(2011) SIGNER REPORTS TIGTA ACTION TO
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
As discussed in ”(2010-2011) U. S. Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) Secretly Avoids Investigation of Signer Allegations,” I received no response to my August letters to J. Russell George or Treasury Secretary Geithner. On September 1, 2011, I reported the history to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in a telephone conversation. I referred the Agent with whom I spoke to donsigner.com, which contained the details and supporting documents. The Agent said he would read it, and then contact the FBI’s White-Collar Crime Division.
After I talked to the FBI Agent on September 1, I received TIGTA Principal Deputy Inspector General Hungate’s August 29 letter discussed in the TIGTA section. On September 6, I recontacted the Agent I previously talked with and informed him of the letter. The Agent informed me that he had referred the case to the FBI’s San Jose White-Collar Crime Division, which would review donsigner.com for information it needs. As the only record of my complaint was the telephone conversations, I prepared a written summary of TIGTA’s actions with supporting documents, and then took them to the San Jose FBI office on September 14. I informed the Duty Agent that I had reported the issue on September 1, and that I had brought the printed documents to the office as a formal record. The Agent asked questions about the history, but refused to accept the package I had prepared. After further discussion, he agreed to accept the short introductory cover letter, but not my story of TIGTA’s actions or supporting documents.
On September 21, I attended a local Fremont event in which an FBI Special Agent from the San Jose office was a guest speaker. After he spoke, I talked with him privately and informed him of my visit to the FBI office the week before, and asked him if he would be able to find the status and let me know. The following week he informed me that my report had not yet been reviewed for action to be taken, but confirmed that I had made the report to the right people. He said that if I hadn’t heard from the FBI within a month or so, that I should make another personal visit to the San Jose office and seek an update.
After hearing nothing further from the FBI, on November 18 I again visited the San Jose FBI office. I asked the Duty Agent (a different person than I had talked to in the past) the status of my report. His response was vague, but did not indicate that any action had been taken. I handed him the package of documents that the September r4 Duty Agent had rejected. He asked my why he wouldn’t take them, to which I responded that I didn’t know. He told me that he would read the package, and then call me the following week. After not hearing from him, I called the office the following week and left a message. After not receiving a reply, I left two more messages in the days that followed. After still not hearing, on December 1 I left a message for the Special Agent who had suggested I make a visit to seek an update, but received no return call from him either.
As it appears that both Special Agents have been instructed not to contact me, on December 8, 2011, I sent a letter to San Francisco Special Agent in Charge Stephanie Douglas explaining my unsuccessful attempts at obtaining the status, and seeking a response from her or a subordinate. The San Francisco FBI office is responsible for other Bay Area FBI offices, including San Jose. I furnished copies of the December 8 letter to Congressman Stark and Senator Boxer, both of whom had written letters on my behalf in the past.
Of the many categories listed on the FBI’s White-Collar Crime web page, it appears that my case would fall under Public Corruption/ Government Fraud. Another FBI web page goes into more depth beginning with, “Public corruption is a breach of trust by federal, state, or local officials—often with the help of private sector accomplices. It’s also the FBI’s top criminal investigative priority.” I believe that this statement describes the situation both with the GM/IRS collusion, and the apparent TIGTA cover-up that followed. The web page goes on to explain how the FBI investigates public corruption, stating in part, “We often work in conjunction with the inspector general offices from various federal agencies…“ In my case, it is the Inspector General’s office itself that committed a seemingly fraudulent act.
As TIGTA is an Inspector General, my complaint involves an ally of the FBI. This makes for an awkward FBI investigation, similar to TIGTA investigating the Treasury’s business partner, GM. It would seem even more difficult for the FBI since, as I explained in the TIGTA response Expanded Details, it appears to me that the direction for TIGTA’s non-investigation came from above TIGTA. Disturbingly, the FBI’s lack of response to me seems eerily similar to TIGTA’s avoidance of action on my well-documented complaint about GM/IRS collusion.
