The Associated Press cites officials who said there is enough evidence to seize the men as enemy combatants and send them to Guantanamo Bay.

But apparently the Obama administration wants civilian trials for anyone involved in the Benghazi attack and has sent the FBI back to collect more evidence, which could be challenging in a more tumultuous Libya today.

From the AP:

The decision not to seize the men militarily underscores the White House aim to move away from hunting terrorists as enemy combatants and holding them at the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The preference is toward a process in which most are apprehended and tried by the countries where they are living or arrested by the U.S. with the host country’s cooperation and tried in the U.S. criminal justice system. Using military force to detain the men might also harm fledgling relations with Libya and other post-Arab-Spring governments with whom the U.S. is trying to build partnerships to hunt al-Qaida as the organization expands throughout the region.

A senior administration official said the FBI has identified a number of individuals that it believes have information or may have been involved, and is considering options to bring those responsible to justice. But taking action in remote eastern Libya would be difficult. America’s relationship with Libya would be weighed as part of those options, the official said, speaking only on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to discuss the effort publicly.

…The FBI and other U.S. intelligence agencies identified the men through contacts in Libya and by monitoring their communications. They are thought to be members of Ansar al-Shariah, the Libyan militia group whose fighters were seen near the U.S. diplomatic facility prior to the violence.

In March, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) estimated that drone strikes have killed about 4,700, including some senior members of al-Qaeda.

The National Desert Storm and Desert Shield War Memorial Act, introduced by Rep. Phil Roe (R-Tenn.) last summer, fizzled in committee before the end of the 112th Congress. This time around, the bill has a Senate version to give it some extra lift.

Sens. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) and John Boozman (R-Ark.) joined together to introduce legislation today that would authorize a National Desert Storm and Desert Shield Memorial.

“We owe all men and women who serve our nation a debt of gratitude, and those who serve in war should have their exceptional efforts recognized,” Donnelly said. “The men and women who fought in the first Gulf War, especially those who gave the ultimate sacrifice, deserve to have their service memorialized.”

“There is no national memorial dedicated to the valor and sacrifices made by those members of our Armed Forces who honorably fought, and in some cases made the ultimate sacrifice, in Operation Desert Shield and Desert Storm. We need to change that,” Boozman said. “This bill will clear the way for a memorial that will show a grateful nation’s respect and appreciation for those who fought to defend freedom in the Gulf War.”

The legislation would allow the memorial to be built on federal land in D.C., but no federal funds would be spent on construction. The memorial would be built with funds would be raised privately by the National Desert Storm War Memorial Association.

Roe reintroduced the House version on Feb. 5. “Every day we should commemorate and give thanks to the men and women who have devoted their lives to defending freedom. Every soldier who honorably served our nation should be recognized, and that is why I reintroduced the National Desert Storm and Desert Shield War Memorial Act,” Roe said.

Of the roughly 600,000 American troops who were deployed in both Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, 293 died in theater with 148 killed in action.

Gen. “Stormin’” Norman Schwarzkopf passed away in December at age 78.

A Sanders amendment to the farm bill would make the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the Justice Department’s Oil and Gas Price Fraud Working Group to conduct a six-month investigation to determine whether any company or individual in the United States has manipulated the price of gasoline, crude oil, heating oil, diesel fuel or jet fuel.

“We must do everything that we can to make sure that oil and gasoline prices are transparent and free from fraud, manipulation, abuse and excessive speculation,” said Sanders, a member of the Senate Energy Committee.

“If the Commodity Futures Trading Commission finds that illegal price-fixing has occurred, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission shall report those findings, along with any evidence, to the proper authorities,” the amendment states.

He also proposed a 30-day deadline for the CFTC to use its emergency powers to curb excessive speculation in crude oil markets.

The European Commission announced last week that it was investigating the possibility that BP, Shell, Statoil and others “may have colluded in reporting distorted prices to a Price Reporting Agency to manipulate the published prices for a number of oil and biofuel products.”

Sanders is angry because of a 41 cent per gallon average price hike over the past five months even though demand is lower and inventories are high.

“The skyrocketing cost of gasoline and oil is causing tremendous hardship to the American consumer, small businesses, truckers, airlines and fuel dealers,” he said. “In fact, as we struggle to claw our way out of this terrible recession, high oil and gas prices are enormously detrimental to the entire economic recovery process.”

The amendments come on the heel of Sanders cheering Pope Francis last week for condemning a “cult of money” in the world that he said was oppressing the poor.

“At a time when the gap between rich and everyone else is growing wider, at a time when Wall Street and large financial institutions are exerting extraordinary power over the American and world economy, I applaud the pope for speaking out on these enormously important issues,” Sanders said.

“This administration is living up to its three codes: admit nothing, blame everybody, and deny everything. I mean they have been true to that every step of the way,” Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) said on Fox Business. “The press secretary says, I appreciate your question; the other guy says, this is irrelevant to know where the president was when Benghazi, the attack on our consulate was taking place; it is an irrelevant fact to know whether the president was doing a fundraiser, whether he was sleeping soundly in bed.”

“…I want to know where the president was. I want to know where all of these people were because we want to prevent another Benghazi. This administration just keeps deflecting the facts because they call them irrelevant and then they go on these talk shows. That was a shameful as Susan Rice when she went on those talk shows. If you’re going to show up on those shows then have the facts and own up to it.”

Ros-Lehtinen called the administration’s continued obfuscating “an insult to the American people, never mind that they’re running roughshod over Congress.”

Americans “should be insulted that this administration is admitting nothing, they are denying everything and that they’re blaming everybody,” she added.

“Remember that this is the administration that came in on a — on a high horse saying they were going to be that most transparent administration in history. What we’ve seen are lies, deception, a web of intrigue. Everybody knew everything except the president,” the congresswoman said. “…So everybody is on board was saying we’ve got to protect the president at all costs and heads may roll, a little head here and a little head there but it’s protecting the king. This is what is happening. They’re — they’re conducting this administration as if it were an imperial presidency.”

“When it came to Osama bin Laden we had this view of the Situation Room as this wonderful military operation was going down. Every tragedy we’ve had photos. Where was the president in Benghazi? What was going on that night? Where has the president been in all of these maneuvers?”

Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), who grew up in Moore, quickly left Washington late last night to fly back to his district.

“I appreciate the fact that the president reached out to me last night offering his and the first lady’s prayers and sympathy. He informed me of the FEMA and NORCOM assets and resources that are available and assured me that a disaster declaration would be issued; that was done later in the evening,” Cole said today. “The president also assured me that if there were any problems or needs to call him directly. It was a generous and gracious gesture, and I know he meant it.”

Cole also noted that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) ordered flags flown at half-staff and said his office “has been deluged with expressions of sympathy and offers to help by literally dozens of my fellow House Members on both sides of the aisle.”

“In the days and weeks ahead, my staff and I, as well as my congressional colleagues from Oklahoma, will be doing everything we can to help those in need, comfort those who have lost family members and assist our local officials in getting the resources needed to recover and rebuild. I am confident we will get the help we need to make it through this tragedy; that is what Americans do for other Americans in tough times and challenging circumstances,” he said.

