ST. LOUIS, Mo. (KMOX) — In light of reports that the Internal Revenue Service unfairly targeted conservative groups, KMOV’s Larry Conners took to Facebook Monday night saying he was also targeted by the agency.
Conners wrote that shortly after he interviewed President Obama and his wife in April 2012 the IRS “started hammering” him. Conners did not explain how the IRS targeted him.
“At the time, I dismissed the “co-incidence”, but now, I have concerns … after revelations about the IRS targeting various groups and their members,” Conners wrote on Facebook.
During Conners’ interview with the President he touched on several topics including, the economy, spending, the Buffet Rule, and Obamacare. Below is an excerpt from the interview: (Watch the full interview: here)
Excerpt from Larry Conners post on Facebook.
(Read more here)
“Journalistic integrity is of the utmost importance to me. My job is to ask the hard questions, because I believe viewers have a right to be well-informed. I cannot and will not promote anyone’s agenda – political or otherwise – at the expense of the reporting the truth.
What I don’t like to even consider … is that because of the Obama interview … the IRS put a target on me.
Can I prove it? At this time, no.
But it is a fact that since that April 2012 interview … the IRS has been pressuring me.”
Conners told several media outlets Tuesday that he would do interviews but later said he can’t because “corporate” does not want him to.
Conners issued a brief explanation of his post during the 6 p.m. news Tuesday night, stopping short of apologizing but explaining that his troubles with the Internal Revenue Service actually started years prior to his 2012 interview with President Obama.
“As you may have heard, I commented on my Facebook page yesterday that I believe there might be a connection between my interview in April, 2012 with President Obama and pressure I believe I’ve received recently from the Internal Revenue Service,” he said, adding that they were his “personal views.” He also said the lines between personal issues and his journalistic objectivity “may have been unintentionally crossed” with the post.