Cleta on the Cummings case

Washington superlawyer Cleta Mitchell represents True the Vote, one of the groups illegally targeted by the IRS in the scandals that have exposed the agency as a partisan operation. True the Vote’s Catherine Engelbrecht has been harassed by federal law enforcement authorities representing three different federal agencies. They represent the price of politics in the Age of Obama.

As John notes below, yesterday the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee released emails that show Democratic staffers communicating with the IRS about True the Vote. It appears that Elijah Cummings, the committee’s ranking Democrat and therefore the Congressman to whom these staffers reported, may have lied during a committee hearing when he denied that his staffers had put the IRS on the trail of True the Vote. The emails show the Democrats calling True the Vote to the IRS’s attention and requesting records about that organization, which Lois Lerner was anxious to provide them.

We reached out to Cleta to ask if she might be able to shed light on the news that broke yesterday. She responded: “This is the supplement to the ethics complaint filed [by Cleta on behalf of True the Vote] on Feb 6. I think one of the questions is what EXACTLY the IRS provided to Cummings staff. And what other communications between Cummings staff and, say, the SEIU or White House counsel might have occurred.” Cleta has kindly forwarded a copy of her letter dated April 9 supplementing the Ethics Committee complaint filed previously against Cummings. She tells us that she is filing the letter this morning:

We dont need no steeken' AG Holder to get to the bottom of this.

Ace lawyer Cleta Mitchell should subpoena every official document Elijah filed. Every document needs to be scrutinized in conjunction w/ possible connections to IRS terrorism-targeting, orders from Obama, favors from Obama, financial emoluments, govt fraud, etc.

Perjury, forgery, and voter fraud need to be considered. For example: Cummings might have coached voters to lie on registration forms, and perhaps falsified candidacy papers.

Falsifying Official Public Documents involves altering, changing, or modifying a document for the purpose of deception.......can also involve forgery and/or passing copies of false documents. Falsifying documents is usually done in connection with broader criminal aims, such as extortion, government fraud, tax evasion, money laundering, financing terrorism........

A person (or persons) can be held criminally liable if they are deliberately acting with the intention of deceiving or defrauding another party.

Falsifying documents is a very serious offense and is generally classified as a felony. This means that a person charged with falsifying documents may be subject to the following legal penalties:
◾Having to pay a monetary fine
◾Incarceration in a prison facility

Depending on the gravity of the offense, as well as individual state laws, falsifying documents can result in a prison sentence of 5-10 years. Also, if government documents or authorities were involved, the legal penalties may be more severe. ..... legal penalties may increase with repeat offenses.

The penalty for falsifying government documents is outlined in the Crimes Act of 1958.

If the allegations can be proven, Democrat Cummings faces VERY serious charges of getting unauthorized access to confidential Federal Taxpayer Information (FTI), a violation that could land him in jail--and if he colluded to obtain numbers of FTI's from Conservative 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) groups--that could involve other serious crimes.

If Elijah does, in fact, possess unauthorized tax documents obtained through conspiracy and collusion, and if he distributed the illegally-held documents to other "interested parties" (perhaps in Congress), charges of aiding and abetting could also be involved.

===============================================

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....

<><> the FBI, ATF, the IRS, and OSHA were sicced on Catherine Englebrecht, as she valiantly tried to improve the US voting system.

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

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

=======================================

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--

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.