Skip to comments.ĎAbsolutely Un-Americaní: Dem Rep. Explodes During IRS Investigation Hearing; Issa Walks Out
Posted on 03/05/2014 7:56:55 AM PST by Nachum
During a hearing of the House Oversight Committee into allegations that the Internal Revenue Service scrutinized conservative groups tax-exempt status filings unduly, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) exploded at Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (D-CA). Cummings charged that the way in which the proceedings were being conducted were Un-American. In apparent protest, Issa then walked out of the committee hearing.
While making a statement before the committee, Issa stood up and asked Cummings to yield.
If you will sit down and allow me to ask a question, Cummings insisted. I am a member of a Congress of the United States of America.
(Excerpt) Read more at mediaite.com ...
American really doesn’t have much if any meaning or importance any more, so whutever.
The list, Ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
Funny, I would think that using the IRS to attack Americans who oppose the government would be “unAmerican”.
Dems (Lerner) still playing the 5th Amendment game. They will not cooperate so Issa adjourned. Good for Issa. Bad for Lerner who probably now faces charges of Contempt of Congress.
WHO KNEW? The IRS (a tax-funded L/E agency) takes its marching orders from Democrats. Other govt agencies were sicced on conservatives---the FBI, ATF, the IRS, and OSHA were sicced on Catherine Englebrecht, who was harassed on numerous occasions, as she valiantly tried to improve the US voting system.
DEMS STOOP TO CONQUEUR--order IRS to act (to save their seats)
by Alexander Bolton, The Hill, 2/13/14
Senate Democrats facing tough elections this year want the IRS to play a more aggressive role in regulating outside groups expected to spend millions of dollars on their races. In the wake of the IRS targeting scandal, the Democrats are publicly prodding the agency instead of lobbying them directly.
Dems are also careful to say the IRS should treat conservative and liberal groups equally, but theyre concerned about an impending tidal wave of attack ads funded by GOP-allied organizations. Much of the funding for those groups is secret, in contrast to the donations lawmakers collect, which must be reported publicly.
One of the most powerful groups is Americans for Prosperity, funded by the billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch. It has already spent close to $30 million on ads attacking Democrats this election cycle.
If theyre claiming the tax relief, the tax benefit to be a nonprofit for social relief or social justice, then thats what they should be doing, said Sen. Mark Begich (D), who faces a competitive race in Alaska. If its to give them cover so they can do political activity, thats abusing the tax code. And either side."
Asked if the IRS should play a more active role policing political advocacy by groups that claim to be focused on social welfare, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) responded, Absolutely. Both on the left and the right, she said. As taxpayers, we should not be providing a write-off to groups to do political activity, and thats exactly what were doing.
Shaheen called the glut of political spending by self-described social welfare groups that qualify under section 501(c) (4) of the tax code outrageous. Shaheen is in a good position now but could find herself embroiled in a tight campaign if former Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass) challenges her.
Sen. Mark Pryor (Ark.), the most vulnerable Democratic incumbent, said the IRS has jurisdiction over 501(c)(4) groups, as well as charities, which fall under section 5/01(c)(3) of the tax code and sometimes engage in quasi-political activity.
That whole 501(c)(3), 501(c)(4) [issue], those are IRS numbers. It is inherently an internal revenue matter, he said. There are two things you dont want in political money, in the fundraising world and expenditure world. You dont want secret money, and you dont want unlimited money, and thats what we have now. --SNIP--
MOMENTS TO REMEMBER AT THE VOTING BOOTH
<><> Seven US Senators ask the IRS to Investigate political opponents....
<><> Elijah Cummings led the Democrat pack in smearing patriot Englebrecht....
<><> Obama said Tea Parties were a "threat to democracy."
What Cummings was trying to do was trying to void the thing again. Slowest Lerner pleads the 5th to Issa’s questions and Cummings wants to ask her friendly questions for her to editorialize on.
Cummings decided to hijack the “seat” after the
Committee adjourned because the witness,
the corrupt Lerner (who is connected to Cummings),
refused to answer.
With RATs, politics trumps all else.
