Americans who received a stimulus check from the federal government also are getting something else in the mail: a letter from President Donald Trump.

A one-page letter from Trump started arriving over the weekend in the mailboxes of millions of Americans who received stimulus payments of up to $1,200 under a new law designed to help the economy recover from the fallout of the coronavirus pandemic.

Time for a lifeline….

A former taxpayer advocate at the Internal Revenue Service called the letter “unbelievable” and said it makes the agency “look like it is the handmaiden of one administration and one party.”
— USA Today, 4/29/20

Take a look at the letter sent from the White House, signed by the sitting President of the United States; the same president who signed the CARES Act authorizing payments sent directly to Americans, and see if you can find the “unbelievable” tone that makes the agency look like “the handmaiden of one administration and one party.”

The president obviously neglected to have the IRS slip in the word “Republican”.

Collins reached out to one person to certify what must have been some nitpick outrage. That person was Nina Olsen.

“This will harm the IRS and its ability to appear nonpolitical and nonpartisan,” said Nina Olson, executive director of the Center for Taxpayer Rights. “If I were there, I would be strongly advocating against this.”

We don’t recall ever hearing Olson publicly excoriate the Obama administration, not only after the revelations of IRS official Lois Lerner’s targeting conservative groups, her lost-and-found 30,000 missing emails or former Obama Commissioner John Koskinen’s obstruction that stunk of monumental cover-up. The response from her “watchdog” agency response (at the time) was rather subdued and in no way reflected the public outrage.

“To promote voluntary compliance with the tax laws, the IRS must be impartial both in fact and in appearance. The revelation that the IRS used ‘tea party’ and similar labels to select tax-exemption applicants for further review, even if intended solely as a workload management tool, has created the appearance that the IRS was not impartial. It is imperative the IRS move quickly to regain the public’s trust and take steps to prevent this kind of incident from happening again.”
— Taxpayer Advocate Service, 2014 Special Report

Ouch.

Seeing how Lerner escaped any kind of real punishment (early retirement doesn’t count), it’s not clear which steps were taken to “regain the public’s trust and take steps to prevent this kind of incident from happening again.”

This whole letter thing appears to be yet another narrative created to poke President Trump and one concurring quote was found.

It remains to be seen when Mr. Collins will find and quote Americans who received a check and letter, ready to go on the record and bitch about receiving much-needed relief.

Many States including NY require the loss of employment, if taking the fifth in regard to such employment. The NY State Constitution says: “providing, that any public officer who, upon being called before a grand jury to testify concerning the conduct of his or her present office or of any public office held by him or her within five years prior to such grand jury call to testify, or the performance of his or her official duties in any such present or prior offices, refuses to sign a waiver of immunity against subsequent criminal prosecution, or to answer any relevant question concerning such matters before such grand jury, shall by virtue of such refusal, be disqualified from holding any other public office or public employment for a period of five years from the date of such refusal to sign a waiver of immunity against subsequent prosecution, or to answer any relevant question concerning such matters before such grand jury, and shall be removed from his or her present office by the appropriate authority or shall forfeit his or her present office at the suit of the attorney-general.”

The Supreme Court said in regard to the Hatch Act: “When actions of civil servants in the judgment of Congress menace the integrity and the competency of the service, legislation to forestall such danger and adequate to maintain its usefulness is required. The Hatch Act is the answer of Congress to this need.” Engaging in partisan political activity as part of Federal Government employment is illegal.

Lois Lerner, the head of the exempt organizations division of the IRS, won’t answer questions about what she knew about the improper screening – or why she didn’t reveal it to Congress, according to a letter from her defense lawyer, William W. Taylor 3rd. Lerner was scheduled to appear before the House Oversight committee Wednesday. But, Committee Chairman Issa said “no”, and a subpoena was issued for Lerner.

Will Obama repeal the above Eisenhower Executive Order or refuse to act on it? Will Obama issue a pardon in advance for Ms. Learner? Should federal government employees avoid oversight by taking the fifth, which was rejected by the Supreme Court? Is not what is constitutionally demanded in NY State and other States and which the federal Executive Branch under Eisenhower approved not required for honest government? Quo vadis, Obama? A Hatch Act prosecution, Holder?

Further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lois_Lerner

http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/14/irs-official-lerner-approved-exemption-for-obama-brothers-charity/