Posted on 06/22/2014 8:16:56 PM PDT by dagogo redux
Do any lawyers or others among us have any idea whether the Tea Party groups that were targeted by the IRS can file a RICO action against the IRS?
If so, what would it cost, what are the chances of prevailing, and what possible protections could one expect against the defendants and their friends in other parts of the syndicate?
Could such an action be filed as well against other agencies of the federal syndicate involved in organized criminal actions like Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the VA, etc, etc, etc.
Well, you came to the right place.
I think I would consider defending myself by force if they came afetr me for some trumped up charge or audit.
They won’t do that. They can just freeze your bank account and put a hold/lien on your assets. You just go on down to the heavily guarded Gun-Free Zone Federal Building and talk to the nice IRS agent about this little misunderstanding.
” - - - Lerner may have been receiving emails from both sides of the aisle on Capitol Hill urging audits and investigations into Tea Party groups. - - - “
[Note: Quote from FR thread article posted 6-21-14 by spodfly. ]
If this is true, then here are a few questions designed to get to “where the buck stops” as follows:
Some of the main questions are as follows:
* Did Rep. Peter King of New York send the most anti-TEA party emails to the IRS?
* Did Speaker Boehner send anti-TEA Party emails to then Sec. of the Treasury, Timmy Geithner?
* In any of the Obama/Boehner “Grand Bargain” discussions, was IRS Harassment of TEA Party Groups ever discussed, by Obama or Boehner, as a bargaining point?
* Did Rep. Darrell Issa of California and Rep. Mike Rogers sign group letters to Geithner or Lerner as Chairmen, or just as regular House Members to slow-walk any TEA party groups through the IRS?
* What role did Rep. Eric Cantor play in encouraging or discouraging continued IRS Harassment of Tea Party Groups?
BTW, similar questions can be raised in the US Senate, if ones last names are Graham or McCain.
But I do think that the government is culpable under RICO myself.
The federal government claims a “right” called sovereign immunity, which basically states that you can only sue them if they say it’s okay. Nice huh?
Targets of the IRS might have a civil claim for violation of Constitutional rights under color of law. Sovereign immunity does NOT apply.
Any lawyers want to pipe in and correct me if I’m wrong?
Well, not being an attorney, I lack the finely honed skills needed to understand the reasoning here:
“the Ninth Circuit reasoned . . . that a Federal Tort Claims Act action against a federal government employee could not, by definition, include a RICO claim because the employee’s actions would by definition have to have been taken outside the course and scope of his or her employment:
Is not the use of the IRS as a political sledgehammer “outside the course and scope of his or her employment”?
In addition, the Bill of Rights clearly states, “The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law . . . prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.”
So how is one to “redress . . . grievances” against a government or governmental agency that operates as an organized crime syndicate? What is the mechanism, if not something like RICO?
I’m not a lawyer (and proud of it), but if you did file a RICO charge against the IRS, who would the prosecutor be?
Answer: there would be no prosecutor. Attorney General Holder would laugh as he threw the RICO forms in the wastebasket. And if any federal DA tried to prosecute the case, he’d be immediately fired. And no one in the MSM would care to investigate as to why.
Where did this come from?
a RICO complaint is not against an organization; it is against individuals managing, operating or controlling an organization in a corrupt manner.
It is well established that government offices are organizations that fit within the RICO statutes.
I’m not a lawyer either, but will take a stab at your question. “Racketeering” is a catch-all phrase referring to the methods of organized crime like the Chicago mobs of the 30’s who, get this, made a racket in their speakeasies and brothels. As such it implies the existence of a conspiracy e.g. two or more people coordinating a crime. So if you sue a government official on RICO statues, you are ensnaring unspecified government officials and officers in a larger crime who are not named in the original lawsuit. And the government explicitly states that you cannot do that.
Maybe I missed it, but where is Rudy Guiliani on all this? Few people know the RICO law and how to use it like him; he was a NY prosecutor.
Rudy put away mobsters and banksters and is still alive. He’s the man for this job I would think.
The “powers that be” would have no fear at all of this for the reasons already stated. The only thing that could give them pause is the anticipation of single individuals, acting alone.
I sure hope knowledgeable lawyers pipe in, because I do believe that the RICO laws do not allow exceptions for elected or appointed officials.
Total immunity simply makes no sense.
Besides, the "Federal Government" cannot be charged under RICO laws; only individual criminals who happen to be congresscritters.
Frog march the entire Congress to jail. Let them stew until one of them rolls on the others (should take less than 4 hours).
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.