Congressman Aaron Schock – who is relatively young, to be fair – says “The IRS’s steller reputation of being above partisan politics has been shattered.” Well, for starters…

Congressman Danny Davis: ”I am not convinced that this is a great, big political conspiracy.” Ohh??

Here’s the heart of the problem and what is not likely to be constructively resolved while everyone focuses on babbling about how President Obama is the New Nixon:

It gets into stickier territory when, in the process of trying to parse it out, the IRS feels it needs to look at donor lists to groups in questions. Miller says there needs to be a powerful rationale for requesting such lists, but again: all of these guidelines are very hazy.

Miller is already getting criticized by conservative commentators for saying earlier that the IRS needs a “bigger budget” to help fix the problems its dealing with. And perhaps that was tone-deaf for today’s hearing.

But as congressman Earl Blumenauer is saying now, what sense does it make for Congress to keep making the tax code more and more complex without giving the IRS additional resources?

It makes perfect political sense. Which means it’s pretty irrational.

Republicans have not been willing to accept this as satisfactory:

Congressman Tom Price is up and appears to have his grandstanding pants today. He describes the government asking people what books they read as “chilling,” then pauses for a while, presumably for us to figure out where he’s going with this.

Price is now working the GOP’s tenuous IRS scandal/Obamacare angle du jour: That Sarah Hall Ingram, who served as head of the IRS’ tax-empt division from 2009-2012, now heading the IRS’… Affordable Care Act compliance division! 

George says “yes” to a question about whether it would be helpful to have a “tightening” of rules for 501(c)(4) “social welfare” applications. He believes the IRS can do this without additional legislation being passed.

Miller, again, is asked about whether he, or an underling at the IRS, spoke to anyone in the administration from 2010 onward about the sharing of confidential taxpayer information, in violation of the law.

“I have no knowledge of that,” he answers.

“Did you ever speak to anyone in Treasury, not within the IRS, about the sharing of confidential taxpayer information,” congressman Jim Gerlach presses.

Miller evades.

“I can say categorically that I never shared information,” Miller says, adding that he “doesn’t know” if he talked to anyone in the administration about the sharing of information.

It got a bit circular, there.

Inspector general George, in response to a question, reiterates that activity was “inappropriate,” not “illegal.”

Miller is being quizzed about whether he has notes on talking to IRS employees. “Sir, please,” he eventually says.

We’re back. Democratic congressman Lloyd Doggett is up, and chastises chair Dave Camp’s earlier comments about the tax system being “rotten,” noting that Republicans are already trying to use this controversy to take down the new health care law over its tax provisions.

Briefly, here’s how things have been going: Republicans are mainly trying to nail Miller on why the IRS “targeted” conservative groups and to find a link to the White House; Democrats have been more concerned with the pressures that the flood of 501(c)(4) applications have brought to the IRS. Both, however, acknowledge that the IRS had been handling applications irresponsibly in the highlighted cases.

One special congressman asked if “this is still America,” also, too.

Fifteen minute recess! Everyone go have a nice snack.

Congressman Dave Reichert, with the latest lecture-from-dad type question: Does this committee have the right to know the truth. “This is the United States Congress which you’re accountable to… do you not believe it’s your job to provide us with the information you knew?”

He adds that “I was a cop for 33 years,” for some reason.

Miller is asked to explain the difference between 501(c)(4) non-profits and section 527 political organizations. It’s “difficult,” he says, but they try to look at the level of political expenditures.

Dare we suggest that we’re at the point where lines of questioning are getting repetitive? Democrat Xavier Becerra is, again, talking about the vagueness of guidelines on 501(c)(4) organizations. Which is a big problem! The hearing should be focused on that, maybe.

Congressman Robert Neal notes that Merriam-Webster’s word of the day is “litmus test” and – after saying that Merriam-Webster is located in his district (hoorah!) – inquires about whether a corrupt “litmus test” was used to single out conservative tax-emption applications.

He, like many of the Democrats today, goes on to discuss the post-Citizens United “rush” of money into 501(c)(4) groups, under the banner of social welfare, but really for political causes. “There wasn’t this rush to join Sisters of Mercy,” he notes wryly.

And now there’s Republican Devin Nunes, making the latest attempt to show that this is all Obama’s fault and the administration is evil and loves targeting conservative groups, for bloodsport.

Congressman Jim McDermott notes that the folks in the Cincinnatti IRS office just “screwed up,” and deserve punishment, but it’s really the vagueness of the 501(c)(4) criteria and amount of information coming through the IRS that leads to such problems.

He stands up for the “thousands and thousands” of “hardworking” employees at the IRS who show up everyday to work at one of the most “hated” organizations. Miller appreciates that.

Vice Presi… err… Congressman Paul Ryan is now up, and grilling Miller on why he hadn’t disclosed “targeting” that he was briefed on to Congress earlier. How can Miller say that “he did not mislead this committee?”

