Obama’s National Security Force becomes a reality

Comment

Along strict party lines, with Kamala Harris casting the deciding vote, the US Senate passed the Democrats’ “Cut Inflation Act” on August 7, which they say is “a landmark bill on climate, health care and taxes”. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) calls “life-changing legislation.”

The United States House of Representatives passed the bill also along party lines on August 12 after a limited debate in the room. Considerable attention, particularly from Republicans and independent media, has been focused on a key tax provision that will provide $80 billion to the Internal Revenue Service to fund 87,000 new IRS agents.

Pelosi may have been right that the legislation was “life changing,” as anyone who has been audited by the IRS can attest. And the addition of 87,000 new IRS agents will ultimately change many lives of unsuspecting Americans in the future. But is there more to it than just a scary soundbite? Are there any underlying ulterior motives long pursued by Democrats associated with this expansion of the IRS?

During his presidential campaign on July 2, 2008, Barack Obama gave a speech in Colorado that touched on his ideas of national service and national security in which he proposed an original idea: the creation of a “national security force “.

His words (emphasis ours):We cannot continue to rely on our military to achieve the national security goals we have set for ourselves. We need to have a civilian national security force that is just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.

Could a well-armed and expanded tax office be what Obama had in mind?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) strikes the gavel after the House of Representatives voted 220-207 to pass the Cut Inflation Act at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on August 12, 2022. ( Olivier Douliery/AFP via Getty Images)

Let’s examine the subject.

Democrats’ fixation on nationalized health care

Obama’s 2008 speech proposing a civilian national security force was swept into the memory hole with the help of the mainstream media, and he was never in a hurry to explain exactly what he meant by this proposition. But as is the case with most policies pushed by Democrats, they never give up on their outlandish ideas and work feverishly over time to implement them into federal law, even when they are initially thwarted by the Republicans and the people.

Take Obamacare, for example. Most of the concepts of the original 2,300-page law were formulated during the Clinton administration. Remember the failure of Hillary Clinton’s “health care task force” and her 1993 Safe Health Care Bill (also known as Hillarycare)? This working group has developed a 1,342-page invoicewho proposed a universal healthcare system that was ultimately defeated in Congress after a national outcry from concerned citizens.

While Obamacare draws inspiration from liberal Republican Mitt Romney’s 2006 Massachusetts plan, many of the basic concepts were similar to those originally proposed in Hillarycare: a requirement for all Americans to have health insurance, co-ops created to sell health care with federal subsidies for the unemployed and part-time employees and established federal standards for health care plans.

Nationalizing health care was, after all, a lifelong goal of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), his speech in July 2009 detailed his entire life of “health care for all Americans.” It was therefore not surprising that Massachusetts was the incubator of the Democrats’ national health policy. There is a continuity of effort over many years – from Kennedy’s long health care advocacy to Bill Clinton and Hillarycare to Romney (in heavily Democratic Massachusetts) to Obama and Obamacare.

As this example shows, Democrats relentlessly pursue their political goals for decades if necessary. Is Obama’s “civilian national security force” a similar long-term goal pursued by Democrats? And is the IRS the agency Democrats planned all along to make it happen?

Obama and the taxman

Obama had a penchant for arming federal agencies against his political adversaries. For example, its EPA has implemented onerous regulations on the coal industry in the United States, leading to plant closures without the consent of Congress. The American Center for Law and Justice reported that “during the 2013 shutdown, the Obama administration turned our public lands and war memorials into political weapons, denying veterans access to monuments built in their honor.”

Epoch Times Photo
President Barack Obama and White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer, right, react to a reporter’s question as they leave the Treasury Department in Washington on January 16, 2013. (Charles Dharapak, AP Photo)

And then there was the IRS’ targeting of Tea Party groups and the leaking of private information from various conservative groups such as the National Organization for Marriage, as reported by the New York Post. In that same article, Dr. Ben Carson was quoted as saying he was audited by the IRS for the first time after criticizing Obama “in front of the National Prayer Breakfast”. Just a coincidence or a harbinger of things to come?

