"Barr Can't Be Trusted" Rules Fed Judge On Trump IC IG Revenge Firing Lies

Endorsing Trump’s Firing of Inspector General, Barr Paints Distorted Picture

The attorney general misstated key facts in explaining the dismissed official’s handling of the whistle-blower complaint that prompted impeachment.

“The president did the right thing in removing Atkinson,” Attorney General William P. Barr told Fox News.Credit...Doug Mills/The New York Times

By Charlie Savage

• 10 April 2020

WASHINGTON — Attorney General William P. Barr endorsed and defended President Trump’s firing of Michael K. Atkinson, the intelligence community inspector general, in an interview with Fox News. But in making the case that Mr. Atkinson committed a firing offense in his handling of a whistle-blower complaint last year that led to the impeachment battle, Mr. Barr made several claims that are subject to scrutiny.

What did Mr. Atkinson do?

Mr. Atkinson pushed the Trump administration in September to tell Congress about the whistle-blower complaint accusing Mr. Trump of abusing his power to try to coerce Ukraine into announcing investigations that could deliver him personal political benefits. The complaint touched off Mr. Trump’s impeachment by the Democratic-controlled House.

Since the Republican-controlled Senate acquitted the president, he has been purging officials who cooperated with the House inquiry. On April 3, Mr. Trump fired Mr. Atkinson. The next day, the president made clear at a news briefing that he did so because he remained angry that the inspector general wanted to disclose the complaint to Congress.

“He did a terrible job, absolutely terrible,” Mr. Trump said, adding: “He took a fake report and he brought it to Congress with an emergency, OK? Not a big Trump fan, that I can tell you.”

What did Mr. Barr say?

He endorsed Mr. Trump’s move while putting forth a dubious account of what happened. This is Mr. Barr’s statement:

“The president did the right thing in removing Atkinson. From the vantage point of the Department of Justice, he had interpreted his statute — which is a fairly narrow statute, gave him jurisdiction over wrongdoing by intelligence people — and tried to turn it in to a commission to explore anything in the government and immediately report it to Congress without letting the executive branch look at it and determine whether there was any problem. He was told this in a letter from the Department of Justice, and he is obliged to follow the interpretation of the Department of Justice and he ignored it, so I think the president was correct in firing him.”

Did Mr. Atkinson do what Mr. Barr said?

No, not when it came to an executive branch review. Mr. Atkinson tried to follow the procedures laid out in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, which requires that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence review the complaint, then report it to Congress.

After determining that the complaint was “credible” and raised an “urgent concern,” Mr. Atkinson provided it on Aug. 26 to the acting director of national intelligence at the time, Joseph Maguire. Mr. Atkinson believed that under the whistle-blower protection law, Mr. Maguire would have seven days to review the materials and append any comments before passing on the complaint to Congress.

A senior Justice Department official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, defended Mr. Barr’s claim that Mr. Atkinson instead thought he could “immediately report it to Congress without letting the executive branch look at it,” arguing that a week was insufficient for the department to conduct its own review of the complaint.

But it was Congress, not Mr. Atkinson, that set the review period at one week for complaints covered by the whistle-blower law. In addition, officials at the White House and the Justice Department already knew that an intelligence official had raised concerns about Mr. Trump’s Ukraine dealings even before he filed the complaint on Aug. 12. The department ultimately decided not to open any criminal investigation.

Did Mr. Atkinson ignore the Justice Department’s view?

No. While Mr. Atkinson disagreed with it, he considered himself bound by it.

After Mr. Atkinson gave the complaint to Mr. Maguire, Steven E. Engel, the head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, opined that the whistle-blower law did not apply because the complaint was not about an intelligence activity, so the administration could lawfully withhold it from Congress.

On Sept. 9, about a week after the deadline, Mr. Atkinson wrote to the intelligence oversight committees with the approval of Mr. Maguire, notifying them that a dispute had arisen over how the law applied to a whistle-blower complaint without disclosing its subject. Mr. Atkinson also wrote in a follow-up letter to Congress, “I understand that I am bound by the determination” of the Justice Department and “will continue to abide by that determination.”

The senior department official, defending Mr. Barr’s claim that Mr. Atkinson instead “ignored” the Justice Department’s interpretation, argued that if he had truly respected the Office of Legal Counsel’s role, he would not have told the oversight committees anything.

Did Mr. Barr assert anything else factually questionable?