The reflexive black hive-mind is a terrible thing to witness. They’ll do anything to protect their Boy King.
Maybe Cummings will get so hot and his blood pressure go up so high, the world will be relieved of his loathsome presence!
It stems from their assumptive worldview.
They HAVE to attain power by any means possible in order to make the world perfect.
He should have been removed from room by the Sargent at Arms staff.
Dave Chappelle vs Louis Lerner ‘Pleading The Fifth!’
Louis should do time instead of comedy.
The Attorney General of the US with be prosecuting, no?
What is “un-American” is the double standard whereby a powerful government official gives sworn testimony as to her innocence, etc. and then when time comes for cross-examination, she gives them the middle finger.
If an ordinary American in a courtroom tried that, he would find his butt sitting in jail pretty quick.
1.) What did the next Speaker of the House, Trey Gowdy, say at the hearing or to reporters?
2.) Why are we surprised that RINO Obamacrat Issa was surprised? DUH!
That is not an investigation, it's a cover-up! And it's not the first from this bunch of arrogant thugs!
Cummings making a spectacle to take the spotlight off the real issue. Dems up to old tricks again, nothing more to it.
Correct, so Lerner has nothing to fear.
Oh, and NOT ONE ‘reporter’ asked about Lerner taking the 5th. AGAIN. They all asked about why Issa didn’t allow Cummings to speak (lecture Issa) instead.
If I didn’t know better I would think the ‘reporters’ were ignorant, lazy and partisan. /s
A subsequent comment amplified the fact that her salary is paid by the people she is refusing to answer to. Although it is to the point, the democrat machine's ability to smirk at the law as they skip past the bench seems to be growing.
Behind the scene my be is that through various liberal money machines Obama has promised her a big pile of cash to be followed by a presidential pardon as he exits the White House if she'll play this out and take the hit. While it seemed that she was uncomfortable for a bit, her arrogant sneer today made me believe that she is confident in her future.
Hey, nobody’s going to do time for this. Or pretty much any of the other shenanigans in this administration.
IRS just doing the dim and gope dirty work. DC approves.
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA). He’s a Republican.
We should show them just how un-American we are by showing up at post offices across the country on April 15th and burning our tax returns.
It is all show. So far, no actions on the part of Issa, just more meetings after meetings. No prosecutions, no impeachments, nothing.
Really? Then who? Holder’s department investigated Holder when he was found in contempt of Congress, but this is different?
Give her immunity.
Yep. Pat Caddell is looking more correct all the time.
In the video someone is clearly signaling Issa with a hand gesture to leave the hearing. Following that, Issa then leaves.
He is Republican and he has the tough job of making it look like the GOP cares that the IRS was used as a weapon against conservatives.
The purpose of the Democrat party is to elect thieves to office so that they have access to the public treasuries in order to loot them.
The Democrats will do anything to protect their access to the public treasuries. The Democrats are not going to sit quietly with their heads bowed in shame while their party takes hits. Of course The Democrats are going to scream. They scream when they are losing. They don’t want to have to go out and work for money.
No Cummings, whats UN-American is for the government to persecute a certain section of “We the People” that don’t agree with your views with an arm of the government.
Issa knew this was coming. Cummings could have asked procedural questions before beginning of her testimony. But he didnt... that’s curious... Oh because he wasnt looking for clarification but rather confusion.
Congress has the authority to arrest and imprison those found in Contempt. The power extends throughout the United States and is an inherent power (does not depend upon legislated act)
Here are a few references from the Congressional Record and Supreme Court rulings
1) The matter of Sam Houstons assault on William Stanbery is in the House Journal, beginning with Stanberys Saturday April 14 letter to the speaker of the House claiming a breach of privilege, the issuance of the arrest order that same day, the bringing of Houston before the House on Monday April 16 through to the Friday May 11 conviction and pronouncement of sentence on Monday May 14 (reprimand). All the while Houston was in the custody of the Sergeant at Arms who arrested him.
The House ordered its sergeant-at-arms to take in custody, wherever to be found, the body of Samuel Houston.
Wherever to be found is unambiguous.