Who could forget the uproar over the antics of Lois Lerner, director of IRS exempt organizations, who “reported a disproportionate number of requests for tax-exempt status from conservative groups ‘for special treatment and was responsible for’ substantial … mismanagement, lack of judgment and institutional inertia” in the treatment of these requests, because even CNN reported. She was even charged with contempt of Congress for failing to provide requested records or answer questions during a committee hearing. Yet an internal investigation by the IRS left she dropped out in 2015 to the outrage of many conservative groups targeted by the IRS and Republicans in Congress. She is now retired and receiving her full pension for her federal service (as well as her Democratic Party service!).

The IRS weathered this particular storm, even if it was a short-lived thing, as Republicans targeted the IRS enforcement budget and then reduced the overall IRS funding profile during of the next eight years, as reported by leftist and pro-IRS parties. ProPublica in 2018. Democrats and their media allies subsequently “did some love” to the IRS by complaining about their outdated computer systems and networks, understaffing, and long delays in processing tax returns. income. But even their flaky bits, like this one from TheHill.com in April of this year, coyly report that the IRS is “one of the most hated federal agencies”. You think?

Connecting these and other dots, a 2013 Fiscal Times op-ed stated “how federal workers became obama’s private army.” The article ended with this statement: “When law enforcement and tax enforcement become purely political, Americans can no longer trust their federal government.” And to think this was written before the FISA abuses by the DOJ and Obama’s FBI associated with Donald Trump’s Crossfire Hurricane hoax investigation became known. Trust in federal government agencies has continued its downward trend over the past few years, as reported in June Research bench.

Mar-a-Lago
A member of the Secret Service outside former President Donald Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida on August 9, 2022. (Giorgio Viera/AFP via Getty Images)

The weaponization of the federal bureaucracy against Democratic political opponents became standard operating procedure during the Obama years. And Joe Biden and the Democrats have seemingly picked up where Obama left off when it comes to the upcoming major IRS expansion, not to mention DOJ approval. FBI Raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago HomeFlorida on August 9.

Conservative and independent media also recently reported that the IRS is recruiting qualified armed special agents as law enforcement officers, as reported here. On page 17 of IRS Annual Criminal Investigation Report for fiscal year 2021, IRS special agents are boldly depicted firing at human-shaped targets on a shooting range. And just the news reported on August 3 that the IRS has already stockpiled more than 5 million cartridges, including $725,000 purchased this year alone.

While some consider months of recruiting armed IRS agents, qualifying special agents on human-shaped targets and stockpiling over 5 million IRS rounds to be out of touch with the addition of 87,000 new IRS officers under the Democrats’ Cut Inflation Act. , consider the long-term arc of the Democrats’ pursuit of their various policy goals. All of these issues are actually linked regardless of their timing because it is the end result that matters: the creation of a gigantic “national security force” by any other name. And it looks like the IRS will send a lot of that force. The only problem is the percentage of these new IRS agents who will be armed law enforcement officers.

Final Thoughts

Obama once proposed a “civilian national security force” that has never been properly defined. Under the guise of “fighting inflation,” are the Democrats achieving this goal? Is the arrival of 87,000 new IRS agents, at least some of whom will be armed law enforcement officers, something Americans should be worried about? Must the fact that the The IRS will have more agents that there are US Marines to be of concern? Should Americans fear that, according to the Free Washington Beaconthe reviled IRS should become “bigger than the Pentagon, State Department, FBI and Border Patrol combined”?

Frontpagemag.com is right: the tax office could very well be “a Gestapo in the making” – which is probably what Obama envisioned in the first place.

The opinions expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Epoch Times.

Stu Cvrk

Follow

Stu Cvrk retired as a Captain after serving 30 years in the United States Navy in a variety of active and reserve capacities, with considerable operational experience in the Middle East and Western Pacific. With his training and experience as an oceanographer and systems analyst, Cvrk graduated from the US Naval Academy, where he received a classic liberal upbringing that serves as the essential foundation for his political commentary.

Comments are closed.