or get the internet only offer of just $4.95 and save $15. go to obamacare911.com to claim your copy now. >> this week, editorial report, irs scandal grows as targeting went beyond tea party. eric holder under fire. will the white house stand by its attorney general? and can president obama change the subject before the scandals take their toll? plus, the new national education standards that have some conservatives crying foul. former new york city schools chancellor joe klein tells us why he supports the common core. welcome to the journal editorial report. i'm paul gigot. well, the irs scandal continued to unfold this week with new

evidence suggesting that the targeting went beyond tea party groups and involved more than a few rogue employees in the tax agency's cincinnati office. collin levy has been following the story for us. he joins me, along with dna henninger and washington columnist kim stossel. collin, you wrote this week about a case of a pro-israel group that seemed to have been targeted after -- right around the time that the administration was pursuing some policies that that group opposed. >> right, paul. we really saw coalescing stories of targeting from other groups this week. this group you're referring to, the pro-israel group called z street, and they basically had a situation where an agent told them that any groups that had issues related to israel were getting special scrutiny in washington, d.c we've also heard now from a doctor's group called doctors for patient care that was

actively opposed to obamacare that they may have been -- one of the doctors there may have been personally you hadditied. -- audited. this is in addition to the information that came out this week about lois lerner having signed on. >> paul: she was the -- she's now on suspension, but she ran that tax exempt department. let's go at the z street story. ne gentry, irs agentfy the who told them that she had been instructed to single groups like this out. this was the -- the timing was also strange because it occurred at a time when this group was opposing some of the policies of the administration, they were pursuing the palestinian peace process. >> well, right. basically what was happening was there were stories at the time that gee, a lot of these pro-israel groups are supporting west bank settlements and things like this and at the same time that they're getting tax exempt status. so it's entirely possible some of these irs agents were getting

these cues one way or another that hey, this is opposed to the administration's policy priorities and i think it was said specifically to z street that some of the scrutiny was to see whether or not the israel groups were in lock step with the administration's policy priorities. >> paul: and we called miss gentry to see if she had any response or comment on that story and we didn't get a returned phone call. so kim, what's the ultimate vulnerability here for the administration? is it really that want to find out how widespread this practice was? was it extended to romney donor, for example. whether it extended to any groups that opposed the obama agenda? >> this scandal could continue to unfold and unfold. everyone, the truth is, paul, everyone has an issue with the irs. what this has done is emboldened people to speak out about issues they've had and you're beginning to see connections put together

and strange timing put together and intersections of officials who were looking into this put together and that is the issue for the administration is that this story becomes not what they claimed rogue agents, but a more targeted and direct assault on any organization opposed to the administration or its policies. >> paul: kind of ethic or culture that targeted certain ideas. go ahead. >> well, staffers for the ways and means committee have gone to cincinnati and they are interviewing the workers involved in that division down there in cincinnati. if at any point in this some of these federal workers feel that they are vulnerable and say that they were given signals by political appointees that they should do this, we're talking about a new ball game at that point. and this amazing figure of douglas shulman going up to the white house 157 times, three times as many as katherine

sebelius who is running -- >> paul: let me ask but that because the defense for shulman is, this was just obamacare in which the irs has a significant new role, so what do you expect? >> katherine se legalious is the secretary of hhs, she was requesting to be in charge of implementing the entire thing, went up to the white house about 50 times. up there three times as many times as she was. i'd like to know who he was talking t. lower staffers about irs regulations, or maybe people around the oval office. >> paul: collin, we're also seeing lawsuits come out against the federal government by some of the groups that were aggrieved here. cleta mitchell has one on behalf of tea party groups, they're charged viewpoint discrimination. what do you make of these suits and their prospects? >> i think these suits are going to be a really important way for us to learn more about what happened. there was a lawsuit filed this week by the american center for law and justice. they brought out a lot of information that people hadn't heard before, notably that it

wasn't just in cincinnati, that there were two offices in california, as well as they had letters from washington, d.c. and also made clear in this lawsuit that they had letters that were signed by lois lerner that were part of those intrusive questionnaires and, and that these questionnaires have been coming up until one month ago. that completely contradicts the irs' position that all of this targeting stopped in may 2012. so that's an entirely different ball game. >> paul: all right. lots more to discover here. when we come back with more irs hearings to come and growing calls for the attorney general to resign. can president obama move beyond the controversies that are dogging his administration before they do permanent damage to his poll numbers and hisch s agenda key role throughout our lives. one a day men's 50+ is a complete multivitamin designed for men's health concerns as we age. it has 7 antioxidants to support cell health. one a day men's 50+.

