deliberately misled congress as a part of those efforts. the claim is not that we disagree with his decisions. or that we request them toll speak in which his agency provided answers. but that he knowingly and intentionally supplied us with false information. ...

in addition, career investigators at the department of justice also looked into these claims. they also found, and i quote again, no evidence that any official involved in the handling of the tax exempt applications or irs leadership attempted to obstruct justice, into quotation. it's no wonder then that we have read reports of speaker ryan doing his best to make certain this measure never reaches the floor of the house, as speaker boehner did before him. it's also not a surprise that many in the republican conference have been critical of the tactics that forced this

hearing. chairman boost the need for the subcommittee on tax policy has argued that this hearing is a waste of time and and potentially damaging to our priorities. he told reporters last week, if we do this is going to further delay the investigation. i think it's time to move on, into quotation. senator orrin hatch, the chairman of the senate finance committee, has said that there simply no interest in impeachment activity in the united states senate, where a two-thirds vote would be required for any conviction. when asked about commissioner koskinen, senator hatch and said, we have a very different experience with him. we can have our disagreements with him, but that doesn't mean

that there is an impeachable offense. and he added, for the most part he's been very cooperative with us your to summarize, mr. chairman, the proposed articles have been debunked, the investigation itself, by independent investigators. the resolution faces stiff bipartisan opposition in the house, and even worse odds in the united states senate. there are precious few working days left in this congress. i am personally disappointed that we plan to spend not just today but an additional day in june discussing these unsubstantiated claims. if it's at all possible, chairman goodlatte, please

consider returning the second day to do substantive work of this committee. in any event, i urge you to lead us past this distraction quickly and back to the work of some actual benefit to the american people. and i thank you for the time and i yield back. i yield back. >> the chair thanks the gentleman. without objection all other members open status will be made a part of the record. we welcome our distinguished witnesses today, both of whom are members of the house judiciary committee but as is our custom if you would please rise, we will begin by swimming in. [witnesses were sworn in] >> thank you very much. please be seated and let the record reflect that both witnesses responded in the affirmative. i would not begin by introducing today's witnesses. the first witness is the honorable jason chaffetz, who

has been a member of the house judiciary committee since first coming to congress in 2000. representative district of utah is a member of the judiciary subcommittee on courts, intellectual property and internet, and the subcommittee on crime, terrorism, homeland security and investigations. since 2015 he has served as chairman of the house oversight and government reform committee. our next witness is the honorable ron desantis, since being elected in 2012, he has served on the judiciary, foreign affairs and oversight and government reform committees. he is a the chairman of the oversight committees national security subcommittee and the vice chairman of the judiciary committee subcommittee on the constitution and civil justice. welcome to you both. your written testimony will be entered into the record in its entirety and ask each of you summarize your testimony in the time that you are a lauded. to help you stay within that time there is a timing light on your table.

you guys know how this works. when the light turns red signals your time has expired but given the importance of this we have a lot of additional time to give you and for the video that the chairman has brought with them as well. we will begin with chairman chaffetz. welcome. >> thank you, thank you. i appreciate your holdings assuring a joint belgian's and to the ranking member conyers i enjoy a good working relationship with you, and i enjoyed your friendship and expect that to continue in the future and i appreciate the discussion today. also want to note and thank chairman isa, chairman when much of this happening to me these things are happening and to his good work and tenacious approach to this, it was an important step and wouldn't be here today quite frankly without the good work and leadership of darrell issa. this is really a simple case in my mind. when congress ask you a question, you're expected to give a truthful answer. when congress issues a subpoena,

compliance is not optional. imagine if the taxpayer failed to comply with an irs summons or subpoena. what would they do to you? if they asked you for those materials come you're expected to produce those materials that if you don't they will take you to court and probably going to win. the irs targeting scandal was on american. they got the most powerful and feared entity in the united states. the first amendment rights of citizens were trampled upon. in fairness mr. koskinen as commissioner was not there for the initial targeting. he was brought in by president obama as the president obama as a turnaround artist, to work hand-in-hand with congress to fix a problem. from my perspective he didn't fix the problem. he made it worse. they are been numerous hearings, letters and subpoenas issued a variety of committees. the iran's is no stranger to its summons or a subpoena. they know exactly how this works. in fact, on average the issue

about 66,000 summons and subpoenas per year and a half since 2010. failure to abate a summit is a criminal violation under 26 usc section 7210 entries with it a fine of up to $1000 a year of imprisonment. if you don't comply the rs is going to come after you. they do prosky. the irs prevailed and 95% of those cases. again compliance with a subpoena is not optional. providing false testimony before congress comes with a consequence, at least it should. it is a crying. mr. koskinen did not tell the truth to congress. he provided false testimony failed to comply with the subpoena. he could've presented evidence from being destroyed but he didn't, he didn't tell the truth about it. americans are rightfully frustrated about the targeting scandal and the lack of accountability. but the case before us is about mr. koskinen in what he did and did not do which promote deprived the american people of

understanding what went wrong with their government. it also prevents us, congress, from fully fixing the problem and holding people accountable. there can't be full accountability because the evidence was destroyed on mr. koskinen's watch and under a subpoena. the remedy given to us in the constitution is impeachment. into the remedy designed for congress as a co-equal voice. the senate gives its advice and consent on confirming residential appointments our founders in that constitution also gave us an opportunity to remove somebody if they're not serving the best interests of the united states of america. this set has the opportunity to of a co-equal voice, and who serves i in the upper as long aa deductible summit out of there for congress is impeachment. hasn't been done often enough, and i think we must stand up for ourselves. to give some background i'm going to show video. it's about 10 minutes and it thn we'll get into the specifics of why think mr. koskinen allies.

>> from the woman at the center of the irs -- >> scandal involving -- >> where is lois lerner? >> lois lerner. >> this was orchestrated, it was bland. >> or possibly of criminal activity. >> let the record indicate the witness did answer in the affirmative. >> on the advice of my counsel of respectfully exercise my fifth amendment right and declined to answer that question. >> the irs and lois lerner, something we've only received his bits and pieces but what does a look-alike altogether? let's rewind. in 2013 the i resonated to the selective intentional targeting of american taxpayers based on their political beliefs. this is lois lerner, the irs simply with the most knowledge of the intentional targeting but when called to testify she refused to quit the key witness unwilling to cooperate to get to the truth congress had to obtain and review documents.

what followed was a sequence of obfuscation, construction and destruction of evidence by the irs which has left the american people with no real answers to why the first amendment rights were violated. >> with rumors of targeting percolating come in june 2011, ways and means chairman dave camp since the first letter to the irs related to the allegations of the irs mistreatment of conservative groups. nine months later in march 2012, chairman garrett isa and jim jordan of the house oversight committee sent a letter to the irs requesting information. by may 2013 the irs commits to targeting, and chairman isa and jordan send yet another letter requesting information. the president acknowledges wrongdoing and pledges cooperation. >> this is inexcusable and americans are right to be angry about it. our administrators to make sure we're working hand in hand with

congress to get to this thing fixed. >> by august the osha commission issued its first subpoena of the committee sent a letter to the secretary min money in of the obligation to preserve all e-mails. at this .3 congressional committees, the inspector general and the doj all have investigations under way. fast forward nine months, after he condemned the targeting president obama state in of february 2014 interview that there is not a smidgen of its russian spin not even ask corruption. not even a smidgen of corruption. >> on this investigation are still open. even the investigation he ordered was not complete. so how did the president arrived at this conclusion? what did he become aware of in those nine months? meanwhile, iran's commissioner koskinen appears before multiple congressional panels promising to deliver all of lois lerner's e-mails. >> are you going to provide the documents to lois lerner? >> yes spirit that were subpoenaed speak with yes. we are working very hard to get

you the lois lerner e-mails. >> are you or are you not going to provide all of lois lerner's e-mails? >> we all already -- yes, we will do that. >> until he starts backtracking spin the process redacted or there will be thousands of pages but it will not expect the conclusion of this investigation. >> in june 2014 he tells congress her e-mails could not be recovered. >> the actual hard drive after was determined it was dysfunctional and that was expert, no e-mails could be retrieved, was recycled and destroyed in the normal process. spirit wasn't physically destroyed? >> that's my understanding speed of what could happen for the commission to make such a statement? remember the very first letter from chairman camp to the irs in june 2011? coincidentally lois lerner char driver crashes eight days later. what are the odds aren't her hard drive within a week of a

banquet from congress truly defies all odds. this hard drive will sit in the bin for nearly eight months until it is destroyed. within weeks of an irs internal investigation commencing. another coincidence. in april 2013, a month before getting to the targeting, lois lerner reminds colleagues to be cautious about we say in e-mails. on a same-day asks whether the answer of instant messaging system is our god. when told no, she responds, perfect. so back to may 2013, the irs just admitted to targeting and the president just promise cooperation. lois lerner comes before congress and takes the fifth. on the exact same day, nearly two years after congress started asking questions, the irs find issues on august the order to all irs personnel. so with an admission of targeting subpoenas and investigations under way we returned to the president because the comments from february 2014. >> not even a staging of

