The “fact-checking” genre is one of the most reliably dishonest and worthless forms of journalism.
The Washington Post published a fact check this week flunking Republican Sens. Mike Crapo of Idaho and John Kennedy of Louisiana for accurately criticizing the Biden administration’s since-amended proposal to empower the IRS to collect data on all bank accounts that see more than $600 in annual transactions.
This is not a lie or hyperbole. The White House absolutely did propose this. Nevertheless, the Washington Post published the following headline this week: “No, Biden isn’t proposing that the IRS spy on bank records.”
The article itself reviews specific comments made on Oct. 19, 2021, by Sens. Crapo and Kennedy.
“I don’t think there’s any Republican who doesn’t think the IRS should be able to identify tax evaders and taxes that are being evaded,” said Crapo. “The question is, do you need to create a mechanism where the people of America have to give up their privacy on all of their financial transactions in order to do so? There’s got to be some ground in the middle.”
Added Kennedy, “Whether it’s $600 or $10,000, under this proposal, the intimate financial details of everyone in this room, at a minimum of every American who has a job, will be turned over on a daily basis to the IRS. What could possibly go wrong?”
On Tuesday, moments before Crapo and Kennedy spoke, Democrats amended their IRS proposal slightly, upping the amount to $10,000 in annual transactions, rather than the previously recommended $600. This means that anyone paying $900 per month in rent and utilities out of their bank account, hardly an indicator of great wealth, will be spied upon.
Yet, the Washington Post awarded the Republican senators three Pinocchios anyway.
“Republican senators including Crapo and Kennedy claimed that under the Democrats’ tax enforcement plan, the IRS would be snooping on the sensitive financial details contained in Americans’ bank records,” the fact check reads. “The burden of proof is on the speaker, as we like to remind our readers, but in this case, no proof was supplied.”
It adds, “In reality, the proposal is to monitor the total amount of money going in and out of any bank account with more than $10,000 of transactions in a given year, not the blow-by-blow of where and when people spend their money.”
If you think this is bad, awarding Crapo and Kennedy three Pinocchios for criticizing a proposal that was scaled back only moments before they spoke, consider that the following lines also appear Washington Post fact check [emphasis added]: “The initial version of the Democrats’ proposal would have required financial institutions to provide the IRS with two new figures every year: the total inflows and outflows for any bank account with more than $600 in annual deposits or withdrawals, ‘with a breakdown for physical cash, transactions with a foreign account, and transfers to and from another account with the same owner.’ The requirement would apply to all business and personal accounts at financial institutions.”
Okay, so, Democrats may have proposed a highly invasive surveillance system wherein state actors will be granted the authority to comb through the personal financial and banking data of individual citizens spending modest amounts of money. But don’t call it “spying”!
Also, Democrats changed the amount to $10,000 per year, up from $600. So, gotcha, Crapo and Kennedy!
Anyway, what’s the worst that can happen? It’s not as if the IRS has ever targeted individual citizens for political retaliation or illegally leaked sensitive personal information to the media.
Three Pinocchios!