Yes. He claimed that the F.B.I. had opened its investigation into whether Trump campaign officials were coordinating with Russia’s election interference “without any basis.” But the official who decided to open the investigation, Bill Priestap, then the assistant director of the F.B.I.’s counterintelligence division, did so on the basis of certain facts.

Specifically, after WikiLeaks started dumping out stolen Democratic emails believed to have been hacked by Russia and timed to disrupt the 2016 Democratic National Convention, Australia told the United States that two months earlier, a Trump campaign official, George Papadopoulos, had told one of its diplomats that Russia had offered to help the Trump campaign by anonymously disclosing “dirt” on Hillary Clinton.

Defending Mr. Barr’s claim that the F.B.I. did not have “any basis” to open an investigation, the department official pointed to the apparent opinion of John H. Durham, a prosecutor whom Mr. Barr has assigned to reinvestigate the Russia investigators, that the F.B.I. should have opened a “preliminary investigation” rather than a “full investigation.”

The Justice Department inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, concluded that the facts available to Mr. Priestap were an adequate basis for a full investigation, but said in testimony last year that Mr. Durham had disagreed with him and believed the factual basis for the inquiry only rose to the standard for a preliminary one.

Has Mr. Barr’s candor about the Russia inquiry come under question before?

Yes. He has repeatedly come under fire for misleading the public about the findings and analysis of the special counsel who eventually took over the case, Robert S. Mueller III.

Last month, Reggie B. Walton, a federal judge appointed by a Republican president, declared in a ruling that Mr. Barr’s initial account of the then-still-secret Mueller report was so “distorted” and “misleading” that the court could not trust him. Judge Walton also suggested that the attorney general had made “a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller report in favor of President Trump.”

The Justice Department has said it “stands by” Mr. Barr’s statements without addressing the substance of the judge’s critique.

Eric Schmitt contributed reporting.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/10/us/politics/barr-inspector-general-firing.html?

Copyright 2020 Martin P. All World Rights Expressly Reserved (no claim to The New York Times content)

Obama Guantanamo Lied Prevents Closure Breaks Vow To Voters Won By Deceit Obama CIA Sadistic War Crimes Against Humanity Torture Camp Still Imprisons 116 "Detainees" None Since 2001 Charged Tried Nor Convicted At Obama CIA Atrocity Stands As Anti-U.S. Global Terrorist Recruiting Billboard

