one. what do you think that the democratic party is feeling the most going into the 2014 midterms? i think the irs has to be the biggest issue. it s easy for people to understand benghazi. it s been complicated to get that message across. we haven t gotten the answers right now. but with the irs they ve already admitted wrongdoing, and we ve seen a pattern developing where it s worse than simply saying well, they accidentally flagged the tea party and patriots and some other people got extra scrutiny. right now we have pro-life groups, you have pro israel groups. i think that is a spread that could be bigger. and if it does reach anyone in the white house that could be a huge deal. the biggest issue i can see is the irs you can tie that to obamacare. one of every ten provisions in obamacare is overseen by the irs. they re going to be able to rally their base on this issue, tie it to obamacare and that s
israel, you need to have special scrutiny from the irs. some of those groups will be sent to a special unit in washington, d.c. to determine if your activities are in contradiction with those of this administration s public policies. as soon as we heard that the board met. we understood that the viewpoint discrimination. it s unconstitutional. you can look it up and see if our activity to see inappropriate but you can t tell us our thoughts or beliefs are inappropriate. megyn: the determination group says there is a reason they do this. they say israel is one of many middle east countries and higher risk of terrorism so the extra scrutiny is appropriate. whenever it mentions countries that have a higher terror risk. your response to that?
the american government seeks to end the four decade jewish settlement enterprise and foster a palestinian state. american treasury sustains them on tax breaks to donations that support them to groups like yours. they ask the question, was this basically the wink and nod that the irs needed to understand that groups like yours required extra special scrutiny before they got their status. do you feel that is what happened and you are being treated as some of the tea party groups were later? look, first of all, for the new york times to make that allegation, it simply a philosophical statement on their part. it s not a directive for the government of the united states to act based on something that appears in the new york times. the government is required to follow the law. unless the law states you
two things. one providing resources is not providing mental support. resources are money i don t know manpower or something. we didn t provide any resources to anybody anywhere for anything. that is flat out wrong. second of all, to say that terrorism happens in israel therefore they have to look at any organization connected to israel, in what country does terrorism not happen? how are you possibly limiting the number of groups that are being considered if you say, terrorism happens someplace that you think about, you ll application has to be held up. megyn: wall street journal has an interesting piece, why, why would there be scrutiny for pro israel groups. a new york times article dated back in july of 2010 may have provided a clue. they talked about then how this a quoted from the new york times as
israel is rock solid and as i ve said to the prime minister in every one of our meeting s the united states will always have israel s back when it comes to security. israel has the right to make its own decisions, i believe that is why you appreciate that israel must reserve the right to defend itself. but sunday the president told the pro israel groups and supporters that diplomacy still needs time to work. now is to sustain the broad international coalition we have built. now is the time to heed the timeless advice from teddy roosevelt, speak softly. carry a big stick. clearly the president is sendsing multiple messages. starting with an interview with