“Americans are the most resilient, most determined and most compassionate people in the world.”

Rep. James Lankford (R-Okla.), whose district is just to the north of Moore, said he’s helping get aid coordinated in D.C.

Lankford was in Shawnee, Okla., surveying damage from a Sunday tornado before flying back to Washington on Monday morning. The Moore tornado hit later in the day.

“Between our churches and the National Guard and our state and our emergency management folks which are terrific in our state, we’re well trained and prepared to do it. But anything that’s this large and this catastrophic, there’s no real preparation that can get you there,” he told Bloomberg.

Lankford clarified on MSNBC that there was ample warning about the storm. “People that were watching and attentive had that opportunity. But you’ve got to understand, a typical tornado that comes through, and E.F.-1, E.F.-2, or E.F.-3, may take off a roof, may take off a couple of walls, blow out some glass. And so people hide in place. They have a shelter inside their home. That may not be a physical concrete shelter, but that’s a normal tornado,” he said.

“This was not a normal tornado that happened on Sunday through Shawnee, and then not a normal tornado that happened by far coming through Moore as well. And so this is not a — a typical situation. Even though people had warning, they went to their normal shelter locations, but it wasn’t enough.”

More were spared from Sunday’s tornado because of where it hit, Lankford said.

“It did a tremendous amount of damage, but it was in a very rural area. So the homes that it hit were obliterated, but it hit very few homes because it was in a very rural area. And we even said Monday morning, ‘This could have been much worse if this would have been in a more urban-populated area, suburban area.’ And then by the time I got here on Monday from the flight, that was already hitting the ground, then, there in Moore and we had it all over again.”

Press secretary Jay Carney also claimed that President Obama had complete ignorance of the investigation as it was unfolding because senior staffers at the White House chose not to tell him.

“There were conversations. After White House counsel was notified, and told senior staff members, there were conversations between staff here and Treasury about when — you know, what was the timing going to be; what would the — would the findings likely be in anticipation of that. But there was no fore-knowledge of when this — when this happened,” Carney said.

“Kathy Ruemmler, the White House counsel, was made aware the week of April 22nd. I’ve now gotten the specific date of April 24th. It does turn out, and we looked at this, that there was a part of this notification process of a series of I.G. — pending I.G. matters that was conveyed to — communicated to someone on the staff of the White House counsel’s office, but that information did not reach Kathy Ruemmler until the following week.”

It was pointed out to Carney that in a briefing last week about he never mentioned that the chief of staff and others were notified.

“Well, I — I think I said that White House counsel knew. I think I said that I didn’t know until Friday, but I didn’t — you know, I’m getting this information to you now. The point is counsel knew on April 24, White House counsel did. And she informed some other senior staff. And with that — in that — in informing, she also made clear that it was her view and others shared this view that there was not a need in a situation like this, with an ongoing investigation or audit, that the president should be notified,” he said.

“There were discussions here. And as I said, there were conversations from his — White House chief of staff’s office with general counsel at Treasury and the chief of staff’s office at Treasury about the timing — anticipated timing of the release of the report and the potential findings. But, there was, again, the — the point was no — no intervention, no action, because it would be entirely inappropriate to do anything except ultimately wait for what the findings would be.”

When the Justice Department began investigating possible leaks of classified information about North Korea in 2009, investigators did more than obtain telephone records of a working journalist suspected of receiving the secret material.

They used security badge access records to track the reporter’s comings and goings from the State Department, according to a newly obtained court affidavit. They traced the timing of his calls with a State Department security adviser suspected of sharing the classified report. They obtained a search warrant for the reporter’s personal e-mails.

The case of Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, the government adviser, and James Rosen, the chief Washington correspondent for Fox News, bears striking similarities to a sweeping leaks investigation disclosed last week in which federal investigators obtained records over two months of more than 20 telephone lines assigned to the Associated Press.

…Court documents in the Kim case reveal how deeply investigators explored the private communications of a working journalist — and raise the question of how often journalists have been investigated as closely as Rosen was in 2010. The case also raises new concerns among critics of government secrecy about the possible stifling effect of these investigations on a critical element of press freedom: the exchange of information between reporters and their sources.

The White House hadn’t scheduled a briefing with press secretary Jay Carney today, but late this morning the administration added a briefing at 1:30 p.m.

In the afternoon, President Obama welcomes Burmese President Thein Sein to the White House.

UPDATE: Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) gives one of the first Hill statements on the latest revelation: “I am very concerned by reports the Obama Administration targeted a FOX News reporter for possible criminal prosecution for doing what appears to be normal news-gathering protected by the First Amendment. The sort of reporting by James Rosen detailed in the report is the same sort of reporting that helped Mr. Rosen aggressively pursue questions about the Administration’s handling of Benghazi. National security leaks are criminal and put American lives on the line, and federal prosecutors should, of course, vigorously investigate.  But we expect that they do so within the bounds of the law, and that the investigations focus on the leakers within the government – not on media organizations that have First Amendment protections and serve vital function in our democracy. We must insist that federal agents not use legitimate investigations as an excuse to harass journalists they deem unfriendly to the President or the Administration.  We shouldn’t even have to ask if our government would do such a thing, but unfortunately as the unfolding IRS scandal shows, this White House has created a culture where we do have to explicitly make these kinds of requests.”

This is just adorable in every way.

Myles, a 7-year-old from Milwaukee, wrote Vice President Biden a letter to suggest that if guns shot chocolate bullets, no one would get hurt.

The Vice President wrote back. Take a look at his response, then share it with your friends:
Dear Myles –

I am sorry it took me so very long to respond to your letter.

I really like your idea. If we had guns that shot chocolate, not only would our country be safer, it would be happier. People love chocolate.

You are a good boy.

– Joe Biden

Guessing a chocolate bullet would still leave a good bruise – paintballs do, and they aren’t even solid like chocolate.

The federal government spends $890,000 each year to maintain 13,000 empty bank accounts.

Sens. Mark Begich (D-Alaska) and Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) wrote OMB director Sylvia Burwell last week to note that “in a time where federal employees are being furloughed and many federal programs are at risk of losing funding, we simply cannot tolerate this type of wasteful spending.”

The senators asked OMB “to exercise its authority and consider implementing methods that would compel federal agencies to work with urgency to close bank accounts that contain a zero balance.”

The pair asked President Obama’s budget arm to provide a plan of action on how they’ll “prevent the continued accrual of wasted fees.”

“I know that $890,000 may not seem like much to some folks here in Washington, but it is this kind of careless spending that angers American taxpayers—and rightly so,” said Begich.

Both Begich and Pryor are up for re-election next year and have been trying to burnish their deficit-cutting credentials. Both are being targeted by liberal groups for voting against recent gun-control efforts in the Senate.

“We must abolish the IRS and end any need for a regulatory agency that snoops into people’s private lives,” said Libertarian Party Executive Director Carla Howell. “We must draw back total federal spending to the level of 1992, which is more than enough to fulfill the government’s constitutional duties to protect our life, liberty, and property. This will allow us to balance the budget immediately, end the federal income tax completely, and give back an average of more than $12,000 to every family in America.”

