Did The IRS Lie To Senators?

Black & Right ^ | 06/20/14 | Bob Parks

[impetrio1]

Only one problem: the Office of Management and Budget issued a memo August 24, 2012 reminding federal employees that President Obama signed a directive on November 18, 2011 that offered specific guidelines as to the handling of records (see memo page 3 below).

[InterceptPoint]

A Question for any of our Freeper Experts:

I believe the appointment of a Special Prosecutor to investigate the IRS Scandal would require the approval of Eric Holder/Obama.

The typical response of Congress Critters and Commentators is that we need a Special Prosecutor to get to the bottom of this mess.

I believe that there is something less than “no chance at all” that Eric Holder will allow a Special Prosecutor to be named. It's not going to happen.

Assuming the above is true, MY QUESTION IS:

Is it possible legally for Congress (a House Committee, for example) to go straight to the courts to request the release of documents - the Lois Lerner Emails for example?

[savedbygrace]

I think ACLJ is representing one of the harmed parties in a lawsuit. They will ask the judge to order the documents produced.

But I could be wrong.

[Don Corleone]

LIES are the mother’s milk of politics. Lies in Washington are at least as important as political contributions and in many cases serve the same purpose.

[vette6387]

“Yes. Especially that ratty-looking guy Kosin....whatever. Oh, and LL.”

And let’s not forget Steven Miller and Douglas Schulman. They are just other parts of the same turd. You knew they were lying (and enjoying it) every time their mouths moved. I particularly liked it yesterday when Koskinen got all huffy about being called a liar, which or course he was, but again, that’s his principal job at the IRS.

[doorgunner69]

If they did, a LOT of heads at the IRS are going to roll. And both Valerie Jarrett and Eric Holder will be out of their jobs.

With this crowd, the MSM, and the idiots that still support them, I hope you do not have your hopes set too high.

[InterceptPoint]

I think ACLJ is representing one of the harmed parties in a lawsuit. They will ask the judge to order the documents produced.

Yes. I believe that is true. We may get some documents by that path since judges have the power to throw people in jail who don't comply.

Congress really doesn't have that power. There is no apparent punishment for perjury. The Capital Jail is a joke. There is really no remedy for what is going on right now unless Congress can utilize the courts to force the disclosure of the documents they seek.

But I'm not sure they are allowed to make requests to courts of this sort. If they can, they should.

[all the best]

The IRS did not lie. Individuals did lie.

[Count of Monte Fisto]

Is it possible legally for Congress (a House Committee, for example) to go straight to the courts to request the release of documents - the Lois Lerner Emails for example?

Congress has the inherent power to arrest and imprison for Contempt of Congress. They don't need to crawl to Holder or the Federal courts.

The House of Reps could have the House Sergeant at Arms arrest Lerner and the IRS thugs that have 'lost' the emails RIGHT NOW and hold them indefinitely until they testify completely and truthfully to the oversight committee. If they lie they can be imprisoned. There used to be a jail right in the Capital Building for that purpose.

But don't hold your breath waiting for that to ever happen. The GOP Establishment and the Obama Regime both play for the same team.

[Count of Monte Fisto]

Congress really doesn't have that power.

Oh yeah?

From Wikipedia: Contempt of Congress

Inherent contempt

Under this process, the procedure for holding a person in contempt involves only the chamber concerned. Following a contempt citation, the person cited is arrested by the Sergeant-at-Arms for the House or Senate, brought to the floor of the chamber, held to answer charges by the presiding officer, and then subjected to punishment as the chamber may dictate (usually imprisonment for punishment reasons, imprisonment for coercive effect, or release from the contempt citation).

Concerned with the time-consuming nature of a contempt proceeding and the inability to extend punishment further than the session of the Congress concerned (under Supreme Court rulings), Congress created a statutory process in 1857. While Congress retains its "inherent contempt" authority and may exercise it at any time, this inherent contempt process was last used by the Senate in 1934, in a Senate investigation of airlines and the U.S. Postmaster. After a one-week trial on the Senate floor (presided over by the Vice-President of the United States, acting as Senate President), William P. MacCracken, Jr., a lawyer and former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics who had allowed clients to rip up subpoenaed documents, was found guilty and sentenced to 10 days imprisonment.[6]

MacCracken filed a petition of habeas corpus in federal courts to overturn his arrest, but after litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress had acted constitutionally, and denied the petition in the case Jurney v. MacCracken.[7][8]

Presidential pardons appear not to apply to a civil contempt procedure such as the above, since it is not an "offense against the United States" or against "the dignity of public authority."[9]

[ncfool]

Just remember what happened to Michael Mahon Hastings when he crossed Obama! He found a tree..and died.

[grumpygresh]

Lying to congress by 0bama officials has already been legitimized and legalized by precedent. As long as no one important is prosecuted, lying to congress doesn’t count.

[Jack Hammer]

Of course.

Next dumb question.

[trebb]

If they did, a LOT of heads at the IRS are going to roll. And both Valerie Jarrett and Eric Holder will be out of their jobs.

I see you're an optimist. If there was half a chance of your hopes coming true, there would already be a lot of severed heads rolling around in D.C. and Holder and Jarrett would be sharing a cell in a Mexican prison.