A House could fall on Lerner

Lerner, who headed the IRS division that reviews tax-exemption applications, has repeatedly invoked her Fifth Amendment right instead of testifying about the agency, and she, her former lawyers, and her mentor, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) have been saying that the House panel could take no further action on the matter.

However, this month House lawyers decided that Lerner could, in fact, be charged with contempt. This decision was not merely made by the House Oversight Committee, but by the House.

Regardless of political affiliation, however, Lerner's reluctance to testify is frustrating. Watching her appearances in Congress has been like enthusiastically ordering a container of shrimp fried rice from the finest Chinese restaurant in the city, and then winding up with a delivery without even a single shrimp in it!

A Washington Times editorial on March 13 indicates that Lerner could be facing a day of reckoning:

"The noose tightens around the neck of Lois Lerner, once an enforcer at the Internal Revenue Service with duties to protect the interests of Democrats. She’s the first casualty of the IRS scandal and hasn’t answered many of the questions posed by Congress, beyond only a vow of innocence and her name, rank and serial number. The silence may not last much longer."

"In a sternly-worded letter (March 14) to Rep. Elijah Cummings -- and obtained by The Daily Caller -- Rep. Darrell Issa said that his House Oversight Committee is well within its rights to hold ex-IRS official Lois Lerner in contempt despite Cummings’ arguments to the contrary," Patrick Howley led his Daily Caller piece, "Issa to Cummings: You’re wrong. We can hold Lois Lerner in contempt."

"Issa says his latest report "presents evidence that Ms. Lerner misled Congress about IRS targeting and her own conduct."

The crucial question remains. Was Ms. Lerner acting alone or at the direction of the White House, Issa asks. Her testimony "remains critical to the committee's investigation."

Lerner's refusal to answer questions leaves Congress with the responsibility to pursue and punish what is clearly contempt of Congress, Issa concludes.

In "House lawyers say panel can pursue contempt charges against Lois Lerner" (Washington Post, March 26), Josh Hicks explains that, "... the panel effectively overruled Lerner’s Fifth Amendment assertion when it determined — in a party-line vote — that she had waived her right to not testify by declaring innocence at a hearing last year. It also noted that the committee advised Lerner that she could face contempt charges if she refused to answer questions."

Now even Democrats would like Lerner to pipe about the IRS scandal. Why the silence? Besides her, was anybody else involved, or was it just a group of renegade juvenile IRS agents in Cincinnati?

ALL OF THIS THIS NEEDS TO GO VIRAL One of the Articles of Impeachment drawn up against Richard Nixon was merely "threatening" to use the Internal Revenue Service to selectively audit political opponents.

OBAMA HAS WEAPONIZED THE IRS AGAINST POLITICAL OPPONENTS ordering multiple covert campaigns of intimidation, threats, and persecution of tea party/conservative organizations, and those daring to criticize Obama's agenda.

<><> Seven lock-stepping Democrats scared-***tless of losing their seats ask the IRS to “Investigate” political opponents,

<><> Rep Elijah Cummings led the Democrat pack in smearing True the Vote patriot Catherine Englebrecht....

<><> der leader Obama said Tea Parties were a "threat to democracy."

<><> The IRS (a tax-funded L/E agency) takes its marching orders from Democrat;

<><> the FBI, ATF, the IRS, and OSHA were sicced on Catherine Englebrecht, 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 they’re 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 they’re claiming the tax relief, the tax benefit to be a nonprofit for social relief or social justice, then that’s what they should be doing,” said Sen. Mark Begich (D), who faces a competitive race in Alaska. “If it’s to give them cover so they can do political activity, that’s 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 that’s exactly what we’re 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 don’t want in political money, in the fundraising world and expenditure world. You don’t want secret money, and you don’t want unlimited money, and that’s what we have now.” --SNIP--

“Rep. Darrell E. Issa, the House’s top investigator, said Thursday (April 3) that as a senior official at the center of the IRS targeting, Ms. Lerner will either talk or face penalties for refusing to help the committee get to the bottom of who orchestrated the targeting and what the motives were. ...”

The hearing will be next Thursday (April 10) at 9 a.m. If the contempt resolution passes, it will go to the House floor for final approval and would not require approval of the Democrat-led Senate.

Rachel Bade and Lauren French of politico.com said Lerner could theoretically be jailed if found in contempt, though that power has been used rarely.

“Every person who having been summoned as a witness … [who] refuses to answer any question pertinent to the question under inquiry, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than [$100,000] nor less than $100 and imprisonment in a common jail for not less than one month nor more than twelve months,” federal law states.

I think that a month in a “common jail” would sound pretty nasty to Lerner. A Google search of the home she owns with her husband, a D.C. lawyer, in Maryland (I had started a search with their names and address, and “house”) and up pops a Bethesda property with a total worth of $2,474,520. Two floors, A/C. It was built in 2000; the assessment was made in 2006.

Nothing “common” about that, for sure.

The contempt vote is expected to pass the Oversight Committee and then be sent on to the House.

http://www.telegram.com/article/20140404/IMPORTED_BLOGS/304049542/0/SEARCH

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.