The party noted that FDR, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, and now Barack Obama have all been caught using the IRS to target political enemies.

No investigation or probe will change this from happening again and threatening free speech, the Libertarians argued.

“We don’t need an income tax, and we certainly don’t need the IRS,” Howell said.

“The Libertarian Party is running candidates to dramatically downsize the federal government,” she continued. “We can cut federal spending by 50 percent, or even 90 percent, and Americans will be better for it. We can end the personal income tax, the corporate income tax, the death tax, and all federal payroll taxes. There will be no need for the IRS, nor any substitute agency.”

“Ending the income tax, abolishing the IRS, and cutting federal spending to the level of 1992 means no more deficit spending. This will stop inflation and stabilize prices. Even more importantly, it will transfer wealth out of the wasteful, dysfunctional and destructive government sector and into the productive private sector, resulting in a bounty of new jobs and prosperity for Americans.”

The vague Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women’s Services Act has been introduced in past Congresses with no success. Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Richard Blumenthal(D-Conn.) and Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) decided to reintroduce for the 113th Congress timed to mark National Women’s Health Week.

“While I will defend crisis centers’ First Amendment rights even though I disagree with their view of abortion, those that practice bait-and-switch should be held accountable so that pregnant women are not deceived at an extremely vulnerable time in their lives,” Maloney said.

In years past, the bill gave the Federal Trade Commission enforcement powers to stop “any person from advertising with the intent to deceptively create the impression that such person is a provider of abortion services if such person does not provide abortion services.” It would be a violation of section 5(a)(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Beyond that, it gives wide discretion to which operations the government could decide to close.

“Deceptive practices that prey on women at pregnancy centers are particularly repugnant and reprehensible – and should be strictly punished and stopped,” Blumenthal said. “This bill would end misleading and false pitches that exploit women seeking vital health care.”

The bill is backed by NARAL and the National Abortion Federation. “We know these crisis pregnancy centers lie to women in the moment they most need accurate information to decide the future of their pregnancy and their lives. It’s despicable that anyone would take advantage of that decision to drive their own political agenda,” said Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. “We’re thrilled that Sen. Menendez is taking action to hold these fake ‘clinics’ accountable.”

Planned Parenthood also regularly lashes out at centers they call “fake clinics run by people who are anti-abortion” that “have a history of giving women wrong, biased information to scare them into not having abortions.”

And to do this, he’s consulting with other militaries around the world for suggestions.

Hagel and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, along with senior enlisted and Vice President Joe Biden, sat down with President Obama yesterday for “a very important, productive meeting” on the crisis, Hagel said this afternoon at the Pentagon.

“It gave the president an opportunity to ask questions directly and get the sense of this huge problem, this serious problem in our military,” Hagel said. “…The president was very constructive. He was very clear. There wasn’t anyone in that room who was disappointed.”

The latest in a string of cases of military sexual abuse program managers to be accused of crimes, Lt. Col. Darin Haas at Fort Campbell, Ky., was relieved of his post after allegedly violating an order of protection and stalking his ex-wife.

“We all have committed to turn this around and we’re gonna fix the problem; this is going to take all of us,” Hagel said, stressing “the problem will be solved here in this institution and we will fix it.”

The new team he’s assembled to come up with intragency solutions, and perhaps ward off an onslaught of legislation, will hold its first meeting next month at the Pentagon.

“It’s not good enough to say we have a zero tolerance policy,” Hagel said.

In addition, every military recruiter will have to undergo special training after a string of sexual misconduct cases in their ranks.

“The risks inherent to military service must not include the risk of sexual assault,” Dempsey said, stressing that “the emphasis on prevention is especially important” and the Joint Chiefs have been brainstorming on ways to “change a culture that has become complacent.”

“Now’s the time for moral courage at every level; there can be no bystanders,” he added of battling “aggressive sexual behavior that rips at the bonds of trust that bind us together.”

Hagel addressed the question of those who say “well, why don’t you just fire some people — well, yeah, who you gonna fire?”

“Where we can find people who have actually perpetrated these crimes, yes,” he said.

Hagel stressed the importance of an independent review board to look objectively at the cases and arrive at suggestions for real-world fixes.

“We need to see what they come up with,” he said. “We’re talking with other militaries from around the world and see what they think.”

The Defense secretary didn’t say which countries he’s consulted. This week he met with counterparts from Bosnia-Herzegovina and Turkey.

“I would say that it’s been a challenging week, but in many ways, a week that I’ve enjoyed because I think that when a press secretary goes to the briefing room and there’s a lot of intensity in the room and a lot of news, that, you know, it’s inspiring reporters to ask hard questions. You know, that’s what it’s all about,” Carney said.

“And I have no problem with that and I think that it’s part of our democracy and part of what makes the process great. So I — you know, some people have said oh — you know, you’ve really been on the firing line and, you know, maybe it’s just me, but I’ve kind of enjoyed it,” he added.

Morgan noted damning commentaries from the New York Times and the Washington Post saying President Obama has been acting like a bystander while letting Carney take the heat.

“What’s remarkable to me, Piers, is that those very fine journalists who wrote those stories would be writing something far worse if a president, this president or any other president, was directly involved in a criminal investigation that in part was looking at his own administration,” Carney said. “That would be — there’s a history to it and I assume the two people who wrote that know the history and understand that it is entirely inappropriate for a president or a White House to be engaged in or, you know, inappropriately knowledgeable about a criminal investigation the likes of which is under way as we understand it by the Justice Department.”

“So you know, those kind of narratives sound right but when you peel back the onion just a little bit, the facts just don’t support it. What the president has done when it comes to the IRS situation is that when he found out based on the I.G.’s report that there had been inappropriate and wrong conduct by IRS personnel, he spoke out about it, he made clear he thought it was an outrage and he has taken action,” he said.

The press secretary also took issue with Morgan’s characterization of the three scandals as scandals.

“One is a total concoction by Republicans on the first hand, you know, and the other, I mean, it depends on the IRS issue, absolutely,” Carney said, referring to Benghazi first.

Asked if he was outraged by the third scandal, the AP phone records grab, as a journalist, Carney said “obviously the Department of Justice, obviously the people involved, obviously the deputy attorney general, were fully aware of the investigation and the activity of that investigation. We at the White House appropriately are not engaged in that activity. It would be wrong if we were.”

But he saved time at the end of the interview for more slamming of “the Benghazi affair that was contrived by Republicans and I think has fallen apart largely this week.”

“The fact of the matter is that we — that this administration has a record on transparency that outdoes any previous administrations, and we are committed to that. The president is committed to that,” he said.

Fifty-four percent of those surveyed said they were very or somewhat closely following the news that IRS applied greater scrutiny to conservative political groups, 22 percent said they weren’t following the story too closely, and 24 percent said they weren’t following the IRS story at all.

Fifty-three percent of those surveyed said they were very or somewhat closely following the revelations into the Benghazi attack, 22 percent said they weren’t following the story too closely, and 24 percent said they weren’t following the IRS story at all.

Gallup called these numbers “comparatively low based on historical measures of other news stories over the last two decades.”