corruption. >> on the same day the president makes those comments they irs discuss a problem, i cap and lois lerner seniors. thousands of e-mails are missing in the targeting and 2011. remember, are hard drive crashed. staff recognizes the need to collect backup tapes that might contain e-mails from the relevant timeframe. but on march 4, 400 backup tapes containing e-mails are destroyed. this is 30 days after realizing there is a gap and eight months after the non-district court and the subpoena that something like this happen. the iq test was actually an unbelievable set of circumstances. how in the world with a preservation order and subpoenaed to they destroyed 422? >> it's an unbelievable set of circumstances that would allow that to happen. >> wasn't commissioner cost and appearing at the same time

ushering members the irs would turn over all e-mails? if commission intentionally mislead congress? tacitly suggests the irs new lois lerner's e-mails had been destroyed at the time of the commissioners march test them. remember the investigations. besides congress and the doj, the ig was investigating aspects of the targeting scandal. paster looking to lois lerner's e-mails in june 2014. here's their story. >> in june 2014 the ig opened its investigation into the missing lois lerner e-mails. commissioner koskinen confirm lois lerner's e-mails cannot be recovered and described the great lakes the irs has gone trying to find them spent we spent at last count $18 million responded without over 250 employees after his times involved and over 120,000 hours of effort devoted to it. we've gone to great length. we have replaced the process we

are producing her e-mail twice just to make sure that no e-mail was missing. we understand the import of this investigation. we've gone to great lengths and spent an amount of money to make sure there's no e-mail that is required that has not been produced. >> they didn't find any. the iges looking for backup tapes. just 15 days into the investigation of the ig drives 1.5 hours from d.c. to irs facility in west virginia and ask for backup tapes use the back of lois lerner's e-mail accounts. they handed 744 tapes. >> identified the 740 for backup tapes that met this criteria and took possession of all of the identified 740 for backup tapes. >> attendance that no one ever asked but they been all a long. >> irs in testimony and letters stated that left i quote no stone unturned, end quote to recovered e-mails. was that true because we were able to recover e-mails what appears that statement -- >> so not true?

i was officials testified that it quote from from the e-mails were unrecoverable come into court. given recoverable data still exists on the tapes was a statement to speak with it would not a beauty be true. >> i quote no way to recover them. them. was vouchers because that would not appear to be true. >> we have established here today multiple incidents when the irs did not tell the truth. >> throughout the course of investigation which went to the summer of 2015 the ig recovered 1000 unique e-mails that were never turned over by the irs. >> what did they do with these e-mails? >> to the best we can determine, they simply didn't look for those. >> so for the over 1000 e-mails we found in the backup tapes, we found in because we looked for them. >> they have been. they were under subpoena. what a coincidence. >> remember those 422 tapes destroyed after the irs knew they were missing e-mails and after the nondescript order was

in place at eight months after the subpoena? if those have been properly preserved, an additional 24,000 e-mails may have been recovered and maybe there would be answers. the american people will never know because the irs didn't do its job of preserving deprivation the way he was obligated to do. the ig concluded in its investigation that the irs neglected to search sources beyond lois lerner's hard drive for e-mails. >> how many potential source of recovering her e-mails existed for the irs because we believe there were six. the hard drive, blackberry, backup tapes, server drives, the backup tapes for the server drives and then finally her laptops. >> how many of these to the irs search? >> we are not aware they search anyone in particular. >> they didn't look after blackberry. they didn't look at the servers or backup servers or her laptop. so what great links didn't really go to? spin on the advice of my counsel of respectfully exercise my

fifth amendment right and declined to answer that question. >> the bottom line, irs didn't fulfill its legal obligation to respond to congress. they didn't preserve information. they didn't try to find information. they misled congress four years. they're physically the american people in the dark about how the first amendment rights were trampled upon. there must be accountability. >> mr. chairman, thank you for laying us to show that. i want to build on for the on his testimony, especially the statements made to congress on june and july of the year 2014. he can't explain why the irs wouldn't be able to produce thousands of lois lerner's e-mails. at that point as if it had been in place since august 2013. the subpoena was reissued to mr. koskinen after he was confirmed by the end of the subpoena had at its name on it for more than five months. on february 22014 super bowl sunday, they realized there was

a problem with ms. lerner's e-mails and the some of them are missing from the irs production to congress. ms. duvall was counsel to the commissioner at the time and she was basically managing the irs production to congress. the next day and were third, ms. duvall told our colleagues at the irs about the problem she had done. she told the i.t. people should talk to the people in the office of chief counsel. should talk to the deputy associate chief counsel, and by the next day february 4, thomas kinkade of lois lerner's hard drive had crashed back in 2011 and that was why many of her e-mails were missing. the irs knew in early february that there was a problem with the e-mails. mr. koskinen testified he knew in february. this is his quote, on july 23, 2014 hearing, quote, what i was advised and new in february was that when you look at the knows that already been provided to the committee and other investigations, instead of

looking at them by search terms template for them by date it was clear there were fewer e-mails in the period through 2011 and subsequently. there was also i was told that been a problem with ms. lerner's computer or so the question is what did mr. koskinen under subpoena to about a? he had the subpoena. he just learned most crucial evidence covered by the subpoena was missing and so you'd expect him to spring into action. let's start with what you did not do. according to the treasury inspector general for tax administration, he failed to look in five of the six places ms. lerner's e-mails could have existed. the backup tapes, blackberry, the server, the backup server, and the laptop. in fact, the irs barely looked for the missing e-mails at all according to take the. let's talk about what mr. koskinen did do in april, his agency notified the treasury department and the white house that ms. lerner e-mails were missing. then he waited and then he

waited some more until june when the irs finally told congress by burying a couple of sentences in the fifth page of an attachment in a letter to the senate finance committee. i was on june 13, 2014. that triggered a flurry of hearings, and mr. koskinen came up to testified to explain what he said. then he lied. we've got three quotes i want to share with you among many but let's look at what he told us on june 20 in 2014. 70s after finally telling congress that ms. lerner's e-mails were missing he said since the start of investigation, everything that has been preserved. nothing has been lost. nothing has been destroyed. that's not true. the investigation began in may of 2012. inspector joe found irs destroyed, destroyed evidence, 420 backup tapes that contain as

many as 24,000 e-mails, to and from ms. lerner and that happened on march 4, 2014 which was discovered after, after they discovered there was a problem. go to the second would affect the. this is on the same day june 20, 2014, mr. koskinen testified quote we confirmed that backup tapes from 2011 no longer existed, end quote. that wasn't true either. the fat -- the backup tapes, almost two years after the congressional investigations began and nearly one month after the irs new is a problem with lois lerner's e-mails. at the best this is gross negligence. go to the third quote. to me this is one of the most troubling. this is july 23, another full month afterward from july 23 of 2014 he was asked what was meant by the word confirmed? he said confirmed needs somebody

went back and looked and made sure that, in fact, any backup tapes that have existed had been recycled, end quote. that was completely and totally false. nobody at the irs went back and confirm that the tapes had been destroyed. the inspector general interview the people who were responsible and they said that nobody had ever asked for the backup tapes. in fact, all told, it's the inspector general to 15 days to go find it is edited recover 1000 e-mails. thanks. you can take that back. if they have done so after voting for some of the e-mails were missing in early february they could've been the backup tapes for they were destroyed. we know this because again the inspector general only took 15 days. the deputy inspector for investigations at tigta sum it up by testifying quote the best we can determine for the investigation, they just simply didn't look for those e-mails. so for the thousand e-mails

without on the backup tapes, we found them because we work for them, end quote. we are here today because mr. koskinen provided false testimony. he failed to comply with a duly issued subpoena. and we knew there was a problem he failed to properly inform congress in a timely manner. in fact, i would argue the actively misled congress. nor has mr. koskinen ever made an attempt to clarify or amend any of his prior statements. he continues to stand all of these statements. they are not true. look at the testimony that wasn't entered into the record. he says i stand by ready to cooperate with the committee with regard to any actions begins appropriate but i notice he didn't show up at he didn't show but hearing it today even though he was invited. and for him to say later on page four, i testified truthfully and to the best of my knowledge in answering questions concerning the search for a production the nose went investigation, he still doesn't get it because

that's not true. mr. chairman? regular order. >> the gentleman -- >> that was my concluding comment. thanks. >> the chair thanks the chairman of the overs and government reform committee and is now pleased to recognize and welcome congressman desantis. >> thank you, mr. chairman, ranking member conyers, my colleagues on the committee. although i did know at the time, the first of which i had to the irs targeting scandal occurred long before that date in may 2013 when lois lerner publicly revealed the existence of improper targeting by the irs. she did this by infamously planning a question at a legal conference in order to preempt the forthcoming ig report was a clear indication that the irs had improperly treated american citizens who were doing nothing more than seeking to exercise their first amendment rights. once this news broke i thought back to the previous year about a member of the body often for office for the first time in customary campaign i made a

