize AP phone records was among the most serious he had ever seen.

“I have to say this is ... among the top two or three most serious leaks I have ever seen. It put the American people at risk. That is not hyperbole,” he said. The leak led to an AP story last year about the government foiling a Yemeni-based terror plot to bomb American airliners.

Holder said he recused himself from the investigation, but that he believes the Justice Department acted appropriately.

Meanwhile, Holder told reporters that he has launched an investigation into reports that the IRS singled out conservative groups and subjected them to more review and scrutiny when they applied for tax exempt status. The IRS' inspector general report said that a group of low-level staffers in an Ohio office were responsible.

Holder's appearance at the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee hearing was scheduled before the IRS and AP news broke, but will most likely now be focused on those issues. Rep. Bob Goodlatte, the Republican chair of the committee, said in a statement that he plans to ask "pointed questions" about the Justice Department's decision to subpoena two months' of AP telephone records, as well as question Holder about the IRS and whether there were any intelligence failures in the lead-up to the Boston bombings.

Holder has long faced criticism from Republicans, some of whom called for his resignation in 2011 over the failed gun-walking Fast and Furious operation on the U.S.-Mexico border. The Justice Department's inspector general cleared him of wrongdoing in that scandal last year, blaming the botched operation on Arizona federal prosecutors and ATF agents.

Watch Holder's testimony above, at 1 p.m. ET.

View the original article here

Conservative group says IRS approved nonprofit status after applying with ‘liberal-sounding name’

MediaTrackers.org

In May 2011, Drew Ryun, a conservative activist and former Republican National Committee staffer, began filling out the Internal Revenue Service application to achieve non-profit status for a new conservative watchdog group.

He submitted the paperwork to the IRS in July 2011 for a news site called Media Trackers, which calls itself a "non-partisan investigative watchdog dedicated to promoting accountability in the media and government." Although the site has investigated Republicans like Ohio Gov. John Kasich and Florida Gov. Rick Scott, the site's organizers are apologetically conservative.

"One thing we don't hide is: 'Yeah, we're conservative—free-market, free-enterprise, full-spectrum conservative,'" Ryun told Mother Jones magazine last year.

Eight months passed without word from the agency about the group's application, Ryun said. In February 2012, Ryun's attorney contacted the IRS to ask if it needed more information to secure its non-profit status as a 501(c)3 organization. According to Ryun, the IRS told him that the application was being processed by the agency's office in Cincinnati, Ohio—the same one currently facing scrutiny for targeting conservative groups—and to check back in two months.

As directed, Ryun followed up with the IRS in April 2012, and was told that Media Trackers' application was still under review.

When September 2012 arrived with still no word from the IRS, Ryun determined that Media Trackers would likely never obtain standalone non-profit status, and he tried a new approach: Starting over. He applied for permanent non-profit status for a separate group called Greenhouse Solutions, a pre-existing organization that was reaching the end of its determination period.

The IRS approved Greenhouse Solutions' request for non-profit status in three weeks.

When news broke last week that the IRS had applied heavier scrutiny to conservative groups seeking non-profit status from 2010-2012, Ryun said he became convinced that his second application was approved quickly because he applied under the Greenhouse Solutions title, which he called a "liberal-sounding name."

"Within three weeks, Greenhouse received permanent non-profit status from the IRS, and the IRS approval was transmitted to us from its Cincinnati office. We then rolled the Media Trackers project into Greenhouse and began work on a number of new projects," Ryun told Yahoo News in an interview. "Do I think we benefited from what many think is a liberal-sounding name? Absolutely."

In December 2012, Ryun simply made Media Trackers a project of Greenhouse Solutions and withdrew the Media Trackers application.

The IRS website explains why some requests for tax-exempt status take longer than others to process.

"Sometimes, representatives of exempt organizations and practitioners question why certain applications for tax exemption are processed faster than others. Not all applications are the same," the site reads. "While many are complete when received and involve straight-forward scenarios, others may be incomplete or involve complex issues that require further development."