“Despite extensive news coverage of these stories in recent days, the level of attention being paid to each is below the average 60% of Americans who have closely followed more than 200 news stories Gallup has measured over the past several decades,” the polling organization said. “Additionally, Americans appear to be paying almost exactly the same levels of attention to both stories, despite the relative newness of the IRS story during the time in which this survey was in the field.”

Forty percent of Democrats surveyed were following the IRS story, while 67 percent of Republicans said they are. Forty-five percent of Democrats said they have been following Benghazi, while 66 percent of Republicans are.

Seventy-four percent said more investigation is needed for the IRS scandal and 69 percent want more scrutiny for Benghazi.

“I do not believe partisanship motivated” the political and donor questions posed to Tea Party and other applicants, Miller told the panel. “Foolish mistakes were made by people trying to be more efficient.”

Under questioning from Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), who called the IG’s report “chilling stuff,” Miller said he accepted the inspector general’s findings but “I would not characterize it as targeting.”

“It is absolutely not illegal,” Miller claimed, adding “I don’t believe it should happen.”

J. Russell George, Treasury inspector general for tax administration who issued the scathing report, said some groups had their applications waiting for three years and through two election cycles.

“In summary, we found that all three allegations were substantiated,” George testified. “The IRS used inappropriate criteria that identified for review Tea Party and other organizations applying for tax-exempt status based upon their names or policy positions instead of indications of potential political campaign intervention. Because of ineffective management by IRS officials 1) inappropriate criteria were developed and stayed in place for a total of more than 18 months, 2) there were substantial delays in processing certain applications, and 3) unnecessary information requests were issued to the organizations.”

Miller said when he found out about the selective enforcement “ultimately I issued a directive that said the law in the area was not that clear, that we had not been enforcing in that area substantially.”

“I said let’s not enforce right now, let’s talk about it and study it… I thought that was the fair thing to do.”

He also admitted that he was aware of the leak of confidential applicant information to Pro Publica.

But Miller defended previous commissioner Doug Shulman, who testified last year that no targeting of Tea Party groups was occurring.

“It was incorrect but whether it was untruthful or not…” Miller said. “To my knowledge I don’t believe he knew at the time.”

The IRS official repeatedly refused to use the word “targeting” as committee members did. “I think it’s a term that defines something that didn’t exist here,” said Miller, stating at another point “I’m going to take exception to ‘targeting’ because I think that’s a loaded term.”

Under pointed questioning, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) asked Miller if he had any contact with the White House on the Tea Party targeting.

“Absolutely not,” Miller responded. “I certainly would have had some conversations with Treasury… on this topic I believe it was very recent.”

Nunes also asked if Miller had any contact with President Obama’s re-election campaign or OFA. “No,” Miller answered.

When asked why he’d agree to resign while claiming the IRS didn’t target groups, the acting commissioner said, “I never said I didn’t do anything wrong.”

“I resigned because as the acting commissioner what happens at the IRS, whether I was personally involved or not, stops at my desk.”

He later said “I was asked to resign and I will retire.”

Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) called the IRS controversy a bipartisan scandal that “has brought us together.”

“Much as I dislike the right, I think it’s wrong,” he said.

Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) said it’s key to uncover “how far did this cancer go, how quickly can we cut it out.”

“It’s too late for the Congress but it’s not too late for the government to get its reputation cleaned up for America,” said Rangel, who stepped down as Ways and Means chairman in 2010 because of his ethics scandal.

Rep. Pat Tiberi (R-Ohio) flashed a list of 35 questions asked one group, noting that one applicant was asked for a list of books read at her book club.

“I don’t know how you can say it’s not political,” Tiberi said.

“We provided horrible customer service here,” Miller said, still protesting any political motivations.

Rep. Aaron Schock (R-Ill.) presented some IRS requests received by anti-abortion groups, including “please detail the content of the members of your association’s prayers.”

Miller said he did not know about the specific case, but “it would surprise me that that question was asked.”

Schock also noted another request to “please detail certain signs that may or may not be held up outside a Planned Parenthood facility.”

“That doesn’t sound like the usual question,” Miller said.

Daniel Werfel currently serves as controller of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Werfel has also served as a trial attorney in the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division.

“Throughout his career working in both Democratic and Republican administrations, Danny has proven an effective leader who serves with professionalism, integrity and skill,” Obama said in a statement. “The American people deserve to have the utmost confidence and trust in their government, and as we work to get to the bottom of what happened and restore confidence in the IRS, Danny has the experience and management ability necessary to lead the agency at this important time.”

Werfel, 42, has served in other roles at OMB including as deputy controller, chief of the Financial Integrity and Analysis Branch, budget examiner in the Education Branch, and policy analyst in the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

The new acting commissioner takes over on May 22. Obama has yet to nominate a permanent replacement for Commissioner Doug Shulman, who left the job in November.

If her name sounds familiar, it’s because Psaki was President Obama’s traveling press secretary during his re-election campaign.

She was then picked by new Secretary of State John Kerry to be his press secretary, replacing Victoria Nuland. Since Psaki’s mid-February selection, she’s been undergoing intensive training within the State Department on global affairs.

Daily briefings at the State Department include reporters from around the world, and the questions usually span a wide range of countries. Psaki comes to the job with no foreign policy experience.

Nuland, on the other hand, was a former U.S. ambassador to NATO in the George W. Bush administration and a former foreign policy adviser to Dick Cheney.

Kerry knows Psaki from her work on his 2004 presidential campaign, but unlike the messaging she shaped for Obama’s and Kerry’s campaigns the State Department is expressly a nonpartisan agency.

Richard Grenell, who was press secretary for four U.S. ambassadors at the United Nations including John Bolton, weeks ago sent Psaki flowers and a note wishing her well in her new role. He hasn’t received a reply.

Suffice to say she’s not being treated with kid gloves by the State Department press corps. Here’s a sampling from today’s briefing, on Benghazi:

QUESTION: And you mentioned the e-mails that were released. Overall, in this building, what is the reaction to that release? Do you think it will quell the debate? Well, let’s start with that.

PSAKI: Well, the White House release yesterday, it allows the American public, including all of you, to see firsthand the conversation that took place over the course of e-mails. It does confirm that these were CIA-drafted and CIA-finalized talking points and that a number of the concerns raised in this building were separately on a different track raised in that building, as well.

I leave that to all of you and to others to determine whether it quells the concern, but I think it certainly does put a lot of facts in clarity for people.

QUESTION: So if it’s such a good thing, why did you wait more than nine months to do this?

PSAKI: Well, they’ve been released now…

(CROSSTALK)

PSAKI: I don’t want to look into a rear-view mirror on that.

QUESTION: You don’t want to look forward, you don’t want to look backward.

(CROSSTALK)

PSAKI: I do want to look forward. I’m all about looking forward.

QUESTION: You do? And then you don’t want to prejudge…

(CROSSTALK)

PSAKI: That’s what the implementation of the ARB is about.

QUESTION: You don’t want to prejudge anything or predetermine…

PSAKI: Well, that’s separate.

It’s been widely speculated around Washington that Psaki is being groomed to eventually replace Jay Carney in the press secretary role at the White House.