     Thursday, 3 September 2015, WASHINGTON, DC - President Barack Obama the nation's first African-American president has shown no sympathy for the most oppressed and now further firmly has cemented his legacy as a duplicitous repugnant lost soul arguably among the most shameful morally and ethically bankrupt of U.S. presidents in history including for his authorization of global drone mass murders, refusing to prosecute documented U.S. Government officials and those under them for torture, nor even to make good on his campaign promises to close the CIA Guantanamo Bay torture camp to those to whom he owes his presidency who elected Obama once amid so much hope founded on his grossly false promises.
      Just his latest lie being exposed as President Obama still holds more than one hundred never charged nor tried tortured "detainees" at Guantanamo Bay thereby joining in the commission of continuing war crimes against humanity in flagrant violation of United States and international law and conventions and a grotesque affront to fundamental human rights and all standards of civilized human decency. Obama may be able in his last days as president to pardon others for atrocious human rights violations in the U.S. although never abroad but he cannot ever pardon himself for what through being an accomplice after the fact and obstruction of justice among other things effectively establishes him as a participant in all torture, murder, U.S. government kidnappings and other documented human rights crimes and abuses repugnant to the very fiber of American values perpetrated by U.S. government officials including the Bush-Cheney Administration, its CIA officials, and those acting in conspiracy with and under their authority including all those for whose illegal torture, kidnapping and illegal detention without limitation for which they are responsible.
     Obama's empty promised "change" has in fact largely been anything but by continuing and expanding many unconstitutional, illegal and reprehensible Bush-Cheney Administration executive branch activities and making permanent the most blatantly unconstitutional of their so-called morally bankrupt "legal interpretations" and bogus trash statutes. Lying hypocrite Obama has failed to prosecute any among the worst of those responsible for and having committed acts of torture as documented in extensive detail easily justifying prosecution by the U.S. Justice Department  which Obama has blocked including by the United States Senate Torture Report of December 2014. These are crimes against humanity similar to those prosecuted at Nuremberg and the President of the United States nearly exclusively responsible for their perpetration lacks all moral authority to seek to block their prosecution. Is Obama afraid the CIA will assassinate him for bringing their sick demented persons to justice allowing the CIA mistakenly assuming the authority of a non-existent fourth branch of government as this CIA most likely did JFK as well as untold numbers of often democratically elected foreign leaders. Does Obama cower at the thought of the ire of "Pigheart" Dick "Criminal Notorious" Cheney clearly bargained his soul with the devil for some fast bucks.
     The Obama Administration's actions moreover have confirmed Obama and his executive agencies as consistently inept ready liars of expedience as he has shown himself time and again a worthless tool of demented executive branch committed self-aggrandizing psycho-sociopaths run totally amok hiding behind false claims of "national security" in order to invade every corner of the private lives of the People of the United States growing a malignant police domestic spying state like a cancer with as bloated an ever-expanding budget as possible funding their demonstrably worthless further grave affronts on the most fundamental of the People's rights without any regard for the constraints on the State of the United States Constitution which although sworn to uphold they clearly hold in as much contempt as the People of this great nation from whom their only remaining legitimate power to the extent there is any left either survives or must be extinguished by their own actions.
     Hypocrite liar Obama rumored a once constitutional law professor at some allegedly accredited institution whatever he once falsely might have espoused has proven himself a protector of the most sickening of Bush-Cheney Administration torture officials including Obama apparent new pal the ill-disguised devil himself "Pigheart" Dick "Criminal Notorious" Cheney, CIA officials guilty of torture crimes against humanity and attempts at cover-up down the line, and without limitation the front line human rights violators deranged CIA "hands-on" torturers whopri never accomplished anything of value to the "national security" but rather gravely damaged it by destroying the moral authority of the United States the world over and providing rich fodder for further global terrorist recruiting.  Obama has done nothing even while these criminals who so far walk free (so long as they remain in U.S. jurisdiction) clearly must be subjected to prosecution under domestic and international law as well as war crimes conventions as the rest of the world awaits the opportunity to bring them to justice in the International Criminal Court or wherever jurisdiction lies.
     Hypocrite liar Obama further has proven himself a blatantly inequitable persecutor of whistleblowers as documented in previous posts here on a scale never before seen in this country. And most recently he has proven himself a champion of the continuation and expansion of reprehensibly unconstitutional domestic surveillance and privacy invasions of the American people not to mention the murder of U.S. and world citizens misusing at every opportunity the mechanism of the FISA monkey judge rubber stamp courts with rote unfounded claims of "national security" to subvert any legitimate actual real federal court ruling contrary to his unconscionable, unconstitutional and illegal agenda.
     There is no excuse for hypocrite liar Obama who has proven himself worthy only of the legacy of the worst kind of President who knew better but consistently proved himself nothing but an enemy of the Constitution he has sworn to uphold. Thanks though for letting a few handfuls of the many harmless out of a nightmarish prison system largely privately run for profit after having promised his electorate reform of the entire penal system which of course never happened and where hypocrite liar Obama admits he himself should be incarcerated had he been caught in his prior incarnation dealing drugs on his journey to becoming a United States Senator and President.
     A bold move opening a few cell doors of old dying and non-violent drug Barack while maintaining and expanding the entirely tragically misdirected priorities of United States bloated ruinous law enforcement monstrosity and the nation's disastrously corrupted criminal justice system where the innocent are stripped of their rights by police and prosecutors unilaterally deciding individuals' fates while the police routinely perjure themselves on the stand even as they officially are trained to seize private citizens' most liquid possessions and money for their own profit and use with no recourse for their victims but at best the Kafkaesque biased whims of a prosecutor "judge" despite the fact that many never even are tried nor convicted of any crime.
     As a president reportedly preoccupied with the "legacy" he will leave the Ninth Amendment editorial board belatedly with significant reluctance concludes that President Barack Obama's continuing and escalating major executive agency encroachments, as well as continuing and expanding constitutional and human rights violations as the leader of the United States and the free world will in due time define him as a disingenuous leader who in fact largely maintained and further followed the dire course already set out under duress and deception by the criminal Bush-Cheney Administration despite being elected on a platform of "change".
     Obama's Administration must be seen as one of minor accomplishments when they are held in comparison to his administration's continuation and expansion of severely damaging actions to the long-term security of the existence of United States within the world community by its continuing and expanding vast and illegal overreaching abroad while at home largely by his administration's perilous affronts against the inalienable rights of the People further undermining of the essential foundation of its own legitimacy through its relentless attacks against the United States Constitution. Readers interested in further information about the above can go to either or both of the two links below to BBC World News and/or the New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2015/08/31/us/politics/31reuters-usa-guantanamo-obama.html?_r=0

