Lois Lerner tied to another erased hard drive in a federal investigation

On Monday, July 14, the House Oversight Committee linked embattled former IRS agent Lois Lerner with yet another erased hard drive connected with a federal criminal investigation. In a letter to the chairman of the Federal Election Commission, which can be found on the House Oversight Committee’s website, relates to April Sands, an employee of the Federal Election Commission during the 2012 presidential campaign.

The letter details how Ms. Sands posted twitter messages during work hours “soliciting or endorsing political contributions to Democratic candidates, including President Obama.” The letter then provides screen shots of several of Ms. Sands’ tweets from an account known as “Reign of April:”

July 18, 2012: "Our #POTUS's birthday is August 4. He'll be 51. I'm donating at least $51 to give him the best birthday present ever: a second term. #p2"

Aug. 21, 2012: "Donate to @clairecmc [Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)] today. RT @HuffPostPol BREAKING: Todd Akin[Republican challenger to McCaskill] is not dropping out of his Senate race, he tells Huckabee. #MOSen' #p2"

Sept. 18, 2012: "Romney is toast. But POTUS can't do it all on his own. Don't forget Congressional races. We need a Democratic sweep. Stay focused. #p2"

June 4, 2012: "I just don't understand how anyone but straight white men can vote Republican. What kind of delusional rhetorical [sic] does one use? #p2"

May 1, 2012: "Dear every single Republican ever, When will U learn that Barack Hussein Obama is simply smarter than U? Signed, #Obama2012 #p2"

Aug. 25, 2012: "If you're still calling yourself a Republican after the #WarOnWomen, their stated RNC platform, & Birtherism, you are my enemy. Done. #p2"

All Americans enjoy the free speech protection of the First Amendment, but unfortunately for Ms. Sands, her political advocacy ran afoul of the Hatch Act, a 1939 law which, according to the House Oversight letter, “prohibits Executive Branch employees from engaging in partisan political activity while on official duty at a federal workplace. Certain employees, including FEC employees, are further restricted by the Hatch Act from engaging in partisan political campaigns or management. Additionally, federal law makes it a crime for a federal employee ‘to solicit or receive a donation of money or a thing of value in connection with a Federal, state or local election, while in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties….’”

The House letter further states that Ms. Sands admitted to Office of the Special Counsel (OSC) that she had violated the Hatch Act by conducting political activity and soliciting donations “via webcam from an FEC conference room… while on duty.” The FEC Office of the Inspector General (OIG) sought to prosecute Ms. Sands, but the Oversight letter notes that before the OIG could seize Ms. Sands’ hard drive, the FEC “recycled” the computer. Without the hard drive, the OIG was unable to prove that Ms. Sands’ political activities were carried out on a government computer and the U.S. Attorney made the decision not to prosecute.

April Sands, the letter notes, “worked for former IRS official Lois Lerner when Ms. Lerner served as the FEC’s Associate General Counsel for Enforcement.” Lerner worked for the FEC from 1981 through 2001.

In 2013, the Weekly Standard and National Review reported that Lerner had a history of partisanship and harassment during her tenure at the FEC. Also in 2013, Judicial Watch, a nonpartisan group focused on government transparency, announced that it had obtained emails between then Director of Exempt Organizations at the IRS, Lois Lerner, and enforcement attorneys at the FEC in which she “provided detailed, confidential information concerning the tax exempt application status and returns of conservative groups to the FEC in violation of federal law.” In May 2014, Lerner was held in contempt of Congress by a bipartisan House vote.

At this point, according to the Oversight letter, “it is unclear whether Ms. Sands ever communicated with Ms. Lerner after Ms. Lerner moved to the IRS; however the [Oversight] Committee is aware that Ms. Lerner maintained communication with some former FEC colleagues.”

Read the full article on National Elections Examiner

Health care cover-up

When the House of Representatives voted to pass President Obama’s health care reform bill on March 21, 2010, it was opposed by a majority of Americans. In addition to opposing the bill itself, many Americans objected to the manner in which the bill was passed. To avoid the stronger Republican opposition after the election of Scott Brown from Massachusetts, the house passed a previously passed senate bill and then both houses voted on a separate bill containing fixes for the first bill. This was unprecedented.

Now it seems that there was even more political chicanery involved in the passage of the bill. Several weeks after the passage of the health care bill, on April 22 Medicare’s Office of the Actuary released a report that was full of bad news for President Obama and the Democrats [1]. This report from a nonpartisan office stated that the reform bill will actually increase health care costs, in spite of President Obama’s repeated assurances that the bill would control costs.

Further, the report stated that the bill’s cuts in Medicare could drive up to 15% of hospitals and health care providers into the red [1]. These losses could lead to fewer health care providers as demand increases. This would lead to more limited access to health care, especially for seniors who depend on Medicare. Cuts to Medicare’s Advantage program would also mean that many seniors will face higher out-of-pocket costs.

The one bright spot in the report for Democrats was that the percentage of Americans with health insurance is estimated to increase. However, even the White House admits that the bill still won’t cover all Americans.

In addition to the bad news contained in the report, it was also revealed that the report had been submitted prior to the health care vote. Reports are that the report had been submitted to Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius more than a week prior to the vote [2]. Sebelius’ staff reportedly refused to review the report until after the vote. Conflicting reports [3] are that the report was received only three days before the vote, which was not enough time to review it.

In either case, it looks bad for the Democrats. It is now apparent that the rush in getting the bill passed was related directly to the HHS report. In either case, the vote was pushed through on a Sunday so that the contents of the report would not be made public before the bill became law. The Democrats knew that bad news was coming and delayed it.

In fact, one HHS staffer said as much: "The reason we were given was that they did not want to influence the vote, which is actually the point of having a review like this, you would think" [2].

He goes on to say that the contents of the report were widely known in Democratic circles: "We know a copy was sent to the White House via their legislative affairs staff, and there were a number of meetings here almost right after the analysis was submitted to the secretary's office. Everyone went into lockdown, and people here were too scared to go public with the report" [2].

After years of Democratic complaints about governmental lies, here we have a black-and-white case of intentional deceit. While President Obama and congressional Democrats were claiming that the health care bill would reduce costs, they were aware that actuaries within their own administration were pointing out the flaws in their plan. Even now, more than a month after the vote, are still claiming that the obscenely expensive bill will actually decrease the federal deficit.

All of this points to the fact that the intent of the Democrats is to mislead. They know and have known the truth about their bill for a long time. They concealed the truth in order to deceive the American people and their elected representatives into passing the bill.

We can only hope that the American people will remember this deceit and the arrogance of the Democratic leadership in November.

Repeal – Replace – Reform

Notes:
1. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100423/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_law_costs
2. http://spectator.org/archives/2010/04/26/what-lies-beneath
3. http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212303032885376.html

Kansas City MO
April 29, 2010