“Listen, jobs is our primary focus, but while we’re focused on that, we’re also focused on holding this administration accountable. Our committees are working overtime to uncover the truth about what happened in Libya, and they’re trying to get to the bottom of what happened in the IRS scandal,” Boehner said at a news conference today.

“…The best way to repair this damage is for the administration to come forward with the truth, the whole truth, so that the American people will have all of the facts.”

When asked which people he wants to see go to jail, the speaker reiterated that he wants to see all the facts.

“I want to know how this happened, who was responsible for it. It’s clear that there — there is law. Section 7214 of the Title 26 of the U.S. code states very clearly, any officer or employee of the United States acting in connection with any revenue law of the United States who is guilty of extortion or willful oppression under the color of law shall be dismissed from office and, if convicted, be fined up to $10,000 and spend five years in jail,” Boehner said.

“…Somebody made a decision to do this. And I doubt that it was some low-level employees in the Cincinnati field office.”

Boehner was asked if he trusts President Obama in light of all the scandals.

“Listen, it’s not about trusting someone. Our job here is to get to the truth, and we’re going to get to the truth. And I know what you’re up to. I’m not taking the bait,” he said.

At a press conference with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan today, Obama said his “main concern” with the IRS scandal “is fixing a problem.”

“And we began that process yesterday by asking and accepting the resignation of the acting director there. We will be putting in new leadership that will be able to make sure that following up on the IG audit that we gather up all the facts, that we hold accountable those who have taken these outrageous actions,” Obama said. “…And I’m looking forward to working with Congress to fully investigate what happened, make sure that it doesn’t happen again, and also look at some of the laws that create a bunch of ambiguity in which the IRS may not have enough guidance and not be clear about what, exactly, they need to be doing and doing it right, so that the American people have confidence that — that the tax laws are being applied fairly and evenly.”

Acting commissioner Steve Miller was not in charge at the time of the scandal. He planned to leave the post in June at the conclusion of a 25-year career at the IRS.

Miller is scheduled to testify before the House Ways and Means Committee tomorrow morning.

During an oversight hearing before the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) brought up the case of Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell, who just cut a deal for life in prison after being convicted of three newborn murders.

“I suppose the unique thing about it is is that it’s not all that unique. While we might sanitize the clinics and other places, about 18,000 babies a year, 20 weeks or older are aborted in this country. And that’s the Guttmacher Institute’s quotes and there are about 44,000 abortion survivors living in the country today,” Franks said.

“I guess my first question would be along the lines, where is our president on this subject, but unfortunately, I already know that answer. He voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Acts when he was in his home state several times,” the congressman continued. “…So my question to you — and it’s a sincere question, and I hope you take it so — in 2002, Congress enacted the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, and it provides that all federal protections, including from your office, sir, for persons apply to every infant born alive.”

“So will you enforce the infant — the Born Alive Infant Protection Act as attorney general? And will you consider carefully what’s happening in clinics across the country like happened at the clinic that Kermit Gosnell ran?”

“Well, like you, I share the many of the concerns that you talked about. I’m a father. I have three kids. And I am interestingly married to a woman who is an obstetrician, a gynecologist, very accomplished in her field. I have responsibilities as attorney general to enforce all the laws that Congress passes,” Holder said.

“Have you ever enforced this law even one time?” Franks asked.

Holder said he didn’t know. “We can examine that and see whether the U.S. attorneys — well, since the law was passed — you said in 2002?” he asked. “What the — how many prosecutions there have been under that law?”

“Well, there’s been 18,000 opportunities a year since then approximately. So I’m just wondering if you’ve even even enforced once?” Franks continued.

“I don’t know whether there was enforcement during the Bush administration or the Obama administration since the passage of the law in 2002. I just don’t know what the statistics are,” Holder said.

Franks told the attorney general that “to stand by in silence while the most helpless of all children are tortuously and agonizingly dismembered, day after day after day, year after year, Mr. General, is a — quite honestly a heartless disgrace that really can’t be described by the vocabulary of man.”

The Defense Department launched the short-range missile from Hawaii northwest into the Pacific. The USS Lake Erie then tracked the missile and launched the SM-3 Block IB missile to take it down with a direct impact.

“Initial indications are that all components performed as designed,” the Pentagon said. “Program officials will assess and evaluate system performance based upon telemetry and other data obtained during the test.”

It was the third consecutive successful test of the missile interceptor system, and comes on the heels of a Pentagon report to Congress finding that North Korea is pulling closer to its “stated objective of being able to strike the U.S. homeland.”

“North Korea remains a security threat because of its willingness to undertake provocative and destabilizing behavior, including attacks on the Republic of Korea (ROK), its pursuit of nuclear weapons and long-range ballistic missiles, and its willingness to proliferate weapons in contravention of its international agreements and United Nations Security Council Resolutions.”

No word yet from the Korean Central News Agency on whether Kim Jong-un thought he was being attacked with a short-range missile from Hawaii.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel was informed yesterday about the allegations of criminal behavior against an Army sergeant first class who was a sexual assault prevention and response coordinator at Fort Hood. “I cannot convey strongly enough his frustration, anger, and disappointment over these troubling allegations and the breakdown in discipline and standards they imply,” Pentagon spokesman George Little said.

Hagel met with Army Secretary John McHugh “and directed him to fully investigate this matter rapidly, to discover the extent of these allegations, and to ensure that all of those who might be involved are dealt with appropriately.”

The soldier being investigated allegedly employed one female private first class as a prostitute and assaulted another when she refused to join his prostitution ring.

The newest report comes just a week after the chief of the Air Force’s sexual assault prevention and response branch was arrested on sexual battery charges in Arlington, Va.

The accused soldier at Fort Hood was immediately suspended from all duties by the chain of command once the allegations were brought to the command’s attention, according to the Army, though no charges have yet been filed.

A recent Pentagon report said three sexual assaults an hour took place in 2012.

During testimony last week before the House Appropriations Committee Defense subcommittee, McHugh said the assaults are “so contrary to everything upon which the Army was built.”

“To see this kind of activity happening in our ranks is really heart wrenching and sickening,” he said.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) called the newest allegations “the latest chapter in a long, sordid history of sexual abuse in our Armed Forces.”

“I see no meaningful distinction between complacency or complicity in the military’s latest failure to uphold their own standards of conduct. Nor do I see a distinction between the service member who orchestrated this offense and the chain of command that was either oblivious to or tolerant of criminal behavior,” said McKeon, who has a granddaughter in the Army. “Both are accountable for this appalling breach of trust with their subordinates and their failure to act worthy of their responsibilities as leaders.”

“If true, the latest sexual assault allegation released by the Army is deeply disturbing and extremely troubling. How can our military be so effective at protecting our nation, yet so ineffective at protecting those who serve?” said ranking member Adam Smith (D-Wash.).

“This is the second service member recently accused of sexual assault whose job in the military, in part, is to be one of the leaders charged with stopping such assaults in the military. Clearly, there is a serious issue with how individuals for this position are selected,” Smith continued. “This latest incident clearly demonstrates that the military’s efforts to prevent sexual assault are failing miserably.”