The IRS is currently under fire from both Democrats and Republicans, and Attorney General Eric Holder on Tuesday announced that he had directed the FBI to launch a criminal probe into the IRS. The same day, the Treasury inspector general for tax administration submitted a review of the IRS' practices, which found that the agency had used "inappropriate criteria" to determine which groups were eligible for non-profit status. Current and former IRS officials are expected to testify about the issue before House committees starting Friday.

View the original article here

Speier Calls Congress 'Enablers of Sexual Assault'

Jackie Speier

Lawmakers came down hard today on military leaders, the morning after allegations emerged of another head of a military sexual assault prevention program engaging in the very behavior he was charged with stopping.

Late Tuesday the Army announced that the coordinator of a sexual assault prevention program at Fort Hood, Texas, is under investigation "for pandering, abusive sexual contact, assault and maltreatment of subordinates." He has been suspended from all duties while his case is investigated by the Army's Criminal Investigative Command.

That report came a week after the lieutenant colonel in charge of the Air Force's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office was arrested for the alleged sexual battery of a woman in a parking lot near the Pentagon.

"Another sex scandal rocks the military," Rep. Jackie Speier said Wednesday. "Is Congress really going to stand by and let the military handle this? "Congress has been an enabler of sexual assault by not demanding that these cases be taken out of the chain of command."

Rep. Speier has a bill pending in Congress that would do precisely that, called the STOP Act. Staff for Speier said the U.S. Capitol Police are investigating threats against the congresswoman.

Assistant Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin said these reports were evidence of "a disgraceful culture of abuse" within the armed services.

"Reports of a soldier at Fort Hood, Texas, assigned to prevent and report sexual assaults, being accused of serious sexual misconduct, abuse, and maltreatment of soldiers is reprehensible," Sen. Durbin, D-Ill., said in a statement released Wednesday. "Next week, the Army will be before my subcommittee and they will face tough questions about these accusations."

Other lawmakers on Twitter called the Fort Hood scandal " unacceptable," " horrific" and " v[ery] disturbing."

Tuesday Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel ordered that all of the military's sexual assault prevention coordinators and military recruiters to be retrained, re-credentialed and rescreened.

Gov. Inslee Signs SSB 5195 into law, extending State Need Grant to WGU Washington students

OLYMPIA, Wash., May 15, 2013 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Governor Jay Inslee signed SSB 5195 into law today allowing WGU Washington students with financial need access to the State Need Grant Program. Previously, the state-endorsed, online university was unable to participate due to technicalities in the original language of the law, enacted long before online education was so pervasive.

(Photo: http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20130515/DC15266)

"This bill will give our students the same financial help that's available to other low-income Washingtonians who attend public universities, colleges, and commercial and trade schools in the state," said WGU Washington Chancellor Jean Floten. "Our students are mostly mid-career adults, trying to make ends meet while they work, raise families, and go to school. To some students, the State Need Grant will give them the help they need to pay the rent and feed their families, and not have to choose between the two. Our students are very grateful to the Washington Legislature and Governor Inslee. The bill will play an important role in educating future generations of Washingtonians who seek the flexibility online learning provides."

Current students and people considering returning to school from all over the state will benefit from this new law. That includes Tricia Elsner of Federal Way. She's a single mother of triplets, each with varying degrees of behavioral challenges; two of the 17-year-old boys have autism. Another is Jay Castro of Seattle. He's dealing with several, chronic health issues while working two jobs and going to school fulltime. For Tricia, Jay, and so many others, State Need Grant assistance would ease significant financial strain and help them on their path toward achieving their dreams of a college education.

WGU Washington's innovative model of higher education is producing graduates with the skills to meet the advanced demands of today's market. A recent Harris Interactive study shows that nearly 100 percent of employers who have hired a WGU graduate would not hesitate to hire another, 98 percent agree that WGU grads meet or exceed their expectations, and 98 percent consider WGU graduates equal to or better prepared than graduates of other universities.

Saturday, May 18, a record number of students – 543 – will graduate from WGU Washington in its second annual commencement ceremony at 3:00 pm at Benaroya Hall in Seattle. WGU Washington was created by the Washington State Legislature in 2011 and currently has 4,425 enrolled students from all over the state.