He is trying to explain that the “targeting” list of terms was used to weed out 501(c)(4) applications that appeared to be from “political” groups (as opposed to what are supposedly “social welfare” causes), not just conservative groups. It just so happened that many of them were conservative groups.

(Referring to the flood of money that’s come into 501(c)(4)s since the Supreme Court case Citizens Union… United… Whatever.)

Congressman Charlie Rangel, who not that long ago faced all sorts of scandals relating to his tax returns and financial disclosures, is lecturing Miller now.

Miller: “Again, I’m going to take exception to the notion of ‘targeting,’ because it’s a loaded term.” His parsing is not impressing Mr. Brady, the fellow who wanted to know if this country is still America.

Congressman Kevin Brady: “Is this still America?” WELL? IS IT, MILLER?

Both Democratic questioners so far have pointed out that former IRS commissioner Shulman, under whom this started, was appointed by President George W. Bush.

Crowley, a romantic, asks Republicans to focus on getting the facts before making wild political accusations. So adorable.

It’s gotcha video time!

The clip was like two seconds long. Miller stumbles over his words a bit saying Shulman was “incorrect, but not untruthful.” He notes that “targeting” is a “pejorative” term – in other words, it was not malicious, but certain screens for likely abuse were put in place.

Here’s what our Ewen MacAskill is seeing early on:

Miller so far seems a likeable and credible witness, the best kind of public servant, down to earth, not nerdy, the kind of guy who looks as if he is looking forward to joining his mates at the bar tonight. So he is going to make it hard for hostile Republicans.

Miller has done the right things so far. He has apologised, said the mistakes were foolish and were not partisanship.

What makes it really hard for the Republicans is that Miller has already been sacked so it is hard to touch him. All they can do is try to establish a link between the rogue employees in Cincinnati and the Obama administration and Miller has already said there is none, that he had not reported the incident up the chain.

Camp’s questions indicated that he’s trying to make this as expansive as possible – by looking at not just at small Tea Party groups’ applications at the Cincinnatti IRS office, but also those of big-name 501(c)(4) groups like the National Organization for Marriage and ones started by the Koch Brothers that received additional scrutiny.

Camp closes with a coy little kindergarten lecture: What is it called when you’re asked to disclose the truth and you don’t disclose the truth? (Ooh ooh, We think the answer Camp wants is “lying”!) Miller responds that he always tells the truth.

Camp asks Miller if he was aware that the White House explained a private group’s tax structure to reporters on a conference call in 2010. He thinks he read it “in the newspaper.” He does “not recall” if he made any efforts to pass on this alleged violation of tax law to the IG.

Miller is beginning his opening statement. He claims that the organization did not have enough notice (two days) to prepare full written testimony. He gives a brief statement, apologizing, and saying that the findings in the IG report are “consistent” with what happened. He notes, however, that the problems were nothing more than “mistakes.”

George, the inspector general, is giving his opening statement, largely reiterating the finds of his report.

Congressman Sandy Levin, the Democratic ranking member on the committee, is just as righteous in his fury – a relatively rare bipartisan occurrence that doesn’t speak well for Steven Miller’s morning. He emphasizes that the IRS’ head of the tax exemption division, Lois Lerner, “should be relieved of her duties.”

He does, however, warn the GOP not to make this a kickoff to its 2014 campaign season. Advice that will surely be heeded!…??

Dave Camp, chair of the committee, in his opening statement: “This is not a personnel problem. This is a problem of the IRS being too large, too powerful, too intrusive and too abusive.” He calls the tax system “rotten at the core.”

Meanwhile, this is true:

Good morning, this is Jim Newell in Washington. We’re here to cover what will presumably be the most unpleasant day of acting IRS commissioner Steven Miller‘s soon-to-be-over career.

Miller, who was fired on Wednesday, officially stays on duty until next Wednesday. And today he will join J Russell George, the Treasury inspector general for tax administration, as a witness in a hearing before the House Ways and Means committee on the IRS’s “practice of discriminating” against organizations for political purposes.

It will be the first hearing with Miller as a witness since news broke two weeks ago that applications from groups seeking tax-exempt status, frequently those with names including terms like “Tea Party,” were singled out by the IRS for extra scrutiny starting in early 2010. Three years later, some have still not been processed.

George’s IG report, released on Tuesday, found that “inappropriate criteria were used to identify tax-exempt applications for review,” and made a series of recommendations for the IRS to take going forward. Its released prompted the administration to relieve Miller of his (acting duties).

Miller will have a lawyer at today’s hearing. He does face the threat of self-incrimination if he chooses to speak. And with lawmakers on both sides, but especially Republicans who’ve been concerned about the IRS’ alleged practice of selective enforcement in the past, looking to jam him, it will be a tense morning.

The hearing is scheduled to begin at 9am.