McKeon called on Hagel “to conduct a review of the military and civilian leadership within the military services to determine whether they continue to hold his trust and his confidence to lead in this area.”

“With regard to sexual assault, my confidence in them is deeply shaken,” the chairman added.

Hasan’s pretrial hearings were held up when he grew a beard that he refused to shave. A military judge ordered that he be forcibly shaved to be in regulation, but an appeals court overturned the order and tossed the judge off the case.

In December, the new judge presiding over Hasan’s trial said he would be allowed to keep the beard.

The previous judge, Col. Gregory Gross, found Hasan in contempt of court half a dozen times over the beard.

The next pretrial hearing for Hasan is set for May 29 at the Lawrence J. Williams Judicial Center at Fort Hood, Texas.

Panel selection of the individuals who serve as a jury during military proceedings will begin May 30, and the trial is set for July 1.

Some lawmakers on Capitol Hill are still trying to get the Defense Department to recognize the massacre as an act of terror instead of “workplace violence,” which would qualify the victims for Purple Hearts and enable survivors to be eligible for certain benefits and treatment.

Reps. Chaka Fattah (D-Pa.), Frank Wolf (R-Va.), and Tom Rooney (R-Fla.) slammed the “political sensitivities” that have kept the attack from being recognized as an act of terror in a letter sent to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel last week.

Victims, the members said, have “revealed claims of mistreatment by the Army” in meeting with the lawmakers, including “repeated denials and delays of medical treatment for individuals with physical injuries, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury; denials of retirement benefits; and overall negligence and disregard.”

“When members of our military and DoD civilians are brutally attacked – whether at home or abroad, by a ‘lone wolf’ or by a ‘card-carrying member’ of a designated terrorist organization – it is our responsibility to provide adequate oversight over DoD and the Army’s policies and decisions, both before and after such an attack,” Rooney, Fattah and Wolf wrote.

“The Army’s preferential treatment of Major Hasan – notwithstanding his open extremism and support for religious violence – and the FBI’s refusal to interview Hasan or notify his superiors of his multiple communications with the notorious terrorist leader Anwar al-Awlaki, apparently because of political sensitivities in the Washington Field Office, led to the Fort Hood attack. Frankly, we are deeply concerned that the same considerations of ‘political correctness’ that caused the horrible toll of deaths and injuries at Fort Hood have also informed the Army’s decision to deem his attack an act of ‘workplace violence.’”

Miller, a career tax man filling in the role in the absence of an Obama appointment, was not in charge of the agency at the time of the targeting of conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status. That was Doug Shulman, who stepped down three days after Obama won re-election.

Obama said this evening in the East Room that he’d spoken with Treasury Secretary Jack Lew “to discuss the investigation into IRS personnel who improperly screened conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status.”

“And I look forward to taking some questions at tomorrow’s press conference, but today, I wanted to make sure to get out to all of you some information about what we’re doing about this, and where we go from here,” the president said. “I’ve reviewed the Treasury Department watchdog’s report, and the misconduct that it uncovered is inexcusable. It’s inexcusable, and Americans are right to be angry about it, and I am angry about it.”

The inspector general’s report was released last night. It was preceded by an apology from the IRS for targeting groups like the Tea Party.

Obama said Miller’s resignation was accepted “because given the controversy surrounding this audit, it’s important to institute new leadership that can help restore confidence going forward.”

“Second, we’re going to put in place new safeguards to make sure this kind of behavior cannot happen again,” Obama said. “…Third, we will work with Congress as it performs its oversight role.”

“I’ll do everything in my power to make sure nothing like this happens again by holding the responsible parties accountable, by putting in place new checks and new safeguards, and going forward, by making sure that the law is applied as it should be — in a fair and impartial way,” he continued. “And we’re going to have to make sure that the laws are clear so that we can have confidence that they are enforced in a fair and impartial way, and that there’s not too much ambiguity surrounding these laws.”

“More than two years after the problem began, and a year after the IRS told us there was no problem, the President is beginning to take action. If the President is as concerned about this issue as he claims, he’ll work openly and transparently with Congress to get to the bottom of the scandal—no stonewalling, no half-answers, no withholding of witnesses,” McConnell said.

“These allegations are serious — that there was an effort to bring the power of the federal government to bear on those the administration disagreed with, in the middle of a heated national election.”

Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) said the resignation was a “first step,” but “it remains clear that the President has not fully grasped the wide-ranging effects of the IRS scandal as it took nearly a week for him to act.”

“This is not something that can be swept under the rug – we need permanent, systematic fixes to ensure that it does not happen again,” Scott continued. “The American people deserve better than what they have seen from the White House over the past week, and the President has a responsibility to cooperate with Congressional investigations as we work to get to the bottom of this.”

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), one of the lawmakers to introduce legislation in response to the scandal, called Miller’s resignation “only the first step in preventing these dangerous practices by the IRS and making sure that no government entity engages in this kind of partisan targeting,”

“The Administration and Congress must cut this practice off at its roots by preventing this discriminatory practice from ever occurring going forward.”

Miller is still on the witness list to testify at a Friday House Ways and Means Committee hearing on the scandal.

“The president has deemed this inexcusable, yet actions speak louder than words. It is time for President Obama and his Administration to act and it is our duty as Americans to hold them accountable,” he added.

The resolution finds that “the Internal Revenue Service engaged in discriminatory behavior” and calls for an independent authority to investigate “and, if applicable, seek criminal charges against any individuals who authorized or were involved in targeting people of the United States based on their political views.”

“This resolution is not about Republican vs. Democrat or conservative vs. liberal. It is about arrogant and unrestrained government vs. the rule of law. The First Amendment cannot and should not be renegotiated depending on which party holds power,” Paul said after Democrats placed the hold.

“Each senator took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, yet Senate Democrats chose to block my resolution and thus refused to condemn the IRS for trampling on our First Amendment rights. I am incredibly disappointed in Washington’s party politics and I am determined to hold the IRS accountable for these unjust acts.”

Other bills introduced in reaction to the IRS scandal this week are the Taxpayer Nondiscrimination & Protection Act of 2013, a bill introduced by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) that would add criminal penalties for IRS employees who target political organizations, and the Project Against Ideology-Based Targeting Act, introduced by Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), that would prohibit the IRS from targeting organizations based on ideology.

“Having run a 501(c)(3) organization, I recognize the danger with this kind of targeting by the IRS. We cannot allow it to continue, regardless of the political party in power. There is no excuse for this kind of behavior from our government,” said Flake.

“It’s sad that this legislation is even necessary,” the Arizona senator added. “But as we learn more and ensure those involved are held accountable for this wrongdoing, this bill will prohibit additional targeting from occurring in the future.”

“Listen, and I know you’re all trying to, what led to this — these convictions of murder for this man is the fact that people have been pushed back into these holes to do something that’s legal. I think that all this picking of these clinics and throwing chemicals into them to make them so they can’t use them, you can’t get the chemicals out, all these restrictive laws — the law of the land is now what the Supreme Court has said. And I think to keep pushing these clinics back into situations where they wind up like this is wrong.

I think that no matter how you stand on the issue of abortion, people who make that decision should do it and not have to be worried about infections and some butcher like this doing the bad things they do. They should be in a place that’s clean and sterile and have people that know what they’re doing and care about what they do.”