If you'd like more information about the bill's passage, or would like to speak with a student from your area or WGU Washington Chancellor Floten, please contact Jake Riddell at 206-512-0025, jake.riddell@wgu.edu , or Lee Keller at 206-799-3805, Lee@thekellergroup.com .

About WGU Washington

WGU Washington was established by the Washington State Legislature on April 22, 2011. WGU Washington is state-endorsed and offers degree programs that are accredited through Western Governors University.

WGU Washington offers more than 50 bachelor's and master's degree programs in Business, Information Technology, Teacher Education, and Health Professions, including Nursing. The university's online, competency-based learning model is designed to meet the needs of working adults by providing an affordable, flexible option for earning an accredited, respected college degree. It's non-profit and receives no money from the state.

Degrees are granted under the accreditation of Western Governors University, which is accredited through the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU). Teachers College programs are accredited by the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) and Nursing programs are accredited by the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE*).

The university has earned the support of more than 20 leading corporations and foundations. They include institutions such as AT&T, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Lilly Endowment, HCA, Hewlett-Packard, the Lumina Foundation, Microsoft, Oracle, SunGard Higher Education, and Zions Bank.

*Western Governors University offers nursing programs that are accredited by the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (One Dupont Circle, NW, Suite 5380, Washington DC 20036, 202-877-6791).

Follow WGU:
http://www.facebook.com/wgu.edu
http://www.linkedin.com/companies/western-governors-university
http://twitter.com/wgu
http://www.youtube.com/WesternGovernorsUniv
http://news.wgu.edu/news/news.xml

Contact for media inquiries:
Jake Riddell – Public Relations Manager
(206) 512-0025
jake.riddell@wgu.edu

Contact for enrollment information:
877.214.7004
washington.wgu.edu

SOURCE WGU Washington

View the original article here

Jewish Group: IRS Targeted Us Because ‘They Thought We Might Be Funding Terrorism’

Z Street

Lori Lowenthal Marcus, President of Z Street, appears on "On the Record." (Photo: Fox News)

Soon after the Internal Revenue Service admitted it had been targeting conservative organizations applying for 501 (c) (4) status around the 2012 election -- though it was later discovered it had been happening since at least 2010 -- it was learned that Jewish groups had also faced similar scrutiny.

Now, we are learning that at least one group was told it was because of purported worries they were funding terrorism.

Z Street has been vocal about the treatment it received after battling with the IRS for years. It filed a lawsuit against the government entity in 2010 alleging viewpoint discrimination after applying for 501 (c) (3) status in 2009 (processed through the same office as 501 (c) (4)).

Lori Lowenthal Marcus, president of Z Street, appeared on "On the Record" with Greta Van Susteren Tuesday to explain the situation.

"After we filed our lawsuit, the IRS began having several different positions on why it was taking so long, one of which was because terrorism happens in Israel. Therefore, they had to look into our organization, because they thought we might be funding terrorism. We are a purely educational entity. We didn't fund anybody; we barely funded ourselves!"

When Greta asked whether anyone in her group has been arrested for terrorism, whether their assets have ever been frozen in connection with terrorism, or whether the group has ever even been accused of promoting terrorist activity, the president incredulously replied, "No!"

If that's not enough, the group only filed the suit after their lawyer was told by the IRS that groups connected to Israel receive special scrutiny, and that some are sent to a special unit to determine whether the organization's positions contradict those of the administration's."

"At that point we knew that is classic viewpoint discrimination, and we had to [take] action," she said.

Their group has still not been approved for the 501 (c) (3) status it applied for in 2009.

Watch the entire interview, below:

Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

The POLITICO did some investigating on the matter, writing:

Legal filings show that the problems for Z Street -- and apparently for other Israel-related groups -- stemmed from an obscure unit in the Cincinnati IRS office: the "Touch and Go Group." One of the so-called TAG Group's duties was to weed out applications that might be coming from organizations which might be used to fund terrorism. In response to Z Street's lawsuit, an IRS manager acknowledged that applications mentioning Israel were getting special attention. "Israel is one of many Middle Eastern countries that have a 'higher risk of terrorism,'" wrote Jon Waddell, manager of the IRS's Exempt Organizations Determinations Group. "A referral to TAG is appropriate whenever an application mentions providing resources to organizations in a country with a higher risk of terrorism."