point is because many groups as i could find. in one instance the leaders of one group dedicated to educating their fellow americans on the virtues of constitutional government grew apprehensive when i showed up and requested to speak. they can do for office explain my state for the group that caused them problems with the irs, and agency they felt mistreated their group by refusing to grant them tax-exempt status. it seemed to be as these folks are being paranoid. why would the irs care about a small group seeking tax exempt status with it or not my reaction was wrong and there's good reason to be concerned about the behavior of the irs. i've always thought about that as we done this investigation. as a member of the oversight committee i joined by colleagues in seeking to ascertain the truth about the condit of the irs and his employers like lois lerner. chairman chaffetz has been a good job outlining the extent to which the irs under mr. koskinen has stonewalled and obstructed attempts to find at the truth about the conduct of the irs. drive i pledge to be transparent

and to alert congress and the american people about problems with the investigation as soon as he knew about them yet he failed to the congress about the gaps discovered in her e-mails for four months. he testified every e-mail they been preserved since the start of the investigation, yet the irs destroyed over 400 backup tapes containing as many as 24,000 e-mails in march 2014. these e-mails with the subject of an internal reservation order and to congressional subpoenas. he testified that the backup tapes from 2011 had been recycled pursuant to normal irs policy, yet the foreign backup tapes were not destroyed until march 2014. moreover, to inspector general was able by doing a cursory investigation to identify some backup tapes that had not been recycled. he testified to the irs had gone to great lengths to make sure all e-mails were produced but as the chairman pointed out, they filter you look at her mobile device from the e-mail server, backup server, the laptop and i

was backup disk and all of which were examined by the inspector general. in this business no dispute about the fact, the arrest of up to 24,000 of e-mails under to subpoenas. the rsl to produce all of the e-mails it had in his possession as well as failing to do basic vigilance by not looking in obvious places for the industry is as cut and dry. is sorry trade of false statements and collection of data represents an affront to the authority of his house. the american people had a right to get the fact regarding the irs targeting the the irs had a duty to comply with its congressional investigation but instead they iran's stonewalled us thousands of e-mails have been destroyed the american people may very well never get the entire truth as relates to this scandal. it would be unthinkable for a taxpayer to treat an irs audit the way the irs has treated the congressional investigation. attacks their destroyed documents subject to a summons

on the irs, attacks they would be in the world over. a taxpayer made false statements in response to an investigation, it is safe to say that taxpayers would not get away with it if they taxpayer shared basic compliance with the investigation it's a good bet the investigation would not separate them. the question is is acceptable for that one of most powerful agencies in government to operate under lower standards of conduct than that which is applied to the taxpayers, the commission is charged with auditing. i've no doubt american taxpayers find such an arrangement to be unacceptable. shirley is how should also find it unacceptable. as a debate not a single individual has been held accountable for what happened with the irs. if commissioner koskinen can get away with this conduct, and other executive agencies will have a blueprint of how to stymie the congress when it conducts legitimate oversight. this will for the of of the power of the congress which is arguably at its historical they depict the constitution contains mechanisms for self defense they can be used and check abuses by several officers and executive branch.

we should use them. it's about affairs for the american people, accountability for the executive branch, and self respect for this institution. i thank the chairman for the time. >> the chair thanks the gentleman. we will proceed under the five minute will for questions and i'll begin by recognizing myself. the report of investigation by the treasury inspector general for tax demonstration, or tigta to concluded in its 2050 report as follows adequate, the investigation revealed the backup tapes were destroyed as result of irs management failing to ensure that the may 22, 2013 in a directive from chief technology officer concerning the preservation of electronic e-mail media was fully understood and followed by all of the irs employees responsible for handling and disposing of e-mail backup media come into court.

my understanding is that commissioner koskinen was brought in, appointed commissioner for the purpose of restoring the credibility of the irs following this horrific scandal. and that part of restoring that credibility would be coming clean, making sure that the investigations conducted by vers committees here in the house of representatives were responded to appropriately with the information that they requested. and that in doing so one would follow all the chains of evidence within one's organization that is now head of to find where that might go and then send people there and say what do you have? according to evidence you brought for today, that was never done. i would like to hear from each of you are understanding to what extent commissioner koskinen is responsible for the management of the irs and for this

management failure. >> thank you. he has the duty and obligation, a legal obligation under a subpoena to comply with the subpoena and everything he can in his power to make sure that he is doing the. he testified in multiple committees and multiple times in addition to i believe letters saying that he was making every effort, that it spent $18 million spending did he ever break that down for you? i saw those statements. did he ever say, i did this attitude is added to this. we spent this money for this and this and this? >> we can't find nor can tigta find no proactive evidence that the commissioner did anything proactively to actually recover those tapes on the source of which they were destroyed. i guess the comparison of the inspector general, the inspector general took them start to finish 15 days to go unfunded.

the commissioner had years and millions of dollars of resource and didn't even ask at the basic source. >> what really does it for me is you have these backup tapes in west virginia and the inspector general testified about what he did. he got in his car, he drove to west virginia and asked for the backup tapes. sonia shah.gov spending $18 million, what does it cost for gas to get to west virginia and back? 50 bucks, 60 bucks? he was able to recover some of the tapes. now, of course, others were destroyed by the people at the backup tape is elusive the irs never even requested any of the backup tapes. and so i think that says a lot about his leadership and i think it shows it undercuts his claim that they went to great lengths to get the information. >> very specifically, with regard to that very facility, to further quote from the tigta report, although the existed

until march 4, 2014, the backup tapes containing learners enough were destroyed because irs employees had shipped the backup tapes and server hard drives can understand the responsibility to comply with the chief technology officers may 2013 e-mail directed to preserve electronic backup media and the employees destroy the backup tapes on march 4, 2014. misinterpreted the directive. as you understand it, who was responsible for making sure irs employees understood that may 2013 director speak with the commission of the irs. that's who we issued a subpoena to. >> i concur. >> thank you very much both the. i not recognize the gentleman from michigan for his questions. >> may i thank my two colleagues for their testimony, and they're concerned about this manner. but is there anyway,

mr. chaffetz, that we can determine who was on the tape that you asked and received consent to play for 10 minutes speaks i'm sorry to the question was who is on that tape speak with yes. who was the woman on the tape that was interbreeding it? can you tell us anything about -- >> staff member for the oversight and government reform committee. beaming the voice over? >> yes. >> yes. she was a staff person for the oversight committee. >> well, i didn't know that before just now, and i'm sorry i didn't, i do want to raise anymore objections have already

been raised here this morning, but it seemed a little bit unusual that this was a tape that you didn't identify who it was before it started playing. so what i'm concerned with, are we talking about issues in irs which is under usual, the usual criticism and in these races of circumstances, even more than normal criticism that the usual receive? are we talking about we don't like the way they were doing business and we think that they made some mistakes, and they may

have made even miss statements, or the present commissioner, have made statements that should be, we should be questioning or challenging as we normally do in this committee? and that seems to me to be the just of the comments that i've received from my two learned colleagues on the committee that had testified here today. we don't like what happened. >> can i, can i -- spin sure. >> put some color on a little bit. the first part is to understand the context of why these e-mails are so important. because the targeting of americans, the suppression of the first amendment rights is

something i know on a bipartisan basis we take very socially. the fact before us on the impeachment goes solely to what mr. koskinen did and did not do when he was under subpoena. and he provided, there was a lot of gross negligence. there were things he should have done that he could have done, but he also -- >> is gross negligence and impeachable offenses because i think it is part of it comes as. yesterday. in fact, in 1974 the house judiciary committee came up with the report and talked about the standard by which and impeachable offense should be held. i happened to concur with that. >> well, i believe, i haven't recalled, but i was there for that, and -- >> you are the only one. >> that's right. and i speed i was seven. i was playing soccer. >> well, your excuse for not

knowing about it until much later. but the whole idea of one of 19 impeachment hearings have been held in almost a couple hundred years, is this being a little heavy-handed about this matter? i mean, i probably disagree with some of the irs commissioners views and conduct themselves, but we are examining the allegations of misconduct against the irs commissioner. and i feel that we are talking about another hearing on this same subject, it seems to me a

little bit overbroad, and i think that we are to move a little bit more carefully on this. i'm going to have to examine all of the statements made here today and it seems to me that we really ought to move with a little more discretion. there have been statements of hearsay, of allegations that, whether they are proved or whether they are provable or not, i just don't know and i'm trying to find out. and, of course, i give you the benefit of doubt because your passion and great work you've done on it since you were seven in this area.

do you see what i am describing? >> i can understand and respect that we may disagree on the remedy, but i think what we would find is that, in fact, we were lied to in congress. we were misled in congress that it was gross negligence, but there was a duty and obligation, that the irs as much as anybody when the issue 60,000 subpoenas and summons per year, they know how this works. and that i think we can come to an agreement to. >> i agree with you that we ought to look at these much more carefully. it's sort of hard this point for me to accept them or say that they are probably right, or mistakes were made it and i'm sure that they were made, but there seems to be an anti-irs

commissioner environment here that makes it very difficult for me to go forward without an investigation of all that's been said this morning. and i thank the gentleman. >> the chair thanks the gentleman. recognize the gentleman from california, mr. issa, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. chairman chaffetz, you remember the april 7, 2014 staff report. i asked debbie place in the record. >> without objection and will be made a part of the record. >> april 7, 2014, extensive documentation about the cover, then not cover but what we already discovered and then june 20, 2014, since the start

of this investigation every e-mail has been preserved. now that's a quote under oath by the commission, correct? >> yes. >> you and i are not lawyers so we will tax each other over it on the constitutional question. according to wikipedia, at least, the definition of high crimes and misdemeanors constitutional he says it covers allegation of misconduct, particular, particularly of officials such as perjury of both, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, conduct unbecoming, refusal to obey a lawful order/subpoena. so i just want to go through the last several. is it your understanding that high crimes and misdemeanors include failure to supervise? >> yes. >> dereliction of duty?