“As you are fully aware, the Department of Defense is facing a historic shortfall in our budget for the current fiscal year.  This is the result of current law that went into effect March 1. It imposes deep across-the-board cuts on DoD and other federal agencies. Combined with higher than expected wartime operating costs, we are now short more than $30 billion in our operation and maintenance (O&M) accounts — which are the funds that we use to pay most civilian employees, maintain our military readiness, and respond to global contingencies,” Hagel wrote.

“The department has been doing everything possible to reduce this shortfall while ensuring we can defend the nation, sustain wartime operations, and preserve DoD’s most critical asset — our world-class civilian and military personnel. To that end, we have cut back sharply on facilities maintenance, worked to shift funds from investment to O&M accounts, and reduced many other important but non-essential programs.”

As expected, though, that hasn’t been enough to close the shortfall, he said.

“After required notifications, we will begin the furlough period on July 8 at the rate of one furlough day per week for most personnel. We plan to continue these furloughs through the end of the current fiscal year. If our budgetary situation permits us to end furloughs early, I would strongly prefer to do so. That is a decision I will make later in the year,” Hagel continued.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) warned that “furloughs are just the beginning” in wearing down the Defense Department.

“Sequester’s pain will intensify and strengthen. It will get far worse before it gets better,” he warned.

“In the time since the White House first conceived of sequester, I have urged the president to find a reasonable way to rein in the debt without hurting the economy or compromising our national security. He still has it within his power to fix sequestration, a responsibility no other member of government can claim,” McKeon continued. “House Republicans have advanced multiple balanced solutions that could spare those who support our national security this uncertainty and hardship. Unfortunately, the president has taken no such step.”

“I fear that the President’s inaction has made saving our military from sequester in 2013 a lost cause. My hope is that President Obama reads Congress’ clear intent that sequester be replaced in 2014 as an opportunity to finally show leadership; the signs are not promising.”

The congressman noted that Obama hasn’t even turned in a funding request for troops in Afghanistan.

“I am ready and willing to work with him to prevent the debt crisis from growing into a national security crisis, but his inaction promotes uncertainty and increases risk,” McKeon said.

“The IRS has been using taxing power as a political tool to bully these conservative groups and this type of intimidation is a major violation of our U.S. Constitution,” Paul said. “This act of discrimination should not be tolerated and I demand a formal investigation seeking criminal charges against any individuals who authorized or were involved in targeting people of the United States based on their political views.”

“The president has deemed this inexcusable, yet actions speak louder than words. It is time for President Obama and his Administration to act and it is our duty as Americans to hold them accountable,” he added.

The resolution finds that “the Internal Revenue Service engaged in discriminatory behavior” and calls for an independent authority to investigate “and, if applicable, seek criminal charges against any individuals who authorized or were involved in targeting people of the United States based on their political views.”

It also seeks to “determine if other entities in the administration of President Obama were involved in or were aware of the discrimination and did not take action to stop the actions of the Internal Revenue Service.”

Also today, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) called for the removal of the acting commission of the IRS, Steven Miller.

Miller is a career tax man who was temporarily moved into the spot after Commissioner Doug Shulman left three days after President Obama’s re-election. The targeting of Tea Party groups happened under Shulman’s tenure.

“If the reports are accurate that Steven Miller knew about the IRS’s egregious targeting of conservative groups last year and misled members of Congress about those actions, he should step down or be removed immediately,” Blunt said.

“It’s become increasingly clear this was not limited to the actions of a small group of lower level employees, which is why President Obama and his administration must initiate a comprehensive and transparent investigation immediately.”

When asked by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer yesterday what he might have done differently in the review, Pickering called it “a very interesting question.”

“I hadn’t thought about it from that perspective,” he added.

“What I have been hearing is the promises of new startling developments. What I have been seeing is some of the questions we have reviewed. I’m very open to the idea that nobody can do in two months the absolutely perfect job, that nothing new will arise,” Pickering said.

“So far, I have, with all honesty, not seen any development related to the report and the mandated scope, which is in the law of that report, essentially, the security focus of the report, that would cause me to change my view on the conclusions we reached or the recommendations we made.”

When asked why then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was never interviewed on the report, Pickering said “we felt we had fully developed the answer to the question of where the decisions were made, where the failures and performance had taken place, where those decisions were reviewed.”

“And they did not touch on her,” he added.

“Now, with hindsight, don’t you think it would have been important to ask her about that conversation and other decisions she made that night? Because she was intimately involved,” Blitzer asked.

“We did. We did. We interviewed the senior staff members…”

“I didn’t hear any of them talking about when we went into the Iraq War on the basis of a misrepresentation about what the motivation was for that war, and the thousands of Americans who died and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died,” Pelosi said on MSNBC.

“But putting that aside, because that’s, again, a side show, let’s be serious about this. The fact is the talking points are what is the consensus is that the intelligence community state. All of them come together and agree on consensus talking points based on the information that each of them has at any given time. But we should even be talking about talking points when four people died and the point is our intelligence community, our diplomats, they promote our values. They also protect our people by gaining intelligence to prevent other conflict.”

Pelosi criticized the GOP for wanting “to focus on Secretary Clinton, who did such a magnificent job as secretary of State,” and not on jobs.

Blaming the media for this, she complained “that when you go to a show, everybody wants to talk about Benghazi.”

She called the IRS targeting of conservative groups “an opportunity.”

“As we look at this and we should — and I think it’s very wrong that they would have targeted them. We should be saying what are these groups — let’s have transparency, disclosure. Who are these contributors, A? B, let’s have accountability for what this is. This is a very vague law. We need a clear definition of what a 501-C4 is, that someone could give them money and they don’t have to pay taxes on it,” she said.

She was also asked about campaign fundraising, and Sen. Chris Murphy’s (D-Conn.) recent comments that running for office is a “soul-crushing” experience of becoming “a telemarketer for 24 months” as you beg for money.

“I think it’s easier to ask a total stranger than your friend, myself. I try to avoid that. I still have some friends. But the fact is that there are people who care about a progressive agenda in our country who are willing to help,” Pelosi said.

The AP reported that the Justice Department secretly obtained two months of telephone records of reporters and editors dated April and May 2012, including incoming and outgoing calls, and the duration of each call, for the work and personal phone numbers of individual reporters, general AP office numbers in New York, Washington and Hartford, Conn., and the main number for AP reporters in the House of Representatives press gallery.

AP President and Chief Executive Officer Gary Pruitt fired off a letter of protest to Attorney General Eric Holder today demanding the return of the phone records and destruction of all copies.

“There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters. These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP’s newsgathering operations, and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know,” Pruitt said.

The DoJ notified the AP on Friday but included no explanation for the seizure.

It included phone numbers for five reporters and an editor who were involved in this May 7, 2012, story on the thwarting of a new underwear bombing plot.

The plot was significant because the White House had told the public it had “no credible information that terrorist organizations, including al-Qaida, are plotting attacks in the U.S. to coincide with the (May 2) anniversary of bin Laden’s death,” the AP noted today.