A spokesman for the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration declined to say Monday whether that office had reviewed the issue of scrutiny of Israel-related groups as part of the review of how the IRS handled political groups, or separately. "I don't have any information for you one way or the other on that," said the spokesman, David Barnes. [Emphasis added]

When Z Street went to court though, the government denied its views on Israel or the Obama administration had anything to do with why it was transferred to the TAG Group.

Related:

View the original article here

Obama tries to regain control amid controversies

WASHINGTON (AP) — Under mounting pressure, President Barack Obama on Wednesday released a trove of documents related to the Benghazi attack and forced out the top official at the Internal Revenue Service following revelations that the agency targeted conservative political groups. The moves were aimed at halting a perception spreading among both White House opponents and allies that the president has been passive and disengaged as controversies consume his second term.

In another action, the White House asked Congress to revive a media shield law that would protect journalists from having to reveal information, a step seen as a response to the Justice Department's widely criticized subpoenas of phone records from reporters and editors at The Associated Press.

The flurry of activity signaled a White House anxious to regain control amid the trio of deepening controversies. The incidents have emboldened Republicans, overshadowed Obama's legislative agenda and threatened to plunge his second term into a steady stream of congressional investigations.

Standing in the East Room of the White House, the president said Acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller had resigned and vowed that more steps would be taken to hold those responsible accountable.

"Americans have a right to be angry about it, and I am angry about it," Obama said of the IRS actions. "I will not tolerate this kind of behavior at any agency, but especially at the IRS given the power that it has and the reach that it has into all of our lives."

The president had addressed the IRS controversy on Monday, but his measured words left many unsatisfied, particularly given that he had waited three days to address the developments. He also repeatedly asserted that he was waiting to find out if the reports were accurate, even though top IRS officials had already acknowledged the controversial actions.

Adding to narrative of a passive president were White House efforts to distance Obama from the IRS scandal, as well as the revelations that the Justice Department had secretly obtained work and personal phone records of journalists. In both cases, the White House insisted the president had no prior knowledge of the events and learned about the matters like the general public — from news reports.

Obama's cautious response, combined with his lack of awareness about controversies brewing within his administration, opened him to quick criticism from his Republican foes.

"If Obama really learned about the latest IRS and AP secret subpoena scandals in the news, who exactly is running the ship at the White House?" Republican National Committee spokesman Kirsten Kukowski said.

But in a worrying sign for the White House, some Democrats also criticized the president for not being more aggressive in responding to trouble within the government.

Robert Gibbs, Obama's former White House press secretary, said the president should have appointed a bipartisan commission of former IRS officials to look into the issue of targeting political organizations. And Gibbs gently chided his former boss for using passive language when he first addressed the political targeting during a White House news conference Monday.

"The language should be more active than phrases like 'I didn't have any patience for this' or 'If the allegations are true," Gibbs said during an appearance on MSNBC.

The pair of new fresh controversies coincided with a resurgence in the GOP-led investigation into the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on a U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya, that killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans.

Congressional Republicans launched another round of hearings on the attacks last week. And on Friday, a congressional official disclosed details of emails among administration officials that resulted in the CIA downplaying the prospect that the attacks were an act of terror in talking points used to publicly discuss the deadly incident.

Obama aides insisted the emails were either taken out of context or provided no new information but resisted pressure to make the emails public for five days, before finally disclosing the documents to reporters Wednesday. The emails revealed that then-CIA Director David Petraeus disagreed with the final talking points, despite the White House's insistence that the intelligence agency had the final say over the statements.

The White House has publicly defended its handling of the controversies. Obama spokesman Jay Carney has insisted it would be "wholly inappropriate" for the president, in the case of the Justice Department matter, to weigh in on an active investigation, and in the case of the IRS controversy, to insert himself in the actions of an independent agency.