>> yes. >> condit and the coming? >> yes. >> refused to obey a lawful order to? >> yes. >> did we issued subpoenas that were, in fact, not obeyed speak with yes. august 2013 and february 14, 2014. >> just before leaving office i issued a december 23, 2014 staff reporter do remember that? >> yes. >> i asked debbie place in the record. >> without objection. >> at the top had we already recognized that there had been failure to preserve, in other words, go to obey the subpoena a lawful order, had we not we determined that there'd been conduct unbecoming by lois lerner? hadn't already figured that the commissioner and his political appointed subordinates have failed to supervise and were guilty of dereliction of duty? >> yes. >> in july of last year didn't you call on the commissioner to

rezone? >> yes. >> and the ranking member very aptly mentioned that we've only had 19 impeachment in history of this great republic, and that he had participated in many of them. but the history of impeachment, haven't we threatened impeachment or call on the resignation of cabinet, subcabinet officers hundreds and hundreds of times, and on judges hundreds of hundreds of times? haven't they either quit or been fired by the president speak with yes. that's happened many times. >> so you here today because almost a year ago after multiple very lengthy documents, after millions of dollars and countless thousands of hours you we determined that, one, they had targeted conservatives, that the commissioner had come in and that he had been guilty of failing to properly supervise,

giving us false statements, that he either knew were false or he was too lazy and too negligent to, in fact, verify? >> yes. >> so if i understand correctly, you are here because you have exhausted other remedies speak with providing false testimony to congress, president carter's continuing to whine and complain about the lack of inaction in the executive branch, the founders gave us tools and they gave us the tools to defend ourselves and take care of ourselves, and to provide a consequence. >> mr. chairman, are you familiar with the criminal referral by the ways and means committee against lois lerner? >> yes. >> as i understand, the law said the u.s. attorney for the district of columbia shall present to a grand jury those criminal articles against lois lerner. what happened to those? >> there was no criminal referral. after 10 months of review they decided not to present this to the grand jury.

>> that even though the ways in means committee under statute had delivered a statute that ordered the u.s. attorney to perform an act under this justice department of this president, they chose not to obey the law? >> that's my understanding. >> so if you were to do similarly every for the irs commissioner specifically for his false statements, and if you found him for criminal purposes, you would expect the same thing to happen, that it would not be presented? >> perhaps, different members have different views. i look at this as the remedy that the founders gave us. it hasn't been exercised in a while but that is the tool they gave us. >> and you were here today just after the general accountable office, and nonpartisan part of congress found that conservative groups are still being targeted as we speak, correct? >> that is director in fact could select workstation for examinations in an unfair manner, and he goes on to say based on an organizations religious, education, political

and other views. commissioner koskinen does not resolve the problem and continues today, and based on his most latest comment, he doesn't think he has misspoken any way, shape, or form. >> you here because you've exhausted other remedies and because the remedy for someone who has lost confidence of congress, los lost confidence oe neck and people failed to fix a problem after more than two years, or if you will, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, conduct unbecoming, and refusal to of a lawful orders that's why you're here? >> it is. it's important to note that most members erroneously believe when president obama stepped in and to get a new president that the commission would naturally do that as well. that's not true. when he was confirmed in december 2013, being the commissioner continues until november of 2017. so the remedy is i think urgent. we have 90,000 good hard-working

people at the irs but they are mismanaged and they're being led by somebody who is lying to congress. >> final question, it was discovered on super bowl sunday more than a month before the documents were destroyed, the tapes were destroyed, there was this gap. was she a non-come from but a political appointee, and appointed directly of this commissioner? >> yes, she was. >> thank you. i thank the chairman and the yield back. >> recognize the gentleman from texas for five minutes. >> let me thank my colleagues for their presentation and their service to this nation. i hold the responsibility, however, of the judiciary committee sacrosanct and great moment and great responsibility. we are the protectors of the constitution, and as the authority given to us, this

house, the house having the sole authority to impeach. though i note very clear that this is not an impeachment hearing, i take the responsibility there is usually. to mr. conyers, let me say i associate myself with your line of reasoning, and i promise not to hold your wisdom and experience in legal scholarship against you. so i thank you so very much for all that you have offered to us. bad behavior, inappropriate answering of questions, to my very fine witnesses, may be grounds for being in contempt of congress, and any other admonition we want to give. i hold the two points that you have made. and that is that there must be a relationship between witnesses from the administration, no matter which administration is,

and congress of forthrightness. i also hold to the point that ththe first amendment, freedom f speech and thought are again very high calling of the station. probably why so many have tried to immigrate to this nation because of the freedoms that we give. i also think it's the responsibility of congress to be factual and temperate. so let me read this letter to you, come from the department of justice. recently. and that is, in collaboration with the fbi's inspector general for tax of administration, the department's criminal sovereignty division conducted an exhaustive probe. by the way the 20 million-dollar spent, 160,000 hours of work. we conducted more than 100 witness interviews, those by the irs. collected more than 1 million pages of a irs documents, analyze almost 500 tax exemption applications, examine the role of potential ability of scores

of irs and and consider the applicability of civil rights tax of administration obstruction statute. our investigation uncovered substantial evidence of mismanagement, poor judgment and institutional inertia leading to the belief by many package of applicants at the irs target them based on their political viewpoints. we found no evidence in the irs official acted based on political discriminatory or other motives that would support a criminal prosecution. we found evidence in official involved in the handling of the tax-exempt application or leadership attempted to abstract justice. based on the evidence of this investigation the recommendation of experience, career prosecutors and supervisors at the department of justice, we are closing our investigation and will not seek any crime charges. i realize that it's not impeachment but let me just say this, mr. chaffetz. no evidence was uncovered that any irs implicit been directed to destroy or hide information from congress, the doj or tigta.

do you want to quarrel with that extensive investigation? >> i think you're conflating two different topics. what we are most concerned about is mr. koskinen's actions under this thing. that is not what, that is not what the fbi -- >> the premise of the actions are data with a hold of me of issues. i look at the 10 minute presentation. you at all but just at yes no. the premise of course is charges great about this committee conservative groups. are they not? >> the underlying concern and need for the investigation -- >> came to all of that, fine. so the basis of which attempted and doj investigation found no evidence to suggest any crime. in respect to the commissioner, then his answers cannot be part of a crime if they found no basis for such crime. entities answering to the best of his knowledge and then he

cannot be, maybe bad behavior but he cannot be attributed to an impeachable offense. let me also raised thi this question. spent i would disagree with that by the way. >> that's why we have that right to disagree. and this is the impeachment committee. mr. issa asked if -- hundreds and hundreds of times. you suggest. that turns out to be untrue, have you given yourself a false testimony and should you be removed from office? >> well, i hope i've given everything as i could but if i find there is something inaccurate, i have the duty and obligation to fully as possible to correct the record. and in this case, mr. koskinen, he still stands but all the statements i showed you. he doesn't believe he is making the statements today. i think that's the difference. spent i respect your work or i respect you and i respect mr. desantis is will i do want to see any single group, conservative or otherwise, we discriminate against. as we review these materials i

believe even though this is not an impeachment proceedings there is no impeachable offenses as we defined in, but i would also say that the irs commissioner, there is no definitive proof about him of being connected to the underlying premise, and to the best of his ability, all the material that we have, including even though the doj at that -- suggest he answered as effectively truthfully as he can spin with the gentlelady yield? >> be happy to yield spent in the time, the gentlelady is recognize an additional minute spent i think bobby. in the case of the scooter libby conviction, my understand is he gave alleged to have given a truthful statement about what ultimate was determined not to be a crime. he had no part in revealing the

