Posted on 07/15/2014 7:07:44 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
White House political director David Simas will not appear before the House Oversight Committee to testify Wednesday, despite a subpoena from Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the White House said Tuesday.
In a letter to Issa on Tuesday, White House counsel Neil Eggleston said the California congressman had "made no effort to justify your extraordinary demand that one of the president's immediate advisers testify at a committee hearing."
In the letter, the White House argues Simas is "immune from congressional compulsion to testify on matters relating to his official duties" because doing so would threaten "longstanding interests of the Executive Branch in preserving the president's independence and autonomy." Issa is investigating the relaunch of the White House Office of Political Strategy and Outreach earlier this year. The Republican lawmaker says he's concerned the White House has used staffers for partisan campaign activities, which are prohibited under the Hatch Act.
But Issa has not produced evidence of a specific instance of the White House violating the law, something Eggleston repeatedly emphasized in his letter.
"Your hasty decision to subpoena Mr. Simas is all the more unfounded because the Committee has been unable to point to any indication" the White House broke the law, Eggleston wrote.
Earlier this week, the White House had asked Issa to remove the subpoena, and offered a staff-level briefing on the political office for Issa's investigators.
But Issa said he would not withdraw the subpoena on Tuesday, following a 75-minute gathering between administration officials and committee staff.
“The committee has outstanding questions for Mr. Simas, who did not take part in the briefing, and it is necessary for him to appear at tomorrow’s hearing,” Issa said in a letter to the White House.
“I believe his on-the-record testimony will provide valuable insight into White House efforts to ensure appropriate use of taxpayer funds,” Issa continued.
In his letter, Eggleston said his staff briefed Issa's for 75 minutes and "stayed until the Committee staff determined they had completed their questioning — responding to over forty questions in total."
He also dismissed specific concerns raised by Issa in his letter — including whether the White House press shop pursued corrections to news articles and what officials were involved in the decision to reopen the office — as irrelevant to the question of Hatch Act compliance.
It's not clear what Issa's reaction to the rebuke will be.
In 2012, the House voted to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt over his refusal to turn over documents tied to the Fast and Furious gun running program.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest dismissed Issa’s probe last Friday, stating that the political office “operates in full compliance with the Hatch Act, and to date there is not even any suggestion or let alone evidence that we've deviated from the requirements of the Hatch Act.”
Earlier Tuesday, White House spokesman Josh Earnest dismissed Issa’s probe last Friday, stating that the political office “operates in full compliance with the Hatch Act, and to date there is not even any suggestion or let alone evidence that we've deviated from the requirements of the Hatch Act."
What is Obama hiding?
Obama can't afford for Simas to tesify, because it would look really bad if another member of his administration were to plead the fifth.
Like most Obamanoids, he’d probably just take the transparent edition of “the Fifth” anyway. I imagine his computer has already “crashed” too.
Hiding? Obama?
He’s loving this.
He wishes he got this much attention as a child.
Probably why he invited all those from way down south to come play.
Issa needs to rem,ember this The Most Transparent Administration in history while he’s learning about Illegal aliens, IRS hard drives disintegrating and officials lying through their teeth.
Presidents in the past have maintained this sort of thing. It’s not new with Obama.
Again and again, Issa has proved unwilling to do anything when Obama refuses to cooperate with legitimate demands.
It’s unlikely that this time will be any different.
I think we are experiencing another “not a smidgen of evidence” moment. Purer than Caesar’s wife, aren’t they?
‘Presidents in the past have maintained this sort of thing. It’s not new with Obama.’
So what if other presidents have done this, we all know their is enough dirt on Obama to start a sod farm. Just because it has been done before does not give him a free pass. Might as well have said Bush done it, too. Sh1t.
The air must be thick in the corridors of the WH .. With lawyers.
One suspects that the negative optics from refusing to testify are at least as bad as invoking the 5th Amendment; and one also suspects that Issa will not let this critical issue drop.
.
Presidents in the past have committed crimes and abused their authority to cover them up.
‘The air must be thick in the corridors of the WH .. With lawyers.’
If there is any justice left in this country, he will need them and may have to import them from overseas. I look forward to that day but I doubt it will ever come.
The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world.
And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to.
If you worship me, it will all be yours.”
Luke 4:5-7
Obama is different from every President we have had.
Troll, you continue to spout progressive cant on this website. Some time soon the moderators are going to ban you.
put the soldiers in jail and they will give up the capos. Put the capos in jail and they will give up the don.
Oh, I would agree that he’s completely different than any other President we’ve had. I’ve also said here that he’s the absolute worst President the USA has ever had in its history.
But unfortunately, that still doesn’t change the dynamics of a conviction vote in the US Senate.
You may not like REALITY but I’ve always found it best to face the reality of a situation that one finds themself in.
I don’t believe “facing reality” is a violation of Free Republic posting rules ... LOL ...
The basic question involved with this is whether this is a correct action for the Office of the President of the United States of America to take, in order to preserve the separation of powers ... or not.
This would be an issue that transcends any one President. And, of course, this can always be taken up to the US Supreme Court.
If this is not correct for ANY PRESIDENT (namely not relevant for the separation of powers) then it should be pursued to the US Supreme Court.
There’s not a smidgeon of corruption.
A President committing a crime doesn’t take away legitimate Constitutional prerogatives that the Office of President of the United States of America has.
One has to first determine whether this is something that the “Office of the President” can do, or not.
Then if it is ... the other thing that could come into play is whether a crime has taken place in “the office”. That’s a separate matter from the first item above.
See my Post #18 ...
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.