However, legal scholar Jonathan Turley disputed those assertions, saying there is no legal reason a president would be precluded from learning about the investigations before the public or commenting on them, at least broadly.

"These comments treat the president like he's the bubble boy," said Turley, a law professor at George Washington University.

David Axelrod, Obama's longtime adviser, acknowledged the White House could have acted more aggressively in "the interest of stagecraft." But he insisted that the president's handling of the matters will ultimately be vindicated.

"One virtue he has is that he takes a long-range view," he said. "It's easy to get whipped up by the frenzy, but it's responsible to react to the facts. It has short-term liabilities, but in the long-run, it's a quality you want in a president."

___

Follow Julie Pace on Twitter at http://twitter.com/jpaceDC

View the original article here

ACLJ: Resignation Of Acting IRS Commissioner "Does Not Solve Any Of The Problems" Of A Tainted And Politically-Driven IRS -- Independent Counsel Must Investigate

WASHINGTON, May 15, 2013 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which represents nearly 30 Tea Party organizations nationwide, said today's announcement by President Obama accepting the resignation of acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller does not go far enough.

"President Obama continues to fail to show leadership as this IRS scandal continues to expand," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. "The resignation of acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller does not solve any of the problems of this tainted and politically-driven agency. The announcement comes just hours after the IRS attempted to blame this abhorrent conduct on a couple of rogue IRS agents out of the Cincinnati office. The American people and our clients deserve much more. There are many questions that President Obama failed to address including why his Attorney General is heading up this investigation. The fact is an independent counsel needs to be appointed - with no ties or allegiance to this president. The IRS scheme to target conservative groups because of their thoughts and ideological positions is both unconscionable and intolerable. It is also actionable. We continue to move forward in preparing a federal lawsuit on behalf of our clients - a complaint that could be filed as early as next week."

The ACLJ represents 27 Tea Party organizations targeted by the IRS. Fifteen have received tax-exempt status. Ten are still pending and the subject of a demand letter sent to the IRS – demanding that those clients by granted tax-exempt status immediately. Two other organizations withdrew because of frustration with the IRS.

The IRS contends this intimidation strategy was confined to "low-level" employees out of its office in Cincinnati.

The fact is that the ACLJ's clients have received letters from Cincinnati, but also from two offices in California, El Monte and Laguna Niguel as well as the national office in Washington, D.C. In fact, the Washington office sent a letter to one of our clients as recently as one month ago.

Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), focusing on constitutional law, is based in Washington, D.C. and is online at www.aclj.org.

MEDIA CONTACTS:
For Print: Gene Kapp (757) 575-9520
For Broadcast: Alison Geist or Chandler Epp (770) 813-0000

SOURCE American Center for Law and Justice

View the original article here

Conservative group says IRS approved nonprofit status after applying with ‘liberal-sounding name’

MediaTrackers.org

"One thing we don't hide is: 'Yeah, we're conservative—free-market, free-enterprise, full-spectrum conservative,'" Ryun told Mother Jones magazine last year.

As directed, Ryun followed up with the IRS in April 2012, and was told that Media Trackers' application was still under review.

The IRS approved Greenhouse Solutions' request for non-profit status in three weeks.

In December 2012, Ryun simply made Media Trackers a project of Greenhouse Solutions and withdrew the Media Trackers application.

The IRS website explains why some requests for tax-exempt status take longer than others to process.

View the original article here

The craziest thing Google announced on Wednesday

by Jason Gilbert | Yahoo Tech

At its huge Google I/O keynote on Wednesday, Google announced some pretty bewildering, crazy products: massive changes to Maps; some incredible photography tricks; and an ambitious music service that meshes elements of iTunes, Pandora and Spotify.

But the craziest thing that Google introduced just might be a product that no one onstage in the three-hour keynote ever mentioned, or even hinted at. The announcement? It turns out that you can now attach money to your email using Gmail.

Yes, that's right: Real, live money, straight from your bank account, can now be attached to your Gmail, just like a vacation photo or a spreadsheet for work. If you owe a friend, there's no need to mail a check, or even get their bank account information -- just get their Gmail address, and a working Internet connection, and you can hit them back.