valerie plame identity, and yet he still wasn't disbarred and criminally indicted. by understanding is false testimony our dereliction of duty is still impeachable whether or not the justice department determined there was a crime. i think mr. conyers would confirm, i don't believe that's a question before us as to the commissioners possibility of being found to have failed to meet his obligations, which is the allegation that underlies the chairman. i yield back. >> if i may just any moment time left over, scooter libby a personal knowledge of the facts, underlining factor this was the fact i was making giunta cme group year including a 10 minute presentation this just that commissioner koskinen had any personal knowledge of the facts and the occurrences. to the best of his ability and the commissioner he directed 160,000 hours, $20 million could

not find or pursue what he could find and represented that he presented what he could find, and previously the doj and the treasury inspector general found nothing to send the irs was discriminate against conservative groups and liberal groups. i stand with the president which says if it -- >> time of the javaone has expired. >> is not impeachable at this time. i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from ottawa. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i thank the witnesses for not only their testimony which are deep and legit do effort here on this and also chairman issa and leading on this. this goes so deep as i listen to this testimony today, and tried to make sense of this time of the i want to back up a little bit and ask you, chairman chaffetz, what will the first date of the public be aware are you became aware there was a problem with the irs potentially targeting conservative

organizations. >> i think that goes back to 2011 ever recall dave camp in the ways and means committee. that being the first formal with this letter to the irs. it must've been in the public eye prior to that. we are working with the tape probably ahead of that period of time? >> i don't recall when the first complaints started coming but there were groups that were complaining the applications were being held for unknown reasons. >> this was under the irs commissioner doug shulman? >> there have been a couple of different irs commissioners during this process. >> i've returned to this, that tapes were destroyed and we know the exact date they were destroyed speak with yes, we do. i believe it was march 4 if i recall, 2014 spent march 4, 2014. if we know the exact date to know the name of the individual that physically destroyed in? >> inspector general did interviews of people who work there. i don't have and at my fingertips that it is i believe in the tigta report.

i would have to confirm that but we are relying on the inspector general who interviewed these people. >> but we think we do know that in the individual to the inspector general knows the name of the individual. we just any knowledge as to whether commissioner koskinen had confided that individual to ascertain the truth as you would if you were a manager? >> i believe the inspector general testified, as i recall, that they found no evidence that there was any attempt or communication with them to confirm the existence of these tapes. and again in the inspector general found that in 15 days. >> so we are dealing with, among other allegations here, perjury and obstruction of justice. i would ask if you speculated as to why one would leave

themselves more liberal for such charges? what could be let's say more imposing than such charges? and either witness i would be happy to hear. >> it's hard to understand nor can i definitely identify the motives. but i also think there's an underlying belief, executive branch, that the legislative branch isn't going to stand up for itself. i think that permeates far beyond this. i think they know they can run out the clock. they can provide or not provide and just ignore. for this hearing today, the irs commissioner was invited to testify, and he just said no. >> i just illegal be completely possible to impeach him without inviting him back again and i would just encourage that. if we were to invite himself we should consider his request. mr. desantis, do you have something to add to this? >> i just think it's a frustrating because if a

taxpayer treated the irs the way the irs has created the congress, that just wouldn't fly. i think we all know that. you can talk to people about dealings with the irs in the private sector, and they laughed when you say, you just destroyed, let evidence to be destroyed in the subject of a somewhat. what if he made false statements? is not find what would've to ask you to do something and decided not to do with? i get to find somebody who thinks that would be acceptable. >> i think there's another point here i think it is the must've been a motive. if the irs comes to me at and says that they have my documents and i'm going to provide and because it's easy to do so that it is to face the wrath of the irs, as each of you testified. but when you're avoided to clean up the agency a diet that's as their commission you know there's a problem you have inherited. there's 24,000 missing e-mails in that. is it possible that those e-mails could trace back to the

highest reaches of government at the most famous address in the united states of america perhaps? >> i see no evidence of that, but i will tell you that you look at what happened with lois lerner. she pled the fifth. that's her constitutional right and i respected that, but you can also see correspondence what was quote-unquote perfect that they couldn't search her text messages. within days of the dave camp letter going to the irs, or hard drive crash. i mean, what a coincidence. but i see no direct evidence that i can point to, nor is it central to the impeachment resolution which goes directly to what mr. koskinen did and did not do under a subpoena, and his testimony before congress. >> in brief conclusion, what the statute of limitations on these charges that have been chronicled your? >> i have no idea.

>> thank you, witnesses. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i found the video to be very artistic and -- >> well, thank you. i take that as a huge couple that. our staff will be pleased to be that. >> i would say it was professionally produced. what stafford wasn't that was responsible for the production of this video -- staffer speak with i will ge give you the nams but we have a number of people on our staff. you come with me and osha and i'll introduce you. >> who was primarily responsible for the production of that video? >> well, rebecca edgar is the head of the communications group. we have in j. hinshaw was very and vulgar with alex, action to a number of people. viaduct with this -- might have

to disengage what i will block it back to introduce you to them. >> all of those people are on congressional staff speak up if the question is did we produce it internally yes. >> no. my question is all the people who you just named on congressional staff speak with yes. >> and they were the ones responsible? >> yes. i believe there is one person who no longer works for congress. >> to anybody who worked on that video was not a member of congressional staff? >> i don't believe so. the voiceover was alex, and i'll introduce her u2 or if you would like. >> okay. now, was that congressional, was that video produced by those congressional employees while they were on congressional time speak was yes, absolutely. >> was any of it produced outside of congressional time?

>> i don't believe so. >> and what equipment was used to produce that video speak with we have a lot of apple products and i can show them to you. i can't name them on the top of my head. .. >> that is on congressional social media. >> i would like to get it out there. go to oversight.house.gov and you can see it your self. >> has the video under the direction of congressional

employees ever been used for a non-congressional purpose to your knowledge? >> i couldn't testify about that. wanted is in the public and on the website there are untold number of people who can cite that link. >> was any of the footage that was edited and used in this production derived from congressional sources? or was it solely noncongressional sources? >> there are clips at the beginning of the news media. >> obviously not congressional video. but were there any video that was used, and eclipse of

congressional video that was used in production of this video we saw today. >> i would have to look. there are a lot of clips but we have to look. >> let me ask this question. the senate finance committee investigated this irs issue, correct? >> yes. >> the treasury inspector general, treasury department inspector general also investigated, isn't that >> let me amend the previous answer and tell you what we looked at was what mister koskinen did and did not know. if you want clarity i will give it to you. >> i just want you to answer the question. the fact that doj, the promise of justice investigated this irs issue. yes or no?

>> there are two parts to that. >> you don't want to answer my question? >> i do, i want to give you a complete answer. >> the doj and inspector general come all three investigated the so-called scandal involving the irs? >> that is not true. >> came to the conclusion there was no criminal intent on anyone's part? >> mister chairman -- >> the chairman is over his time. >> the gentleman has expired. >> i ask the chairman one additional minute to finish eliciting responses to the questions i asked. >> will you let him answer? >> i want him to answer the question i asked. >> let him talk. >> the gentleman is recognized with the understanding the gentleman will yield to the witness so they can answer the

question. >> i will restate my question, thank you, mister chairman. isn't it a fact that the senate finance committee, the department of justice and treasury inspector general all investigate alleged irs scandal that is the subject of this hearing today, and each one of those entities found that there is no evidence whatsoever that anyone acted with criminal intent? isn't that a fact? >> no. what the senate finance committee said there was, quote, bipartisan agreement that the irs showed a lack of candor give me time to answer that question. >> it requires a yes or no. >> it requires a complete answer because you are conflating two issues. one issue was investigation into

lois lerner and her actions. this impeachment resolution we have put forward deals with mister koskinen and his actions, his ability to tell the truth and how he misled congress. that is not something the fbi looked at. in fact it would be duly noted that the fbi never interviewed mister koskinen. you said the department of justice i believe. they are part of the department of justice. >> this is important since the internal revenue service is the only entity of which i am aware in the federal government that can ignore the constitution as part of its job. no one else gets to ignore the constitution but they can take people's money without due

process, they can take their property, they can move in and destroy a business that took a lifetime to build and they have done that. it is particularly important that the agents that work for such an agency, that can ignore the constitution must itself be completely overwhelmed with integrity. and what we have seen is not the case. i know and have known irs agents who were as fine and honest people as walked the earth. i heard from irs agents who have been furious privately to see the kind of corruption and dishonesty that overwhelmed the top of the internal revenue service because as one told me which she just filed an amended tax return because she forgot