make a wish! i wish we could lie here forever. i wish this test drive was over, so we could head back to the dealership. [ male announcer ] it's practically yours. test drive! [ male announcer ] but we still need your signature. volkswagen sign then dre is back. and it's never been easier to get a jetta. that's the power of german engineering. get $0 down, $0 due at signing, $0 deposit, and $0 first month's payment on any new volkswagen. visit vwdealer.com today.

>> paul: growing calls this week for the resignation of attorney general eric holder as lawmakers raise questions about his role

in the targeting of journalists in leak investigations and how truthful he was about the matter when he testified before congress earlier this month. the white house says holder has its full support. is the controversy keeping president obama from moving beyond the scandals dogging his administration? we're back with dan henninger and kim strossel and jason reilly joins the panel. kim, please explain this discrepancy between what holder said to congress about what he knew about the rosen subpoena and now what we've learned later. >> here is what holder told congress recently. i'm papa a phrasing. he said, in regards to the potential prosecution of journalists over disclosure of information, this is not something i've been involved in, that i've heard of or that i think would be wise policy. now, these two sentences have become a huge issue because as we know, he had already at this point signed a search warrant

for james rosen of fox news in which the government claimed he was a potential co-conspirator for doing his job. and so that seems to be at complete odds with his statement to congress. >> paul: all right. jason, what do you make of this? you buying the later week regrets by holder that they're leaking out that hey, i'm reconsidering this, you know. i don't like the way this was handled, you know, please let's sit down and discuss? >> no. i'm not buying it, paul. i think you knew exact -- he knew exactly what he was doing and particularly i'm not buying it given that the president wants to put him in charge of the new protocols for handling leaks, even though he has broken the old protocols for handling leaks, so no, i don't buy it at all. i think this is another example of an ag serving as a lightning rod for his boss in the white house. i think that's the role eric holder is playing. >> do you think he thought, i could get away with this because it's fox news and the rest of

the press corps won't care because it's fox news. because ultimately it will come out because they're obliged to explain this to the press within 90 days. the fact there was a controversy the administration says we did tell them after 90 days, not two years later, which is what we finally found out. >> they might well have. you recall this was 2010. in 2010, fox and the white house were in a real battle. there was a lot of tension between the two of them. i think unless -- they might have indeed unless the a.p. subpoenas had not created this synergy between these two things. together, the press is pretty upset. so this thing is operating at several levels. you got the press upset here. you got the republicans thinking to perhaps tag the administration with these scandals. then there is the legal issue of whether eric holder lied or didn't lie to congress of the that's going to be the most -- >> paul: what do you think on that point, the truthfulness to congress? >> i think he was untruthful to congress for sure. but i don't think they'll be able to establish that conclusively in a way that would

cause holder to feel he has to resign. >> paul: kim, you wrote you thought the press scandal, the investigation of the press on leaks is actually the administration's biggest vulnerability of all three scandals. why do you say that? >> it's not the one that the public is focused on. they don't care much about this issue. >> sad to say, they don't care much about the press, that's true. >> they're actually happy to some degree to see this happening to the press. here is the problem for the president. this enraged two groups that are absolutely critical to him in his political success. one is the press, which is in the past largely served as cheerleaders, but now is furious over this and at a time when the administration has these other scandals swirling around. so they're more inclined to dig into them. the other is his own liberal activists who have found this offensive not just on first amendment grounds burks has revived a lot of fury over his national security policy, like the patriot act and wire tapping. some of them are calling for holder to resign. that could put pressure on