U.S. House Journal. 1832. 22nd Cong., 1st sess., 14 April.
2) John Anderson had been arrested under a warrant of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, by the Sergeant at Arms, for an alleged contempt of the House, (an attempt to bribe a member). Anderson brought an action of trespass against the Sergeant at Arms of the House of Representatives of the United States, Thomas Dunn, for an assault and battery and false imprisonment.
Anderson v. Dunn - 19 U.S. 204 (1821)
From the opinion of the Court
And, as to the distance to which the process might reach, it is very clear that there exists no reason for confining its operation to the limits of the District of Columbia; after passing those limits, we know no bounds that can be prescribed to its range but those of the United States.
3) The power of either House of Congress to punish for contempt was not impaired by the enactment in 1857 of the statute, Rev. St. § 102 (2 USCA § 192), making refusal to answer or to produce papers before either House, or one of its committees, a misdemeanor. Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125 (1935)
The Supreme Court case
MacCracken was on several occasions held in custody by the Sargeant at Arms of the Senate. After MacCracken had been released and upon a new warrant being issued for his ignoring a subsequent subpoena, the Sargeant at Arms reported Feb. 12, 1934 that he went to MacCrackens place of business to arrest MacCracken but he was unable to locate him as MacCracken was in hiding. 73rd Cong., 78 Cong.
The Congressional Record:
Go to pdf page 1331 (printed page 2410) at the bottom of the left hand column.
Cummings making a spectacle to take the spotlight off the real issue
Cummings sent 3 letters on House stationery with cc to Issa to Catherine Engelbrecht. Harassment and ethics charges now against Cummings.
This becomes the story - not the fact that Lerner failed to testify.
Each house of Congress has the power to enforce its rules and privileges.
Heres a 2007 article from the other side of the aisle regarding a subpoena of Condoleezza Rice.
You didn't get the memo.
Anyone who opposes government is unAmerican and should be considered suspect.
Joseph Storys Commentaries on the Constitution, Volume 2, § 842
§ 842. [sic] These are all the powers and privileges, which are expressly vested in each house of congress by the constitution. What further powers and privileges they incidentally possess has been a question much discussed, and may hereafter be open, as new cases arise, to still further discussion. It is remarkable, that no power is conferred to punish for any contempts committed against either house; and yet it is obvious, that, unless such a power, to some extent, exists by implication, it is utterly impossible for either house to perform its constitutional functions. For instance, how is either house to conduct its own deliberations, if it may not keep out, or expel intruders? If it may not require and enforce upon strangers silence and decorum in its presence? If it may not enable its own members to have free ingress, egress, and regress to its own hall of legislation? And if the power exists, by implication, to require the duty, it is wholly nugatory, unless it draws after it the incidental authority to compel obedience, and to punish violations of it. It has been suggested by a learned commentator, quoting the language of Lord Bacon, that, as exception strengthens the force of a law in cases not excepted, so enumeration weakens it in cases not enumerated; and hence he deduces the conclusion, that, as the power to punish contempts is not among those enumerated, as belonging to either house, it does not exist. Now, however wise or correct the maxim of Lord Bacon is in a general sense, as a means of interpretation, it is not the sole rule. It is no more true, than another maxim of a directly opposite character, that where the end is required, the means are, by implication, given. Congress are required to exercise the powers of legislation and deliberation. The safety of the rights of the nation require this; and yet, because it is not expressly said, that congress shall possess the appropriate means to accomplish this end, the means are denied, and the end may be defeated. Does not this show, that rules of interpretation, however correct in a general sense, must admit of many qualifications and modifications in their application to the actual business of human life and human laws? Men do not frame constitutions of government to suspend its vital interests, and powers, and duties, upon metaphysical doubts, or ingenious refinements. Such instruments must be construed reasonably, and fairly, according to the scope of their purposes, and to give them effect and operation, not to cripple and destroy them. They must be construed according to the common sense applied to instruments of a like nature; and in furtherance of the fundamental objects proposed to be attained; and according to the known practice and incidents of bodies of a like nature.
That cleared everything up. /s