$600 even though she still had a refund coming back she was called in and was going to be fired because irs agents have to be so above board that their integrity can never be questions until you get to the supervisors and above and that is where the rot is occurring and the stink is getting overwhelming. one of the judges in texas, federal judge william justice, did legislate from the bench, was wrong, but that man had such an incredible sense of integrity, had he been listening to commissioner koskinen, the man would have spent time in jail before he finished his testimony. he had no use for people that would coming and obfuscate as this man has done. back under the bush administration, if this committee, we had an attorney general come in here and under

questioning about national security letters he testified from the very table our witnesses are sitting at that there were no known abuses of the national security letter. they were something like the irs might use demanding production of documents without going through a judge. he testified similarly in front of chuck schumer's committee and then it was later found and i watched a replay of the testimony late one night where he testified it turns out that he had an ig report on his desk three month before he testified before the senate that indicated there were thousands of abuses in the national security letter and he didn't know that and under very tough questioning from senator schumer, it was on

my desk for three days but i never looked at it so i didn't know. i was so outraged at the lack of integrity or the incompetence, whichever, of something that important, and he cannot be defended by republicans again. and to all my colleagues across the aisle, is where is the democrat with the righteous indignation, or this kind of obfuscation and dishonesty that will call the white house and say as i did of an attorney general, this man has to go and within a month that attorney general was gone. i would love to see the democrat that still has that kind of righteous indignation stand up and call it as it is without

regard to parties. i yield back. >> the chair recognizes -- the gentlewoman. >> the house's time would be better stemmons continuing to investigate irs treatment of organizations seeking tax-exempt status as opposed to grandstanding on impeachment. let's remember this is an impeachment hearing. i agree with a colleague from louisiana, you can think what you like about commissioner koskinen but what we are doing today, there is nothing to bring truth to light except maybe show the record our witnesses have presented has presented us. i think senator hatch summed it up well. he said, quote, we can have our disagreements with him but that doesn't mean there is an

impeachable offense. the irs actually does have significant issues, substantiated ones the congress should be talking about. i regularly hear from constituents worried about identity theft after their data the irs compromised. others find it infuriating that they have to pay money to an expert to file their taxes because the tax code is so complicated. even worse constituents who can't even get through to the irs by phone through filing season because the agency has become so underfunded it can barely serve american taxpayers. if we really want to improve government accountability and efficiency for the benefit of the american people, let's start talking about getting our constituents a good return on their investment, let's commit in earnest to solving some of these issues and stop wasting time on circuses like this. when the vast majority of house and senate, republicans and democrats alike can agree the

evidence to support impeaching commissioner koskinen is not there, i think it is time to move on from these games and do some real work. i yield back. >> the chair think the gentlewoman and recognizes the gentleman from ohio for five minutes. >> i think chairman goodlatte for having this hearing, john koskinen had several hearings, he had a duty to preserve documents under subpoena, to produce those documents that were under subpoena, a duty to disclose to congress if he couldn't preserve and produce those documents that were under subpoena, he had a duty to do that in a timely fashion. he had a duty to testify accurately, he had a duty to correct the record if in fact he testified in an inaccurate fashion. he preached every single duty he had and that is what we have outlined here this morning. no wonder the guy didn't show

up. if i had that kind of record i don't think i would show up either. never forget what happened here. the internal revenue service and the power it has over american citizens lives, systematically targeted fellow citizens for their political beliefs, they did it for sustained period of time and they got caught. when they got caught they do what a lot of people do when they get caught, they lied about it. remember may 10th, three years ago this month, lois lerner, bar association speech here in town trying to get ahead of the story, before releasing the first report, not the one we are talking about today but the first report to get ahead of the story, the central figure out a bar association meeting has a friend, lois lerner says what? was it me? was it washington? it was those folks in cincinnati, complete lie. 12 days later, may 22nd, she takes the fifth. interestingly enough, the irs

told themselves -- lois lerner has taken the fifth, the irs is preserve all documents, may 22nd of 2013. when the central figure lies and takes the fifth it sort of puts the premium on getting the documents and information and all her communication. so that comes in mister koskinen. when he is hired, when he is confirmed, the president said we need, quote, new leadership to restore confidence going forward. that is what he was brought in to do and i would argue based on the duties he had he has done anything but restore confidence. under his watch we learned from the testimony from mister chaffetz what happened, he allowed 422 backup tapes to be destroyed. when he learns about it he waits four month before he tells us to do an investigation, he doesn't

even check on any other backup tapes that exist. we find out there are 700 others that weren't destroyed that could have helped us. he didn't even check that some of these had been destroyed. which leads to the one question i have and i think the chairman for this hearing and the second hearing is coming. mister koskinen -- is the standard, in your judgment, for impeachment, a criminal intent standard? >> no. that is pretty clear if you look at alexander hamilton, he said impeachment is about violation of public trust and those offenses are inherently political as they relate more to injuries done to the society and the way the government works and joseph's story on the constitution several decades later said that these need to be thought of as political offenses growing out of misconduct or gross negligence and other disregard for public interests and he said they must be

examined by comprehensive principles of public policy and duty. >> gross negligence, dereliction of duty, breach of public trust? >> sure. >> mister chaffetz, you think mister koskinen did this in gross negligence and his conduct over the last several months in trying to help us get to the bottom of this? >> absolutely. i think there is dereliction of duty. seems to be a demolition of duty when you wait four month to tell congress, his chief counsel new in february 2014 that there were problems, he doesn't tell us until june. his chief lawyer new, he waits four month and the reason he waited four month was because he was doing his due diligence to make sure that actually happened, part of that due diligence wasn't even checking to see if there were backup tapes available. i think that is dereliction of duty and when you look at this, breach of public trust, oh my goodness, we heard democrats

talk about problems with the irs, the tax gap is $385 billion, their fundamental duties to collect revenue due to federal treasury and they can't fulfill that but they have time to target people and destroy backup tapes in the course of an investigation. for goodness sake this is breach of public trust, dereliction of duty and negligence in a gross form. i want to thank you for this first hearing and look forward to the second one where we have some experts come in and talk about the standard to get rid of someone who conducted himself the way mister koskinen has but i look forward to the next hearing. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york, mister jeffries for five minutes. >> i had the opportunity to serve in congress for 3-halfmac years -- 31/2 years and the greatest dereliction of duty, gross negligence, breach of public trust was when members of

his body in october 2013 decided for purely political reasons that you were going to shutdown the government for 16 days and cost the economy $24 billion in lost economic activity and yet we have to sit here at this hearing and be lectured about alleged gross negligence and breach of trust. people need to look at their own conduct, their own behavior and how that impacted the american people and their bottom line rather than subject us to this taxpayer-funded fishing expedition because there is an addiction that some have, not just the distance chairman sitting before us right now, there is an addiction some have in this body to impeachment. let me ask a question. do you think president barack obama has committed impeachable offense during his 7 years?

>> i never argued that. it is irrelevant. i think the irs within the context of the irs we are focusing on. >> the chairman of the senate finance committee, orin hatch, is that correct? >> yes. >> he has jurisdiction over the irs as chairman of the finance committee? >> yes. >> he is a well-respected member of congress? >> yes. >> man of integrity? >> yes. >> he stated we can have our disagreements with him, meaning the irs commissioner but that doesn't make it and impeachable offense. is that correct? >> i think what senator hatch and the senate finance committee may you looking at may be different than what we are looking at. many of these statements i believe were false and misleading happened in the house of representatives. i would also note that the senate finance committee came to a conclusion the, quote, bipartisan agreement that the

irs showed lack of candor. the essence of this controversy as i understand it relates to possible destruction of documents. do you believe that destruction was intentional? or was it in -- incompetence? >> the irs would argue it is accidental and let's take their word for it for a moment. that is not acceptable. there is a duly issued subpoena they have a legal obligation to protect and preserve and they did not do that. in terms of what the irs may have said, let's put that to the side for a second. j russell george is treasury department inspector general. is the correct? >> yes. >> man of integrity? >> i believe so. >> well respected? >> yes. >> bush appointee. >> i think originally. he worked previously for the oversight government reform committee at one point. >> republican appointee.

did the report that he issued uncover any evidence of intentional destruction of evidence by the irs? >> i was careful in my comment to separate out what happened with lois lerner in the email and actions by mister koskinen himself. the inspector general did not look and investigate what mister koskinen, the totality of the resolution. >> the inspector general's report concluded, quote, the investigation did not uncover evidence that the irs and its employees perfectly -- purposefully erase the tape to conceal responsive emails from the congress or the inspector general. is that correct? that finding in the report? >> i believe you stated that

accurately. >> what i'm trying to understand, we are here considering an impeachment proceeding, perhaps the most severe remedy available to congress as it relates to a separate but coequal branch of government, where a republican appointed inspector general concluded that the underlying act that we should all be concerned about was accidental, not intentional, but we then have a theory that even though the republican appointed inspector general concluded that the underlying act, if anything, was based on incompetence, not intentional, that the irs commissioner subsequently came before congress to conceal something that itself while incompetent, wasn't criminal

according to the republican appointed inspector general. i just think this is, respectfully, a remedy in search of a problem, and we have better things we could be doing with our taxpayer dollars to put the american people in a better place in terms of their quality of life. i yield back. >> can i return to that? >> the gentleman's time has expired but witnesses can respond briefly. >> first question is did they destroy documents that were under subpoena and the answer is clearly yes. whether you believe that was an accident or intentional, that really will be for the next hearing we have next month about what is the standard for impeachment. i don't believe you have to improve intent to get there. 60,000 people, constituents of yours and mine and others that will get a subpoena and summons from the irs, is it good enough to say i had those documents and

by golly it was an accident, i destroyed them all, you think that is going to fly? heck no, no way. .. and i could go on. >> the chair thanks the gentleman and recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. >> thank you, chairman. lets me read you a summary that was put together concerning the method by which we could address these matters, not only together , but from a criminal standpoint.