democrats to join that fray. >> i think the key is will democrats join the fray. but i think you might be more optimistic than i am about the press' ability to stay mad at obama. this is a group of people that feels a thrill up their leg when the man speaks. >> what is 9 half life on that anger? two weeks or two months? >> if democrats do start to turn, i would look at, particularly the judiciary committee in both the house and the senate, where leahy and feinstein is, if they make noise, then perhaps holder could be under pressure. >> paul: more bradley dealing with the president, as jason said, attorney generals have been lightning rods for many administrations and they kind of even like president -- presidents like the idea that holder might be taking all of the attacks so that they aren't on obama. how vulnerable is the president when you think about all the benghazi, irs, and the media scandals to all of this? >> well, i think he's vulnerable in the sense that there is no lift in the obama presidency

right now. it's not getting better. i don't think it can get particularly worse. but he wanted to get better so he could take back the house, gain those 17 seats in the house, push his agenda in the congress and congress has is becoming to a great extent, alienated from this white house. republicans are complaining after the charm offensive, they haven't heard from him. we're getting a flat line presidency. it may not be so good for him. it's probably not really great for the country either at five months in to have a presidency flat lining. >> paul: so far, only one poll shows he's down. the rest show him sticking at 50 or above in his approval rating. we will watch that carefully. still ahead, new national education standards have some conservatives seeing red. former new york city schools chancellor joe klein tells us why he's behind the common core next plan for small business lets you connect up to 25 devices on one easy to manage plan. that means your smartphone, her blackberry, his laptop, mark's smartphone

but i'm still on vacation. still on the plan. nice! the intern gets a tablet? everyone's devices. his, hers-- oh, sorry. all easier to manage on the share everything plan for small business. connecting more so you can do more. that's powerful. verizon. get the blackberry z10 for $199.99. (annoucer) new beneful medley's, in tuscan, romana, and mediterranean style varieties. ♪ just mix it in, and take play to new places. three cans in every pack. new beneful medley's.

>> paul: well, press battle is brewing on education. this time over the new common core standards. already adopted by 45 states, the common core aims to better prepare students for college level work through national math and literacy benchmarks. some conservative critics say it's an unwanted and unconstitutional federal intrusion into a policy area traditionally left to state and local government. joel klein is the former chancellor of the new york city public schools. he's now the executive vice president at news corps, the parent company of the "wall street journal" and fox news and director of amplify, its education unit. i spoke with him and asked him why he supports the common core standards. >> i support them fundamentally for two reasons. one, i think our nation needs to have rigorous internationally benchmarks standards rather than letting 50 states really dumb it

down, which is largely what's gone on. these standards are demanding a rigorous, any standards could be improved, but these are a major step forward. second of all, it's long pastime when people in one state should be getting an entirely different education from people in another state. the kids of tomorrow are going to have to compete globally and inn a very, very challenging global economy and it's time we got our united states aligned and ready to meet these standards. otherwise we'll find kids graduating and wholey unprepared. >> paul: a lot of people would argue and say, that violates, what you just said violates our traditional where education is controlled and where policy is set. that is at the local level. and its financed fundamentally by property taxes at the local level. why should we have national standards? >> first of all, it's the states that came together. let's be clear, because a lot of people want to present this as some bolt from washington. it's not the way it happened. the governors came together and i think they figured out that

they need common aligned international benchmark standards. second of all, the control issue is not going to be out of washington. the control issue is going to be in the states. but what you need to hurdle over for a kid to say that he or she has been successfully educated, there is no reason the state should come together and say we have a common standard. 20 or 30 years ago the kids in one state competed. it's intelligent for governors to say, we want a national benchmark that we agree upon. if a state doesn't want it -- >> paul: they can opt out? >> five have not signed on. texas didn't join in. some states are thinking about whether they want to continue to participate. >> paul: but didn't the administration use this -- whether or not the state joined as one of the criteria for whether or not you could get race to the top funds, which was a big chunk of money that these

states could qualify for? that's a form of national policy coercion, is it not? >> i wouldn't say it's coercion. i certainly think they try to incentivize. think there's a difference. for example, in indiana, governor there decided that he was going to -- mitch daniel decided he was going to not participate in the federal dollars. but he had not become core because he thought he was right. he realized that we're kidding ourselves if we don't have demanding standards. so he wasn't incentivized financially. i think the federal government should and can incentivize, just like not only did they do that with standards, they incentivize teacher accountability, incentivized charter schools and nobody was complaining about that. people thought that was great. why shouldn't they incentivize demanding standards? >> paul: here is another objection i hear, which is you take the example of massachusetts, which had a reform in 1993 which imposed really terrific standards and you saw test scores and

