Landmark Legal Foundation, in its two and a half year Freedom of Information Act Request lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service, may have uncovered new evidence that the IRS has been purposely keeping information from the public-interest law firm, but any answers regarding why remain unknown.
Landmark President Mark Levin informed WorldNetDaily that his group has mounting evidence that the IRS has been obstructing information regarding the names of congressional members who are requesting audit information on tax-exempt, non-profit organizations, particularly those of a more conservative or libertarian bent.
In the lawsuit itself, Landmark has been trying to obtain all pertinent information involving the names of individuals and groups who, during the Clinton administration, may have prompted the IRS to audit conservative and libertarian tax-exempt groups. Last March, Landmark Legal received 8,379 pages of documents from the IRS in response to the FOIA request, but large portions of the documents were blacked out.
Although Levin said there is nothing illegal about asking the IRS to audit a tax-exempt organization, deliberately obstructing public information regarding who requested the audit is a crime.
“If you’re destroying public documents that are the subject of litigation, that’s unlawful,” said Levin.
Levin said he first got a hold of this information when his organization interviewed a “senior grade” government official who did not want to be identified. This “whistleblower,” as Levin called the government official, was in attendance at an October 1997 IRS meeting at which Terry Hallihan, a senior manager for the tax-exempt organization division of the IRS, spoke.
According to the “whistleblower,” Hallihan made some interesting statements at that meeting. What was said, however, is not entirely known. However, she allegedly indicated that perhaps a Justice Department attorney in attendance leave the meeting before she spoke. No one left.
According to information Levin got from his contact, Hallihan addressed IRS policies regarding certain IRS forms on which “intake notes” are kept. “Intake notes,” Levin explained, are “notes taken by IRS employees in response to requests by third parties for audits of tax-exempt, non-profit groups.”
These “intake notes” were allegedly handled in a way that was intended to conceal the source of the audit request.
“She (Hallihan) evidently said, according to the person we interviewed who was in attendance (at the meeting), that if a congressman or staffer called, the IRS was to ask the congressman or the staffer where the information came from — like a TV or a radio report or constituents or a news article or whatever — so that the IRS could then list as the source of the information something other than the congressman or the staffer,” Levin said.
Levin added he was told Hallihan was aware some of these “intake notes” had been, or were being, shredded by the IRS.
“We believe this is extraordinarily important information considering that our Freedom of Information request, which is now two and a half years old, sought precisely this kind of information,” said Levin. “We want to know who is asking for all these audits of all these groups.”
“Of course, if the IRS, in a meeting that took place nine months after we filed our FOIA request, is concealing that information, destroying it or otherwise tampering with it, that’s a serious offense.”
Levin told WorldNetDaily that Landmark has asked Judge Henry Kennedy, who is presiding over the case, to have Hallihan deposed. Apparently, in response to Landmark’s request, the Justice Department has sought a protective order for Hallihan.