through separation of powers, principal and structure, congress has no direct role in mom for smit or triggering or initiating the appointment of any prosecutor for a particular matter. commerce has a legislative role in designing statutory mechanism for the appointment of independent counsels or special prosecutors as it did in title vi of the ethics in government act of 1978. under the provisions of that law relating to the employment of independent counsel called special prosecutors until 1983, the attorney general was directed to petition a special three-judge panel of the us court of appeals to name an independent counsel upon the receipt of credible allegation, which we have here of criminal misconduct by certain high level personnel in the executive branch of the federal government prosecution by the administration might give rise

to an appearance of conflict of interest. 1999, congress in its infinite wisdom allow the independent counsel revision law to expire. upon the expiration of the law, in june of 1999, no new independent counsel or special prosecutors may be appointed by a three-judge panel on the application of the attorney general. the attorney general retains the general authority to designate or name individuals of a special counsel to conduct investigations of prosecutions of particular matters or individuals on behalf of the united states. as a result, as a result as what has taken place with the irs and how untruthful they have been i am personally moving forward to draw up legislation that reenacts title vi of the ethics in government act of 19784 independent counsel to be appointed to investigate these

matters so justice can be served and i yield back. >> the chair thinks the doman and recognizes the gentleman from rhode island for five minutes. >> before i begin i want to stress that i have a great deal of respect for the two members before the committee today. i have been fortunate to have worked with both of them on legislation and recognize the sincerity of their views. however, i must disagree with the conclusions they have done today before this committee. my friend and colleague, chairman chaffetz has called that in speech and of commissioner john koskinen and yet said he produced himself before congressional committee and failed to provide oversight to the irs. the treasury inspector general for tax administration and finance committee and the department of justice, however, have conducted their own investigation into the so-called irs targeting scandal and while these investigations uncovered management problems with the irs , there was no evidence to

support evidence of politically motivated behavior and no evidence to support evidence that commissioner john koskinen misled congress or attempted to obstruct the committee. beach of these investigations are no evidence whatsoever that the commissioner had acted in bad faith. under his direction the irs spent $20 million and has devoted more than 160,000 hours to collect, review and produce 1.3 million pages of documents to investigated committees including over 70000 e-mails sent or received by lois lerner including over 24000 e-mails that were affected by ms. lerner's hard drive crash. hard to challenge this as an attempt to stonewall-- sorry, hard to characterize it as an attempt to stonewall-- stonewall a congressional investigation. the overall record of multiple investigations failed to support the allegations leveled in this hearing and i regret we are not

addressing many of the issues that the irs that were raised by the gentle lady from washington that would have a real impact on the services provided to our constituents and i also regret there was no time today to hold a hearing on criminal justice reform, gun violence prevention, legislation to protect intellectual property rights of artists and musicians or comprehensive immigration reform and with that, i yield back. >> chair thinks the gentleman and recognizes the gentleman from south carolina four, five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i was thinking to myself as the chairman was talking about the chronology of this investigation as these two witnesses well-- well know that there were about a half-dozen defenses offered by the irs throughout the course of this investigation on issue of which collapsed under its own illogic. to begin with the two people in ohio that were blamed and then it went to my personal favorite

defense, which was that the irs was too incompetent to be able to construct a scheme as sophisticated as this game was and then they moved from that defense to that, yeah, but we also targeted progressives, so at least we were equal in our discrimination and then my favorite, the one they settled on towards the end was yeah, but the president himself did not personally approve this targeting scheme, therefore, you need to look at it-- you don't need to look at it anymore or end of the next hearing is about the process-- due process was mentioned in the opening statement that he did give to us in the next hearing is about what process is due, the procedural part of the process whereas this one is more of the substantive part of the due process analysis and i am interested as other members are of what elements need to be proven, what is the standard of proof. is a clear convincing evidence?

is it preponderance or beyond a reasonable doubt? does anyone know? do the rules of evidence apply? can you use hearsay? so, i'm interested in that, but chairman chaffetz, he said something that i wrote down, which doesn't happen very often, but it did happen today, which is that impeachment is a penalty, a punishment and you are exactly right, it is it's a punishment. what congress really wants is access to the documents and witnesses. because that is the lifeblood of any investigation. you cannot conduct an investigation if you don't have access to the documents and the witnesses. we know that. unfortunately, those who seek to not be investigated also know that. so, until this body begins to incrementally assert itself with impeachment acknowledge being the ultimate emily, by the way,

i would venture since i have two experts or one for sure expert in front of me and the chairman of oversight, did i hear correctly that incompetence is not an impeachable offense because i was believed that malfeasance in office or the failure to perform the duties of your office could be unimpeachable defense. is that your understanding as well? >> it could be a factor, yes. >> so, how could incompetence be a defense when the allegation is incompetence? if that's what we are alleging a minute doesn't have to be a crime is the notion you can only a peach someone who commits an actual violation of the criminal code is nonsense. there are lots of ways to screw up in your job that don't rise to the level of meeting the us criminal code. so, the notion, if i have it correctly, that incompetence is an offense to it all gay she and

two-- to be an incompetent it's hard for me to get my head around. let me ask you this, either chairman de santis or chairman chaffetz. mr. koskinen said every e-mail is preserved. is that true or false? >> false. >> so that is whether or not it would be intentionally false, negligibly balls whether or not he had a duty to investigate or did not perform that duty, guess that is what we want to investigate; right? at the falsity, but the nature of the false. >> yes, and you are a prosecutor in these aren't criminal offenses, but you remember 18 usc 1001, a reckless disregard for whether a statement is or a conscience effort to avoid learning the truth if a statement can be construed as making a knowingly false statement and so we are in a situation here where i to best he just simply refused to avail himself of the proper facts and

came to congress and testified under a and made his statement that is factually incorrect. >> i also have a no, backup tapes from 2011 no longer exist. was that true or false? >> that is true. now, they went back and were able to find some, but somewhere as they call it the god. >> so it would be false to say it no longer is this because clearly-- it exist because someone went and found them. >> it is how you define it, but someone went through the process >> you are losing. >> exactly, but that was their defense. >> i mean, they destroyed a lot of tapes obviously, but then there were other tapes that the inspector general just went after the commission made the statement are they hopped in their car went to west virginia and asked or tate's and found a bunch of tapes and i think there are 1000 unique e-mails they were able to find off of those tapes also when the commissioner

said there were no backup tapes at the time he said that, that was false. >> i'm looking forward to the next battle because i'm interested in hearing how incompetence and be a defense to an allegation of incompetence and i think you would be a law professors that will have to explain that went to us. >> the chair thinks the gentleman and recognizes the dome and from texas four, five minutes. >> thank you for being here. one of these incidences with the irs includes a group of folks in texas, catherine engelbrecht-- you all know her and put it back into record and in july of 2010 they filed for an irs non- profit status. in december, 2010, the fbi domestic terrorism unit inquired about one of the teachings.

they came back in january, of 2011, the fbi and all of a sudden having never been audited by the irs ever the catherine engelbrecht and their personal finances were audited by the irs from 2008, 2009 through the vote in march of 2011, irs questioned about the non- introduced-- excuse me, questions on nonprofit applications. once again in may 2011, the fbi shows up at one of their meetings. october, 2011, once again the irs sends more questions, second round and the some of questions were including where have you spoken, who did you speak to, what are the lists of the people who were there, what did you say and do give us a copy of this speech and all of your future

speeches. irs inquiry. then, june 2011, once again fbi inquiry. november, december, fbi inquiry and once again true to vote had more questions. third round from the irs, king street patriots had more questions from the irs about the application and then all of a sudden february, 2012, the bureau of alcohol tobacco and firearms shows up to investigate this organization and then july, 2012, osha shows up to investigate their nonprofit request and then the texas commission on environmental quality showed up in november, 2012, and once again fourth round of questions from the irs, march, 2013, more questions from the irs and once again april, 2013, bureau of alcohol, tobacco

and firearms shows up again, so we have the fbi, osha, even the harris county terrorism task force-- fourth showed up to investigate these folks. all they're looking for our whether or not they can get an exception from the irs. now, to me this appears to be an abuse of the irs working with other government agencies about this one issue of whether they should get tax exempt status. political, political persecution by the irs and as you mentioned in your opening statements, the irs knows how to get things done by their subpoena and their requests for information that they turn out-- i apologize to the chairman. that's my mother-in-law calling. she has her own ring. [laughter] >> they have ways of getting you

to get out there and get this information. they show up all these different times trying to get information. to your knowledge, either one of you, has the irs, any agent, any person then held accountable for the abuse of power that they used against this one a citizen back in texas? >> no, i'm not aware of any. >> mr. de santis. >> no seam at the accusations against the irs and there have been numerous, you all have done all the investigation of these different organizations who have been trying to get tax exempt status. the abuses that have occurred or the alleged abuses that have occurred, has anyone in the irs been fired? >> no, mr. koskinen stands by all of statements even to this day and claims it was an accident, but no one was dismissed, reprimanded, moved.

