For real.

Against any person who attempts to block audits of every single Government agency by outside parties.

Every couple of years when I ran MCSNet the state revenue folks showed up for a sales tax audit.  The first one was a bit surprising; yes, we sold tangible property, we were registered, we filed and paid the taxes (which we had collected from the buyers) and we had all the records.

Why surprised then?

Because for years prior to setting up MCSNet I had been part of a Sub-S running Macro Computer Solutions Inc. which sold mostly computers along with some consulting, network cabling and similar services.  We sold a lot of tangible product (it was most of what we did) and never once did the revenue folks come audit us.  We also collected, filed and paid of course, so why suddenly the interest when while it was a different company they knew damn well who I was -- and that had a decently-long record of voluntary compliance.

It quickly became obvious why -- it was apparently a very common scheme among firms in our line of business to buy things allegedly for "resale" and then consume them without paying the tax.  That of course is illegal; you can buy and then convert inventory to consumption if that is required for some reason, but you must pay the tax that wasn't collected when you bought originally and you better be able to document every one of those transactions.  If your intent was to consume the thing (e.g. it was something you ordinarily consumed in the course of business -- like printer paper, envelopes and similar) then you paid at the time of purchase just like everyone else.

So the revenue folks essentially considered our line of work "high risk for fraud."  Well, whatever.  Other than the hassle I didn't care.  We didn't cheat.  That which we had in the back room for resale we had documentation on, that which we had sold we had invoices on along with the reconciliation and check to the state revenue department, and that which we bought for consumption we did not use our resale certificate on and thus we paid the sales tax like everyone else when we bought it -- and we had the invoices with the sales tax line on it, along with the voucher section of the check used to pay said invoice.

Of course the state revenue folks wanted evidence of this and they would spend a day or so in our offices asking for this invoice and that for things we had purchased on our resale certificate, the disposition and records of same for this serial number or that one along with evidence of the tax paid if it had been sold to a customer, and if we still had it where it was.  For the stuff we still had rather than a display on a screen or a print-out of the reconciliation and invoice to the customer along with payment and tied entry to the tax remittance the answer was "its in the box, in the stockroom -- would you like to look?"  After the first couple of "Yes" answers, a walk back in there to the appropriate shelf and there it was in the carton with the serial number sticker on the side of the box it was pretty-clear we weren't cheating.

So what's the problem?  If the IRS thinks you are cheating you get the same treatment.

Why is anyone in government upset about this?  Why are people on the street upset?

Probably because they're cheating, eh?

Yeah, they are.

Outside audits are the only ones that matter.  USAID's director, I remind you, basically told Congress to stick it up their ass when they summoned her to a hearing and asked her questions about exactly where money was going.  They could have held her in criminal contempt, of course, until she produced the records and literally jailed her if she refused to comply -- but didn't.  May I remind you that both sides of the aisle didn't do that.  So much for "Congressional oversight."

They could have also zeroed agency appropriations.  May I also remind you that both sides of the aisle didn't do that either.

Now we're discovering that plenty of these very same people and their political entities were getting paid directly and indirectly with some of the indirect payments coming via campaign contributions from the very firms employees and similar that got the awards.

Gee, big shock that nobody on either side of the aisle wanted to throw the director in jail until the records were coughed up eh?

Spare me the crocodile tears and go sit on a ****ing cactus.

As a former CEO I had to deal with audits any time the state (or feds for that matter) decided they wanted to conduct one.  I had no right to refuse and complaining was a waste of time.  I was either following the law and rules or I was not.  If I was then there was no harm or foul other than wasted time and shortly they'd go away and chase someone else who might be cheating.  I wasn't cheating and thus I didn't give a ****, other than annoyance in that I knew damn well they were wasting both their time and mine.

These *******s think they can do whatever the hell they want with impunity -- whether the violation is of actual law or simply that they know if it was to be made public the outrage would be so great they'd be fired and the money would dry up doesn't matter.  The fact is they're cheating and that is why they're screaming.

PERIOD.

I've read the "complaints" from "entities" who think they have the right to sue to block these audits.  They have alleged, without any basis whatsoever, that said persons doing the audits are exfiltrating information and giving it to outside persons beyond the remit and purpose of the audit itself.  That's an allegation that under the rules of every court, State or Federal, you must have evidence of in order to plead it.

A bare allegation of criminal conduct, without evidence, is not only improper it demands summary dismissal of the complaint with prejudice and sanctions against both the entity bringing it AND THEIR COUNSEL, who has a legal DUTY to bring only reasonably-founded complaints into a courtroom backed by some sort of evidence.

THE SIMPLE FACT IS THAT THERE IS NONE -- HATRED IS NOT EVIDENCE.

So if we're going to play extra-judicial games here, where the rules of evidence are ignored simply because someone doesn't like a particular action or person then I don't give a wet **** if extrajudicial punishment is extracted upon those bringing those complaints and anyone entertaining them in the judiciary.

We either have a rule of law or we do not and those who act as we do not should have absolutely zero recourse to the law when that same standard is applied to them personally.  If someone declares they are outside the law then it is not possible to murder, assault or******them.  (Kill, "rough sex" or punch them, yes, but not murder, assault or rape.)

When I ran MCSNet I would not have contemplated bringing a bald claim of felony misconduct (which data theft from the government clearly is) before a judge and asking for a TRO and/or injunction without evidence that the alleged violation is occurring.  That someone is looking for evidence of malfeasance under the explicit charge of the entity that has a responsibility to enforce the law is not only in no way an improper act it is the very definition of discharging the duties of the Executive, which has a duty to uphold each and every law -- including insuring that every appropriation made by Congress is spent as Congress has directed and for no other purpose.

All of you complaining about this, whether Democrat or Republican, can go **** yourselves.