Several years ago, many of us, including former military and active duty members, were disappointed by what appeared to be the highest military command so easily acquiescing or succumbing to being led by what also appeared to be a constitutionally unqualified presidential candidate.
We knew military officers were bound by oath solely to defend the constitution, while other lower ranking military personnel were required to further swear they would obey the orders of the president. The truth of the matter is we do not know what back-channel efforts were made by the command to sort out the issue, and whether the command determined its position was within the bounds of its oath.
That event is somewhat similar to what we are facing today, with the House of Representatives declining to arrest Lois Lerner. The IRS is required by statute to provide reports in response to House requests. Presently, it appears the executive branch of our government is illegally obstructing the legislative branch of our government from performing the constitutional duty it owes to each of us.
The USSC has supported such arrest power, at least in the case of ordinary citizens and it would be unthinkable that the court would approve behavior that even more directly cripples the ordinary workings of the government. So why is the House not taking action that will enable it to perform its duties?
(With apologies to the OP.)
Threats, bribes and cowardice?