i'm not aware of anyone having any consequence and the gal can back and studied it later and found the situation is dire, bad and still available for targeting. >> even lois lerner retired with full pension even though she had been held in contempt of congress. >> no one has gone to jail. >> no. >> and yada federal judge, what three months ago make the comment that the dc circuit court judge here in washington made the comment that the irs cannot be trusted. are you all familiar with that statement by the federal judge? >> yes. >> i'm not a time, mr. chairman and i yield back. >> that's-- i send the regards to the chairman's mother-in-law and i recognize the other gentleman from texas. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i sometimes ask myself what i'm doing here in congress. i get frustrated and sometimes depressed, sometimes angry

because i don't like the way things are going in washington dc. we pass hundreds of bills just to see them die in the senate. the good stuff that does pass the senate probably gets a vetoed by the president. the president regularly bypasses congress, which what i consider to be illegal and unconstitutional executive orders. am i wasting my time being here? but, what pulls me through this is remembering that we are the elected representatives of the people of the united states and the people of the united states want us to do something. they are mad. they are angry. they don't like gridlock in washington dc. they don't like a big intrusive government. they don't like the high taxes that they have to pay and you know what i think they like the least, being lied to by their elected representatives, whether it's the president if you like your health insurance you can keep it or his appointees like

mr. koskinen. we've got to take a stand and say we are not going to be lied to in congress. you know, in texas there is an anti- litter campaign that says don't mess with texas and it has become an unofficial motto of texas. we need to reclaim some of our constitutional authority and people need to think, don't mess with congress. when you're called to testify before a committee of congress or whether you are subpoenaed to produce documents you should do so promptly and you should do so truthfully. i see an alarming trend. i think that administration and their officials have learned that you announced your kate and delay and maybe the new cycle of forget it and it will go away, but that is not the way it is supposed to work. that is not the way our founding fathers intended it. that's not the way the people who sent me to washington dc

want to see it happen. they want us to do our job. they want us to hold the government accountable. chairman chaffetz, you chair the government-- government oversight and reform committee, are you seeing the same pattern? >> im and i think you hit the nail on the head. i know you are passionate about these issues and that is in part why i can to compass as well. the administration knows a candlelight and we can't let them get away with that and it's a principle that should reach you on both sides of the aisle. this is not a bipartisan issue. shouldn't be. >> we saw with eric holder. we saw it with fast and furious and with hillary clinton's e-mails. it goes on and on and this is our opportunity to take a stand. i'm a cosponsor of your appeasement legislation on mr. koskinen. do you think that proceeding with this will send a message to the administration and that off

of that soup of executive branch agencies, don't mess with congress? >> i do. i believe that a cost-- of the constitution is an inspired document and our founders but this mechanism in place specifically on the officers. we studied this and determined if you are confirmed by the senate, the code equal host vote to go into that highest of government, impeachment is a process by which we can extract that person if they are not the best interest of the united states of america. >> i am also looking forward to hearing from the law professors because my recollection from my constitutional law studies in san antonio, texas, was the impeachment clause means high crimes and misdemeanors and congress decides what those are. >> exactly. >> i think this is our opportunity to reassert our authority and our oversight prerogative and i think it's critical to maintaining the republic that the government

officials who are paid by the taxpayers answer truthfully and promptly the taxpayers rosett-- representative. >> with the gentleman yield? >> yes. >> with the remaining time there is been allowed to set by the gentleman on the other side of the aisle about how the department of justice has found no crime, no wrongdoing, no targeting. mr. chairman, you continued where i left off on the committee. do you find that to be inaccurate? in other words, is it fair to say that the department justice failure to see what you see so clearly as continued targeting, is in fact part of a cover-up that continues today? they are not seeing what is in plain sight is part of the reason you are here. >> potentially one of the things i'm concerned about is that the fbi never interviewed mr. koskinen and i would question the thoroughness in which they

came to these conclusions. >> i think that john and for yielding. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from idaho. >> thank you, mr. chairman. this investigation, i think, has yielded interesting results. i want to first start by thanking mr. i sat on all of his work on this committee and also want to thank mr. chaffetz for continuing this investigation and getting us to this point. as i review the evidence, the similarities between this and watergate are staggering. i apologize and read-- i will be the second person to use wikipedia. the term watergate has come to encompass an array of clandestine line and often illegal activity undertaken by members of the nixon administration. those activities include dirty traits such as bug in the offices of political opponents and people of whom nixon or his

officials were suspicious. nixon and his close aides order harassments of activist groups and political figures using the federal bureau of investigation, the cia and the irs. in july, 1973, evidence mounted against the president's staff including testimony provided by former staff members in an investigation conducted by the senate watergate committee. the investigation revealed that president nixon had a tape recording system in his office and that he had recorded many conversations. after a protracted series of bitter court battles the us supreme court unanimously ruled that the president was obligated to release the tapes to government investigators and he eventually complied. these audio recordings have implicated the president and this is the key, revealing he

had attempted to cover up-- not that he had participated in the crime, but that he had attempted to cover up activities that took place after the break-in and to federal investigation officials to deflect the investigation. as i listen to the testimony and all of the evidence, there is such an eerie similarity to watergate. we had government officials that were persecuting their political enemies who were going after them using the irs and other agencies. the difference is that unlike watergate we have lost the tape. we cannot prosecute these people cousin they destroy the evidence as far as we know and as the evidence shows and as history shows, watergate did not include any destruction of evidence. they tried to hide the evidence, but they did not sit-- destroyed because the supreme court was able to figure out and was able to tell the nixon administration to the bring this evidence

forward. i want to focus on the e-mails today, which to me are like the nixon tapes. much like the 18 and a half minute gaps of the nixon tapes, the sheer convenience of a hard drive crash of multiple other high-level officials experience a system crashes and the subsequent erasing of backup data is highly disturbing. as many of these e-mails were subject to congressional subpoena, the potential of a true cover-up and of the undermining of democracy and of the democratic process becomes even more apparent in what we are talking about today. this committee, in my opinion, has the critical responsibility and i hope members from both sides of the aisle will give this matter the attention it deserves and it saddens me that there is only one democrat right now on the other side. the reason we got to the bottom of watergate is because republicans and democrats decided to take the investigation seriously. lois lerner's hard drive crash

in june of 2011, as you indicated eight days after the letter asking for the information. reports of the investigation from 213, 2014, included a tracking of the crash hard drive and the procedures that took place. do you believe that the irs followed the appropriate-- proper protocols when addressing this crash hard drive in 2011? >> no, i don't believe they did. >> that investigation identified six possible sources that could recover the missing e-mails. to your knowledge of following receipt of the subpoena for the e-mails, how many of these sources were identified and examine i'd in an effort to supply-- comply with e-mail claimant five of the six were not sought nor investigated. >> is there evidence in your commit-- opinion to suggest that the destruction of these tapes were part of a concerted effort to not comply?

>> i want to be careful not to overstep. we see nothing that implies direct intent and i want to be very careful with that, but the irs will call it an accident. but, again as i have said many times before, they had a legal duty to preserve, protect, find, seek and present those to the united states congress and to that they did not do it. >> they call it an accident and i call it a series of unfortunate coincidences and i think it's outrageous or anyone to think this is a coincident and to borrow for moderate, i would like a better understanding and i hope we can get to the bottom of this of what mr. koskinen new and when he knew it and i think that's what this committee has a duty to find out. >> i do hope that people on both sides of the aisle will just look strict with the facts. did they or did they not destroy the evidence? they did.

did they are did they not provide false testimonies and immensely congress? yes, they did. when they knew it was wrong did they come back to congress and correct it? no, they did not. there is a series in a pattern here that is not merely an accident. it goes beyond that and whether it's a democrat or republican, whether it's a democratic administration are republican administration, it should not matter. you cannot destroy evidence. that is under a duly issued subpoena and there should be a consequence to that and then you cannot come to congress and lie about it, which is clearly what happened. >> i yield back my time. >> the chair recognizes the chairman from-- german from arizona. >> mr. chairman, there has been so much very powerful and insightful testimony here today and my purpose here is to try, given the fact we are coming down towards the end of this hearing and try to bring us back to--

>> we are going to lead the last two minutes of this hearing for lives in a coverage. a reminder you can see this event and any c-span program online anytime at c-span.org. as mentioned, the u.s. senate is about to gavel into start the day. first up, final debate on a bill regarding federally inspections. a vote on that measure is expected at 11:00 a.m. eastern. also, at 11:00 a.m., a vote to advance the 2017 defense program bill. now, lie to the senate floor on c-span 2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain dr. barry black will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. o god, who renews our strength and guides us along right paths, we honor your name. we do not fear