The curious addition to Gmail was announced, with little fanfare, on the Google Commerce blog, while Larry Page was taking questions at Google I/O. For the feature, both parties, payer and recipient, will need Google Wallet accounts; the service is free if your Google Wallet is linked to a bank account, or Google will charge a fee if it is attached to a credit or debit card.

Google put together a short video to explain this potentially transformative concept of how money changes hands; you just click the icon that looks like a dollar sign, right in between the Google Drive and photo icons, enter an amount, and -- poof -- money gets transferred to the person you are emailing:

Google Wallet is little used at this point, having struggled to take off on Android smartphones despite the increased presence of a technology called NFC, which enables the touch-to-pay commerce you may have seen in commercials. Google had been rumored to be rethinking its Wallet strategy around this time last year and it appears that the tech giant may just blanket your favorite devices and services with Google Wallet, in the hopes that it will increase usage.

So, what do you think? Will you be emailing your rent, or your share of the tab, any time soon? Or are you sticking to good old-fashioned bitcoin cash?

View the original article here

What’s in a name? Obama to welcome leader of ‘Myanmar,’ not ‘Burma’

Myanmar's president, Thein Sein, at the U.N. building in Bangkok on April 29. (Chaiwat Subprasom /Reuters)Straight up: This will only be of interest to foreign policy nerds and people interested in the fate of U.S. relations with this particular Asian country (Shoutout: Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Republican senate minority leader and resident expert in Congress on this issue).

The White House announced Wednesday that President Barack Obama will welcome President Thein Sein of Myanmar next week. It's a historic visit, part of a gradual patching-up of relations after decades of tension and U.S. economic sanctions.

Obama himself became the first sitting president to visit Myanmar in November 2012. But there's one catch: According to the State Department and the CIA, there's doesn't seem to be any such country. According to those agencies, Thein Sein leads "Burma."

It's a notable diplomatic reward. Obama used the name "Myanmar" during his visit there in November. Authorities there have long quested for Washington to recognize the name, but it's still quite rare among U.S. policymakers—and nearly unheard of in Congress.

Here's the State Department's take: "The military government changed the country name to "Myanmar" in 1989. It remains U.S. policy to refer to the country as Burma."

What does the Central Intelligence Agency have to say? This: "Since 1989 the military authorities in Burma, and the current parliamentary government, have promoted the name Myanmar as a conventional name for their state; the US Government has not adopted the name, which is a derivative of the Burmese short-form name Myanma Naingngandaw."

So why the change? National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden has the goods:

"The United States government over time has begun limited use of the name 'Myanmar' as a diplomatic courtesy," Hayden told Yahoo News by email. "Our policy remains that Burma is the name of the country."

She confirmed that the use of the other name is, in effect, a symbolic reward.

"Burma has undertaken a number of positive reforms, including releasing over 850 political prisoners; easing media restriction; permitting freedom of speech, assembly, and movement," she said. "We have responded by expanding our engagement with the government, easing a number of sanctions, and as a courtesy in appropriate setting, more frequently using the name 'Myanmar.'"

Obama believes "that showing respect for a government that is pursuing an ambitious reform agenda is an important signal of support for its efforts and our desire to help the transformation succeed," Hayden said.

Here is the full statement from White House press secretary Jay Carney:

Statement by the Press Secretary on the visit of President Thein Sein of Myanmar to the White House
President Obama will welcome His Excellency President Thein Sein to the White House on Monday, May 20, 2013. Since President Obama’s historic trip to Rangoon last November, the United States has continued to advocate for continued progress on reform by President Thein Sein’s government, in close cooperation with Aung San Suu Kyi, civil society leaders, and the international community. The President looks forward to discussing with President Thein Sein the many remaining challenges to efforts to develop democracy, address communal and ethnic tensions, and bring economic opportunity to the people of his country, and to exploring how the United States can help.
President Thein Sein’s visit underscores President Obama’s commitment to supporting and assisting those governments that make the important decision to embrace reform, and highlights the dedication of the United States to helping the Burmese people realize the full potential of their extraordinary country.

View the original article here