Image 01 Image 03

House Freedom Caucus Submits Resolution to Impeach IRS Commissioner

House Freedom Caucus Submits Resolution to Impeach IRS Commissioner

They accuse him of holding up their investigation of the IRS targeting Tea Party groups.

The House Freedom Caucus submitted a resolution to force a vote to impeach IRS Commissioner John Koskinen. They have accused him of hampering, “Congress’ effort to investigate the IRS for tough assessments of Tea Party groups that sought tax exemptions several years ago.”

Caucus members Members claim Koskinen failed to provide proper email documents and lied about deleting some emails. They also claim he has shown, “little effort to recover the lost documents.”

To speed up the vote, Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) introduced the bill, “under a privileged motion,” allowing the bill to bypass committee. The House could vote on the bill as early as Thursday.

Roll Call reported:

Fleming said Koskinen had made a “series of false and misleading statements” to House investigators and failed to fully cooperate with their requests for emails and other information related to a probe of the IRS’ handling of applications from conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status.

Fleming, who is running for the Senate, said Koskinen’s statements and actions “warrant impeachment, trial and removal from office.”

He drafted the resolution in July “after the Judiciary Committee held two hearings to examine Koskinen’s alleged misconduct.” The Hill reported that Freedom Caucus members will give speeches on the floor on Tuesday evening to make their case.

However, they are not only trying to persuade the Democrats. House GOP members have not embraced the resolution:

Impeaching Koskinen is an issue that has divided House Republicans. Several congressional Republicans have said that they would vote against impeachment because the resolution has not followed the normal process, which would involve an extensive review by the Judiciary Committee.

Other Republicans have explained, “that an impeachment vote two months before elections risked irritating voters.”

The cause is noble, even if it is a long-shot:

Many Republicans are skeptical of the impeachment, however, and so the House Freedom Caucus isn’t optimistic that leadership will take up their cause.

“I believe they are going to do a motion to refer to the Judiciary Committee or they are going to do a motion to table,” Rep. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, told reporters on Tuesday. “Either way, they are punting.”

The resolution still has to be recognized as “properly noticed” privileged resolution, however. Assuming it is, a vote will have to take place within two legislative days.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


legacyrepublican | September 13, 2016 at 5:49 pm

About time! This should have happened months ago.

    Months? Try YEARS.

    And from the comments from other members of Congress, a whole bunch of Republicans aren’t even interested in it now.

    Which is why the pieces of shit like Lerner, Lynch, Comey and Koskinen are getting more bold. They KNOW the Repulicans won’t hold them accountable no matter how blatantly they violate the law.

      DaveGinOly in reply to Olinser. | September 13, 2016 at 9:13 pm

      They could have impeached Hillary for her lies before Congress, but a conviction in the Senate would have prevented her candidacy. It would have been viewed (by Democrats, at least) as an entirely political exercise. And it would have been, but that wouldn’t have made it the wrong thing to do. She deserved to be impeached and blocked from holding any “office…under the United States.” (Former office-holders can be impeached for exactly this purpose – having been proven ill-suited to office or having violated the public trust, Congress is responsible to see to it that such people don’t hold office again.)

It will never pass this group of cowardly little men and women called Representatives. Their only goal is to be re-elected and if that means acting/voting like Demorats then so be it.

I can’t remember anyone who should be impeached JUST on his facial expressions when testifying…er, lying…before Congress MORE than this puke. They used to TRY to lie artfully, at least.

Of course, that’s just the beginning and hardly the worst.

Other Republicans have explained that an impeachment vote two months before elections risked irritating voters.

That’s a perfect illustration why Trump is the Republican nominee rather than Jeb Bush.

Technical question: How does one introduce a “privileged resolution”? Does it require a certain number of co-sponsors?

Subotai Bahadur | September 13, 2016 at 8:10 pm

1) The resolution will not pass. The Republicans will not allow it to pass because they will not stand up against Democrats on any subject.

2) The vote by each Republican Congress-critter, however, will be instructive when filling out ballots in any putative elections in November. Why have a Republican voting for everything the Democrats want, and to protect every Democrat, when you can have the real thing to blame for their actions.

This refusal to impeach Koskinen is nothing more than confirmation as to the depth and breadth of corruption within our government and nothing less.

I don’t expect any real progress on this impeachment from this totally spineless congress.

Because looking like fools is the way to political victory.

The process per Wiki:
“At the federal level, the impeachment process is a two-step procedure. The House of Representatives must first pass, by a simple majority of those present and voting, articles of impeachment, which constitute the formal allegation or allegations. Upon passage, the defendant has been “impeached”. Next, the Senate tries the accused. In the case of the impeachment of a president, the Chief Justice of the United States presides over the proceedings. For the impeachment of any other official, the Constitution is silent on who shall preside, suggesting that this role falls to the Senate’s usual presiding officer. This may include the impeachment of the vice president, although legal theories suggest that allowing a defendant to be the judge in his own case would be a blatant conflict of interest. If the Vice President did not preside over an impeachment (of anyone besides the President), the duties would fall to the President pro tempore of the Senate.

To convict the accused, a two-thirds majority of the senators present is required. Conviction removes the defendant from office.”

The 2 key points are that a- Joe Biden would preside. A fight to determine who else would preside would make the whole idea moot since it would last until after the election and continue into the new congress.
b- to convict in the senate takes a 2/3 majority – 67 votes. If all the republicans vote to convict, you are still 13 votes short. Unless you can identify which democrats would vote to impeach [and you can’t because they won’t switch], your idea is just a joke. The kind of joke that makes conservatives look like idiots and helps the left stay in power.
That’s reality, so face it. You can’t win the fight so don’t start it. If you want to set the executive branch back on the right track, you have to control the executive branch. Reality! That means a republican president.