UPDATE: White House press secretary Jay Carney, traveling on a fundraising swing through New York with President Obama, remarks to the White House press pool: “Other than press reports, we have no knowledge of any attempt by the Justice Department to seek phone records of the AP. We are not involved in decisions made in connection with criminal investigations, as those matters are handled independently by the Justice Department. Any questions about an ongoing criminal investigation should be directed to the Department of Justice.”

UPDATE: House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) weighs in: “This is obviously disturbing. Coming within a week of revelations that the White House lied to the American people about the Benghazi attacks and the IRS targeted conservative Americans for their political beliefs, Americans should take notice that top Obama Administration officials increasingly see themselves as above the law and emboldened by the belief that they don’t have to answer to anyone. I will work with my fellow House Chairmen on an appropriate response to Obama Administration officials.”

From Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America:

“Justice was served to Kermit Gosnell today and he will pay the price for the atrocities he committed. We hope that the lessons of the trial do not fade with the verdict. Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell.

“From the lack of funding available for low-income women to access abortion services, to the sharp decline of reputable providers in Pennsylvania, to the gross negligence of authorities to enforce the law after complaints were filed against Gosnell, each aspect of this case must be a teachable moment for lawmakers: until we reject the politicization of women’s medical care and leave these decisions where they belong — between a woman and her family and her doctor — women will never be safe. The horrifying story of Kermit Gosnell is a peek into the world before Roe v. Wade made legal a woman’s right to make her own choices.

“NARAL Pro-Choice America’s annual Who Decides? publication has given Pennsylvania an ‘F’ grade precisely because it has passed medically unnecessary laws that restrict access to safe and legal abortion care. It is my sincere hope that the women in Gosnell’s clinic did not suffer in vain and that Pennsylvania, and every state, will step up and join us in making the protection of women’s ability to get, safe, high quality, and legal abortion care a top priority.”

A just verdict. The jury has rightly convicted #Gosnell for his appalling crimes, ensuring no woman is victimized by him ever again.

— Planned Parenthood (@PPact) May 13, 2013

“The actions of the IRS are unacceptable and un-American. Government agencies using their bureaucratic muscle to target Americans for their political beliefs cannot be tolerated,” Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said today. “The president must immediately condemn this attack on our values, find those individuals in his administration who are responsible and fire them.”

The commissioner who was in charge during last campaign season, Douglas Shulman, left the administration three days after Obama was re-elected.

Manchin said the time is now to begin probing the scandal.

“While we await answers from the Inspector General, there must be a congressional investigation to determine how this happened and to prevent this from ever happening again,” he said.

Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, issued on Friday a more careful statement calling for a probe into the IRS’ enforcement of nonprofit rules.

“My subcommittee has been investigating the IRS’s failure to enforce the law requiring that tax-exempt 501(c)4s be engaged exclusively in social welfare activities, not partisan politics,” Levin said. “Today’s announcement by the IRS raises a second issue: whether the IRS, to the extent it has enforced its rules, has been impartial in doing so. Both issues require investigation.”

The IRS commissioner is a presidential appointee. From the end of George W. Bush’s second term and through President Obama’s first term until three days after Election Day, it was Doug Shulman.

Shulman’s spot hasn’t been filled by Obama and Steven T. Miller is the current acting commissioner.

“The American people deserve answers about how such seemingly unconstitutional and potentially criminal behavior could occur, and who else was aware of it throughout the Administration. It is imperative that you, your predecessor, and other past and present high-ranking officials at the Department of Treasury and IRS immediately testify before Congress,” Rubio wrote Lew.

“The public expects your complete cooperation with both congressional investigations and potential criminal inquiries. If investigations reveal that bureaucrats or political appointees engaged in unconstitutional or criminal targeting of conservative taxpayers, they must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” the senator continued. “At a bare minimum, those involved with this deeply offensive use of government power have committed a violation of the public trust that has already had a profoundly chilling effect on free speech. Such behavior cannot be excused with a simple apology.”

Rubio said “it is clear the IRS cannot operate with even a shred of the American people’s confidence under the current leadership.”

“Therefore, I strongly urge that you and President Obama demand the IRS Commissioner’s resignation, effectively immediately. No government agency that has behaved in such a manner can possibly instill any faith and respect from the American public.”

“They’re in the midst of a presidential campaign. The narrative by the Obama campaign is that Bin Laden is dead, the — al-Qaeda is on the run, not to worry about anything. And here comes this attack on Benghazi. And there are so many questions that are unanswered. We need a select committee. But for the president’s spokesman to say, well there was only words, or technical changes made in those emails, is a flat out untruth,” McCain said on ABC’s This Week.

The call for a special committee isn’t new, but the idea has been gaining traction since last week’s Benghazi hearing.

“I like Mr. Carney, but that — that’s just not acceptable for the president’s spokesman to say that to the American people when we now know any reference to active terror, any reference to al-Qaeda were removed from those talking points, and it was done at a deputy’s meeting just before Susan Rice went on television,” the senator continued.

“I’d call it a cover-up. I — I would call it a cover-up in the extent that there was willful removal of information, which was obvious. It was obvious. Mr. Hicks said in his testimony, his jaw dropped when he saw Susan Rice do that — I was on — I was on another Sunday morning show after Susan Rice, my jaw dropped. I said, look people don’t bring rocket-propelled grenades and mortars to spontaneous demonstrations.”

McCain said former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “has played a role in this.”

“She had to have been in the loop some way. But, we don’t know for sure. But I do know that her response before the Foreign Relations Committee, who cares? Remember when she said, well who cares how this happened, in a rather emotional way? A lot of people care, I say with respect to the secretary of State,” he said.

Still, he added, he doesn’t yet know “what level of scandal, quote, unquote, this rises to.”

“I find it impossible to comprehend why on September 11, the day we all know is so important, when there have been numerous warnings about the security at that consulate, that we didn’t have forces that were capable of doing so. And over a seven and a half our period with all the assets we have in the region, we couldn’t have an F-16 at low altitude, fly over those people who were attacking our consulate? Another question is, why weren’t there forces capable of going to defend that consulate?” McCain said.

Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) countered that it’s “absolutely not” a cover-up.

“I think what I would suggest in looking at the play- by-play, is what was going on was not so much the politics of electioneering, but the institutional sort of positioning. Victoria Nuland, who was representing the State Department, had a long career in public service. She’s not a partisan. In fact, she worked for Dick Cheney,” Reed said.

“I think this is the classic issue of interagency battle about who will say what. And at the end I think what you had was a very sort of consensus document that avoided all of the difficult issues.”

Reed said any talking points that have to be approved by every agency are “almost by definition in Washington something that is not as specific or as conclusive.”

“What they did, I think, was try in a very chaotic situation, to come up with points that they felt confident of. They didn’t want to go too far in two concepts. One, our intelligence resources or assets that you might not want to disclose. Second, there’s an ongoing investigation was just beginning. Those two factors also framed the response,” Reed said.

“But I think again, when you talk about this sort of political dynamic, when the president comes out and says quite quickly, with the authority of his office, this was an act of terror, the notion that we’re somehow trying to disguise this and make it something else, I think falls away very quickly.”