I've never been sure what the proper skeptical attitude is towards claims of poitically-motivated audits. Should you be skeptical of the clain or skeptical of the professionalism of the IRS? I have to admit that the list of Clinton critics who got audited during his administration seemed oddly focused, but you would have to do a real sampling to figure out if the apparent focus was statistically significant.
The reason this came up is because Michael Williams is claiming that the IRS has targetted him for his mockery of the new Treasury secretary. I don't know if it's true or not, but it's worth paying attention to this.