How can the House impeach the IRS chief?

[Drahthaardogs]

Last I checked this was an executive position which Congress has no authority over. Oh they can ensure funds were spent correctly, but how the hell do the Tea baggers think they hold power over an executive branch employee.

Last I checked the power to determine if an executive employee was not doing their job fell to the judicial branch not the legislative.

Is it time for a civics lesson in the House or am I missing something?i

[atreides1]

1. Article II, Section 4

Section 4.

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

An example: In 1876, cabinet officer William W. Belknap (former Secretary of War), resigned before his trial, and was later acquitted.

[Drahthaardogs]

8. Is he an officer or an employee?

Congress cannot impeach an employee. I am tired of them overstepping their bounds

[FBaggins]

11. He is without question an officer

He had to be approved by the Senate

[Drahthaardogs]

13. Then I guess that makes sense.

Butthe House still sucks.

[FBaggins]

14. THIS House indeed "still sucks"

- but we don't interpret Constitutional powers based on who currently holds the office.

The Congress in general (and more relevantly the House in particular) is the branch of government that is most answerable to the people. They should have the power to check the Executive Branch. Everyone within the Executive that has the power to exercise some executive power is essentially an extension of the President... and Congress has the power to remove the President.

They created the position and required that appointments to it be confirmed by the Senate. That puts it firmly within their impeachment powers even by the tightest interpretation of who constitutes an "officer".

[Xithras]

15. Yep. The actual definition lies elsewhere in the Constitution....

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2:

The President...shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law....

Pretty much anyone on that list can be impeached. A civil Officer is typically defined as any appointed government position with the authority to establish policy or treaties. They must be approved by the Senate, and can be recommended for impeachment by the House.

John Koskinen is an appointed Civil Officer who was approved by the Senate in December 2013. They unquestionably have the legal authority to impeach him.

[FBaggins]

2. Congres has SOME authority over ALL executive-branch positions

The House alone, however, doesn't. Impeachment is a Senate power.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

3. Impeachment is the purview of the House. Conviction and removal belongs to the Senate.

[FBaggins]

5. Of course you're correct. I had it exactly backwards

I'll just leave it there (typo and all) for posterity.

The key point, of course, is that the OP is incorrect. Congress certainly has power over the IRS chief.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

17. I understood what you were going for. I just wanted to offer a

clarification before someone charged in to jump your case.

You know how things can be around here, sometimes.

[Drahthaardogs]

9. No they don't. They think they do but executive employees

Are NOT under the purview of Congress

[FBaggins]

10. Repeating a claim doesn't make it more believable.

He is most definitely subject to impeachment. You've been given the relevant constitutional citation.

[Drahthaardogs]

12. GS and SES employees under the executive branxh

Are not under the purview of Congress. If they are not doing their job, a federal judge makes that determination. We do have separation of powers. Cabinet appointments obviously do fall under it.

The question is what about appointees?

[CK_John]

4. The House issues an order of impeachment, The Senate holds the trial.

[etherealtruth]

6. I a wondering how they can impeach for "issues" that occurred prior to his tenure?

[gratuitous]

7. How can they do it? It beats working

I am constantly brought up short by the cognoscenti telling Democrats what to do and what not to do, as if they had some actual insight: e.g., the Democrats should dump their nominee because she got pneumonia. But when Republicans are doing something this completely bogus, nobody in the popular media utters a peep, or questions whether this colossal waste of time and energy (not to mention scant legislative time) is a colossal waste of time and energy.

[barbtries]

16. they're just marking time

doing nothing but fluff and bullshit. they are so hateful.

[farmbo]

18. If he was smart, he would refer tax fraud charges against the Trump Foundation..

... To the Justice Department, ASAP.
The Washington Post article pretty much lays out every single element of the crime. At least four separate charities have said they were scammed in official Foundation tax filings.

That would then become an apparent-- maybe the primary--motivation of the impeachment managers in the House. And it would have the added benefit of possibly shining some cleansing light on this blatant criminal enterprise.

What does he have to loose? He's facing a kangaroo court of showboating teapartiers who's only goal is to smear his agency, his life's work, and to ruin him financially with a frivolous prosecution.