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34109685

Copyright 2015 Martin P. All World Rights Reserved

UPDATED NEWS: Former C.I.A. Officer Jeffrey Sterling Convicted Of Espionage For Providing Information To N.Y. Times Reporter James Risen On C.I.A. Operation To Feed Inaccurate Nuclear Information Via Russian Scientist To Iran As Obama Administration Continues "Unprecedented Crackdown"

       Monday, 26 January 2015, ALEXANDRIA, VA - Former C.I.A. officer Jeffrey Sterling today was convicted in federal court of espionage for providing information to New York Times reporter James Risen about a C.I.A. operation to leak intentionally flawed nuclear schematic information to Iran via a Russian scientist. The New York Times in the below article on the conviction today calls it part of the Obama administration's "unprecedented crackdown on officials who speak to journalists about security matters without the Administration's approval". The Ninth Amendment without further comment other than that in the next paragraph provides below a link to the article.
       The Ninth Amendment editorial board does observe that given the serious implications as to freedom of speech and the press under the First Amendment not to mention the specter prosecution "whistleblowers" including as to government waste and abuse raised by this case it appears that the standard that the New York Times sets out in the above quote is likely not a precise recitation of its scope as a standard encompassing all "security" matters without limitation as to type or timeframe seems susceptible to a very broad interpretation.
       The Ninth Amendment in an 18 January 2015 post below did provide a link to an article by a reporter attending Mr. Sterling's trial which described the C.I.A. "Operation Merlin" in considerably less charitable terms characterizing it as an unlikely, mismanaged, uncoordinated plot which not only wasted large amounts of resources but because of a lack of coordination of scientists preparing and reviewing what were supposed to be flawed nuclear plans also inadvertently have have provided Iran with nuclear schematics that indeed were helpful in the development of Iran's nuclear program.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/27/us/politics/cia-officer-in-leak-case-jeffrey-sterling-is-convicted-of-espionage.html?module=Notification&version=BreakingNews&region=FixedTop&action=Click&contentCollection=BreakingNews&contentID=29174522&pgtype=Blogs

       UPDATE: The following Reuters article further includes Attorney Geberal Etic Holder's comments on the case, some information on Holder DOJ's subpeoena history with AP and the press, as well as provides Jeffrey Sterling's sentencing date of 24 April 2015.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/27/newyorktimes-leak-idUSL1N0V51W820150127

Copyright 2015 Martin P. All World Rights Expressly Reserved

CREDO Action Urges Signing Eric Holder Petition For DOJ To File Criminal Charges Against JP Morgan And Send Wall Street Crooks To Prison For "Outright Fraud" Selling Inflated Securities Backed By Failing Mortgages

• Becky Bond, CREDO Action
 
• Dec 2 at 8:44 AM

To Ninth Amendment Readers

        Monday, 8 December 2014, NEW YORK, NEW YORK - JPMorgan Chase "the Bank" allegedly has for nearly a decade escaped and bought its way out of criminal charges for egregious "outright fraud" personally observed by Cornell Law School graduate Alayne Fleishmann who has provided a detailed account to regulators and government lawyers for which she would be a willing testifying witness were the Department of Justice nearly as courageous as she enough so to bring well-deserved criminal charges against the Bank for knowingly vastly overstating the value of failing and defaulted mortgages so as to seriously ramp up their stated value in order to fraudulently sell securities with grossly inflated credit ratings neglecting to disclose known risks to Bank customers while all along using its "diligence team" diligently to cover up that the Bank was doing so in a seemingly common criminal fraudulent practice most frequently used even by "highly regarded" investment banks and firms presumably simply because they are able to do so relying on their long past earned "good names" and associated haughty "how dare you question us" attitudes to bamboozle and frequently bankrupt even loyal longtime clients less likely to scrutinize their practices based of the mistaken impression that their reputations are maintained by some higher standard of honesty and decency when that in fact could not be farther from the truth. 

