Lerner emails looked for way out of difficulties at the IRS
WASHINGTON — Lois Lerner, who oversaw the Internal Revenue Service's scrutiny of Tea Party groups, was looking for someone from every branch of government to help resolve the issue that eventually cost her job.
In emails released on Tuesday by a congressional committee, Lerner wondered why Congress wasn't getting more criticism, hoped that the Federal Election Commission would “save the day” and wrote that political nonprofit groups “itching for a constitutional challenge” might file a court case that would lead the IRS to accelerate the release of specific information about groups denied tax-exempt status.
The emails are part of a 141-page report from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The panel is building a case designed to lead to a vote to hold Lerner in contempt of Congress for refusing to answer the panel's questions and for providing false and misleading information in prior questioning.
“She led efforts to scrutinize conservative groups while working to maintain a veneer of objective enforcement,” the report said of Lerner. “Her unwillingness to testify deprives Congress the opportunity to have her explain her conduct, hear her response to personal criticisms levied by her IRS coworkers, and provide vital context regarding the actions of other IRS officials.”
Lerner has refused to answer lawmakers' questions, twice invoking her constitutional right not to testify.
When she did that March 5, Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., adjourned the hearing and cut off the microphones before Democrats could speak. Issa later apologized.
“As we have said, the majority has no interest in the facts,” William Taylor, Lerner's attorney, said in an email Monday night. “The facts interfere with keeping the conspiracy theory alive through the election cycle.”
Lerner was the IRS's director of exempt organizations until last year, overseeing the enforcement of rules that limit political involvement by nonprofit groups that seek tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code. In response to a question last May at a tax conference, she said the IRS had singled out groups for extra scrutiny based solely on their names, including those related to the anti-tax Tea Party.
That disclosure led to multiple congressional investigations, which are still continuing, along with a Justice Department criminal probe.
President Obama forced out the acting IRS commissioner, Steven Miller. Several other senior officials, including Lerner, left the tax agency.
Republicans contend that Lerner's actions were part of a pattern of politically motivated steps that included disclosure of groups' information and audits of individuals and businesses involved with small-government groups.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Hitchhiking robot’s journey west cut short in Philly
- Obama orders steeper emission cuts from power plants
- Who wins, who loses under stricter power plant limits
- West Virginia on pace to issue record number of concealed-carry permits
- Food industry players fighting proposed dietary guidelines drop millions on lobbyists
- 2 women advance to final phase of Army Ranger training
- State Department accuses top Clinton aide of violations
- University of New Hampshire language guide panned
- Despite U.S. dollars and bombs, effort failing to squash ISIS
- Phoenix man accused of beheading wife, dogs jailed on $2M bail
- Finish 44-year Hamtramck housing bias case soon, judge tells lawyers