performance rise in massachusetts to the top in the country and even competitive with the rest -- the best in the word on science, for example. some people say, this common core now that massachusetts is going to it, it's actual lea going to water you -- actually going to water down massachusetts standards. >> i don't think that's right. this evidence is contrary to that. let me say massachusetts did have high standards. unfortunately, most of our states did not. if massachusetts thought its standards were higher, they should have stayed with their standards. to me, the higher the standards, the better. however, they actually did some independent evaluations. they brought in a team of teachers to analyze their standards against the common core and these were highly credible teachers, teachers who were involved in the original standards. probably as importantly, don her issue, who we talked about here, a guy who created core knowledge and has been on the standards kick for the last 30 years while progressers in education watered down standards, diluted

accountability, and hirsh said these standards are top of the line. so that doesn't mean they'll never or can't be improved. but i think by and large, they're going to move the needle forward in a -- >> paul: i think some of the people worry that we adopt -- they're going to be captured by political interests, particularly the most powerful, the teachers union and then watered down. >> i think it's a reverse. i think the unions have much more power at the state level. that's where they got watered down. nobody doubts that most states' standards -- massachusetts was an exception. but nobody doubts that most states' standards are very weak. kids who are graduating from high school, are wholey unproposed for colleges. it's ridiculous. so i think if there is a risk of capture, the closer you get to the local action, the greater the risk of capture. indeed, that's a big problem in much of what goes on in k to 12 education today. >> paul: thanks so much for being here. >> thank you. >> paul: we have to take one more break. when we come back, hits and misses of the week

okay, team! after age 40, we can start losing muscle -- 8% every 10 years. wow. wow. but you can help fight muscle loss with exercise and ensure muscle health. i've got revigor. what's revigor? it's the amino acid metabolite, hmb to help rebuild muscle and strength naturally lost over time. [ female announcer ] ensure muscle health has revigor and protein to help protect, preserve, and promote muscle health. keeps you from getting soft. [ major nutrition ] ensure. nutrition in charge! to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. i was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again. and now i've got to take more pills. ♪ yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve. ♪ [ male announcer ] look for the easy-open red arthritis cap.

>> time for hits and misses of the week. collin, first to you. >> this is a hit to houston, texas, which has proven itself to be a job creating juggernaut. houston was the first of the top ten metro areas to get back all the jobs it lost in the recession and now the bureau of labor statistics says it's gotten back 230% of the jobs it lost compared to 49% in chicago, 43% in los angeles. the reason is it's really business friendly policies, which made a lot of people want to move there. i think other cities could take their pointers from houston. >> all right. collin. jason? >> several members of congress recently sent a letter to the owner of the washington redskins and the commissioner of the nfl urging them to change the team's name, which they find derogatory and offensive. my first response to this was, doesn't congress have better things to do than spend time on this? then after a minute, i said, maybe this is what i want them spending their time on, this and steroids and baseball and lance armstrong because it means less

time spent screwing up our health care system. so a hit for congress. >> all right. dan? >> when pope francis chris was elevated to the papacy, some hoped they would do a more aggressive job of defending the church's interest. the u.n. human rights council in geneva this week, the representative of the vatican sternly condemned the murder of christians in the middle east and africa and it is an excellent sign if the pope is going to raise the visibility of this awful persecution. >> jason, i'm afraid that i think that congress has the ability to multi task, do many things that -- bad at the same time. usually does. remember, if you have your own hit or miss, please send it to us. be sure to follow us on twitter. that's it for this week's show. thanks to my panel and to all of you for watching. i'm paul gigot. hope to see you right here next week.

>> in the news this week, media backlash on the justice department heats up. the obama administration taking hits for overreaching and infringing on freedom of the press in efforts to control leaks of information. the attorney general's actions and motives causing big concerns among journalists. eric holder invites the press for an off the record chat about the scandal. some members of the media accept. others say no way. >> what would be some of the reasons you might be at the white house? >> the easter egg roll with my kids. >> more details surface in the irs scandal over targeting conservative groups, raising even more questions about who was involved. but are the media covering