       If interested readers ever have a few years to spare reading search results try a few internet search engines on particularly Charlotte, North Carolina based Bank of America coupled with terms such as bank, credit card, mortgage and securities fraud, settlement, guilty, no contest, penalty, overcharge, misstate, lie, deceive, racketeering, Department of Justice (DOJ), enforce, civil, criminal, illegal, unlawful, plea, admit, enforcement action, avoid trial, Parmalat bankruptcy, fraudulent and non-existing accounts and branches, self-regulation, Rick Perry, Texas Enterprise Fund (TEF), Greg Abbott, prosecutorial discretion, bribes, donations, contributions expanding searches after the first months of reading getting boring about the same practices with just the names and dates changed to surely discovered related terms and new concepts such as executive compensation, whistleblower treatment, employment practices, employee contributions, customer satisfaction, rates of return, etc.

       In any case not to digress unduly from the allegedly criminal Bank at hand JP Morgan Chase as related below has so far escaped criminal charges through the hard work of its "diligence team" of preventing the creation of lasting communications evidence of wrongdoing and diligently preventing duped investors from discovering the truth while later making remarkably well-timed offers including one to DOJ especially just in time to prevent a federal criminal filing by paying a "no admission of guilt" greatly reduced settlement per usual which according to CREDO furthermore was never fully paid and what was paid by the Bank conveniently was permitted to be used as a tax write-off although not so far as the Ninth Amendment knows as a  "charitable contribution" perhaps to all those bankrupted by misguided investments based on knowingly bad advice from the Bank.
       Through all this either cooperation or collusion with DOJ depending on how one characterizes it so far avoiding the filing of criminal charges of the basis of an apparently fully credible well-credentialed Bank "whistleblower" (a loaded term we especially disfavor and discourage as somehow playing into the theme favored most often by accused wrongdoers it seems with the subtext of describing some kind of traitor rather than a victim of those who would illegally retaliate and cause as much damage as possible given their degree of willingness further to break the law) who apparently has long endured all kinds of available threats and actions to shut her up and gag her for violating a "non-disclosure agreement" which by any stretch of the imagination should never be allowed to use the force of any kind of lawful retaliation for reporting allegedly bad acts that rise to the level of a serious felonious criminal violation.

        Finally although the CREDO action call for a petition to U.S. Attorney General immediately to bring criminal charges appears to be well-documented and annotated but for a typo the Ninth Amendment points out that those references provided rely on a recent Rolling Stone magazine article. Although we would dismiss any recent controversy about that magazine's apparently just retracted article concerning a specific incident at the University of Virginia as an isolated incident for a magazine which has come to establish itself as a reputable source of professional journalism we believe the authorities cited by CREDO action most likely appear to be to a website name marred by the error of probably one mistakenly referring to the rock band of nearly the same name rather than to the name of the magazine. 

                                             

