Darrell Issa's reckless and dangerous transcripts

Shorter Darrell Issa: I couldn't possibly release the full transcripts because (a) NSA scandal is sucking up all of the news cycles and (b) they would prove my IRS scandal is a partisan scam.

WASHINGTON -- One week after he released partial transcripts of interviews with IRS officials involved in the scandal surrounding the targeting of conservative groups, the chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee said releasing the full transcripts would be "reckless" and "irresponsible."

Get that? Releasing hand picked excerpts to media is fine. The full transcripts to put the excerpts in context, dangerous. By which he means it's dangerous to Issa's now ruined plan to keep his fakery alive all summer. Ranking Democratic on the committee, Elijah Cummings, called Issa out.

Shorter Cummings: Cut the bullshit Issa. You got nothing. Release the transcripts and end the hearings or I'll release the damn transcripts myself.

Issa is of course, appalled that his good friend across the aisle would utter such a coarse challenge.

"Your decision to publicly announce that the investigation should wrap up was irresponsible, but not surprising," said Issa, in a letter to Cummings. "However, your push to release entire transcripts from witness interviews while the investigation remains active was reckless and threatened to undermine the integrity of the Committee’s investigation."

Cummings is not alone. Apparently even Republicans are grumbling in private. Amusing development in light of the current media meme -- transparency in government. Steve Benen adds more context.

How you gonna cry victim now?

I wrote about this a while back. The IRS received applications from 298 groups for tax exempt status and a quick look at the approved groups sure looked like the majority were conservative. Now Kevin Drum found an intrepid soul who did the real work.

However, the IRS does publish the names of groups that have received special scrutiny and been approved for tax-exempt status. They recently released a list of 176 organizations that have been approved since 2010, so Martin Sullivan checked each one to figure out if it was liberal or conservative. Here's what he found:

122 conservative
48 liberal/nonconservative
6 unknown

Sure makes their whining about being suppressed ridiculous. Not that it will stop them from crying about it. [graphic via]

Victims of the IRS

In the GOP's ongoing waste of taxpayers time and money, they dug up some aggrieved Tea Party organizers to testify about their alleged victimization by the IRS. Dianne Belsom, president of the Laurens County Tea Party in South Carolina declares this persecution by paperwork is simply unacceptable. Also so very unnecessary because:

"I'd like to note that our group is a small-time operation with very little money and this represents a complete waste of time by the IRS in terms of any money they would collect if we were not tax-exempt," Belsom said.

If the amount is that small one wonders why they bothered to go for such a complicated tax exempt status. Probably be easier for them to just pay the miniscule tax. Or perhaps apply for a simpler non-profit designation. And again, the bigger question, is does this group deserve a "social welfare" status to begin with. A look at the Laurens County Tea Party accomplishment page suggests the answer is no way. Their accomplishments were mainly in hosting Republican politicians for speaking enagagements and promoting local GOP candidates.

Steve M. has much more on Laurens County Tea Party's activities, the majority of which are purely political and advancing the most far out of crackpot conspiracy theories. Thus unqualified for the tax status they seek. I'd add all of the witnesses appear to be party to a lawsuit versus the IRS as well.

These people aren't victims of discrimination. They're attention seekers at best and pure grifters at worst. The bigger scandal remains that the GOP is relentlessly wasting their taxpayer funded resources on fishing for ammo to be used purely for partisan gain.