Tell Attorney General Eric Holder: No more excuses. Time for criminal charges against JPMorgan Chase Petition to Attorney General Eric Holder: "Alayne Fleischmann’s whistleblower account paints a clear picture of outright fraud at JPMorgan Chase. The Justice Department must immediately announce criminal charges against JP Morgan Chase." Add your name: Dear Martin, Rolling Stone magazine recently published a breathtaking account of a whistleblower who personally witnessed fraud at JPMorgan Chase and was willing to testify – even as the Justice Department claimed it lacked the smoking guns to prosecute big banks.1 For eight years, Alayne Fleischmann has told her story to regulators and government lawyers, only to watch as the Department of Justice settled with JPMorgan Chase out of court, with no admission of guilt, and a much lighter penalty than was initially announced to the public.2 Now, despite a confidentiality agreement covering her time at the bank, she decided to speak out. For years, federal prosecutors have told the public that they lacked the clear evidence to bring criminal charges against big banks for mortgage security fraud. But if Fleischmann’s account is true, the Justice Department had the evidence but simply chose to ignore it, and instead helped JPMorgan Chase avoid accountability for its crimes. Tell Attorney General Eric Holder: No more excuses. Time for criminal charges. Click here to sign the petition. At one point, Fleischmann says, the U.S. Attorney General’s Sacramento Office was on the verge of announcing criminal charges based on her testimony. But according to Rolling Stone and other press accounts, the press conference announcing the prosecution was canceled after JPMorgan Chase Chief Jamie Dimon called Tony West, the third-ranking official in the Justice Department, and offered to settle out of court. The attorney general touted the resulting $13 billion settlement as a major victory, even though the bank paid less than $9 billion, was able to write off the penalty on its taxes, and was able to keep its criminal wrongdoing from the public. A former securities lawyer who worked as a diligence manager evaluating mortgage securities, Fleischmann personally witnessed wrongdoing and even attempted to notify her superiors. The Rolling Stone piece recounts how: Her bosses in the diligence team insisted on a “no email” rule to avoid a paper record, which one former federal prosecutor says shows "these people knew what they were doing and were trying not to get caught." Almost 40% of one pool of mortgages were found to be based on overstated incomes or had already defaulted; her bosses pressured diligence workers to revise the number downward to under 10% and gave the resulting security a misleading credit rating. Fleischmann told her boss that the bank couldn’t sell a security based on those mortgages without telling customers of its content, even if it meant no one would buy it, because to do otherwise would be fraud. She submitted a memo detailing all of these charges to her superiors, expecting the written record to force an end to the practice. Fleischmann can today point out “exactly how her bosses at JPMorgan Chase committed financial fraud: It’s right there in the documents.” JPMorgan Chase’s lawyers worked for years to keep Fleischmann quiet. Now we know why. Tell Attorney General Eric Holder: No more excuses. Time for criminal charges. Click here to sign the petition. Fleischmann’s story is actually far worse for the Justice Department than it is for JPMorgan Chase. Most observers already knew the general outlines of how mortgage originators and big banks conspired to fake documentation and then sell off bad loans to unwitting investors. In case after case, regulators and the Justice Department settled out of court and pursued specific instances of wrong-doing instead of widespread fraud. The excuse has always been that the government lacked the legal firepower and evidence to go big. It is not clear whether regulators and the Justice Department believed a settlement was better than the risk of losing a trial, or were helping powerful institutions cover-up their crimes. But it is now plain to see that the problem was not a lack of credible witnesses. In Fleischmann, the government had a graduate of Cornell Law School who would help them press charges – and simply chose not to. This past summer, a new set of investigators approached Fleischmann and appear to have restarted the criminal case against JPMorgan Chase. She would not comment on that investigation. But if one thing is clear from the last few years, it’s that investigations like this tend to die before charges are filed. This time – with all the facts that are now public – we cannot let that happen. Click the link below to sign the petition to Attorney General Holder to file criminal charges against JP Morgan Chase: http://act.credoaction.com/sign/Holder_Justice_Chase?t=6&akid=12334.5397176.iFgSqA. Alayne Fleischmann could face legal, financial, and career repercussions for sharing her story. It’s up to us to make sure it isn’t in vain. Thank you for helping demand accountability for Wall Street’s crimes. Becky Bond, Political Director CREDO Action from Working Assets Add your name: Matt Taibbi, "The $9 Billion Witness: Meet JPMorgan Chase's Worst Nightmare," RollingStones.com, November 6, 2014. Ibid. Ibid. Share on Facebook Post to your wall Tweet this Post to Twitter © 2014 CREDO. All rights reserved Copyright 2014 by Martin P. All World RIghts Expressly Reserved (no claim to CREDO action content)

IRS Awards 30% To Informants Of IRS Collection Of Tax Fraud Taxes, Penalties and Interest Up To $2 Million With Fiscal 2014 Sequester Still 7.2% Through 30 September 2014

     Wednesday, 9 April 2014, WASHINGTON, D.C. - Interested readers as next Tuesday's 15 April 2014 tax filing deadline approaches are reminded that, although the 30% award to informants for information leading to IRS collection of amounts up to $2 million from tax fraud, penalties and interest continues, the IRS 2014 Fiscal Office Sequester Notice still gives notice that informants' 30% awards will be sequestered by 7.2% up to 30 September 2014 pursuant to the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, unless and until a law is enacted that cancels or otherwise impacts the sequester, at which time the sequestration reduction rate is subject to change.
     The below link is to the pertinent IRS notice including the need to file requisite IRS Form 211 for the above 30% award(s) and/or another award(s) for a maximum of 15% of IRS collections up to $10 million involving lesser amounts in dispute and/or cases of individual taxpayers with lower gross incomes.

This log posts the below official IRS award notice link strictly as a public service. THE NINTH AMENDMENT IS IN NO WAY QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE NOR DOES IT PURPORT TO PROVIDE ANY LEGAL OR TAX ADVICE WHATSOEVER OF ANY KIND.  READERS STRONGLY ARE ENCOURAGED SERIOUSLY TO CONSIDER CONSULTING WITH THEIR TRUSTED LEGAL AND TAX PROFESSIONAL(S) BEFORE APPROACHING THE IRS.

http://www.irs.gov/uac/Whistleblower-Informant-Award

Copyright 2014 Martin P. All World Rights Expressly Reserved