Lois Lerner, the IRS official who oversees the agency’s division in charge of tax-exempt organizations, has been placed on administrative leave, a source told NBC News on Thursday. The IRS has selected Ken Corbin as acting director during Lerner's absence.

Lerner, whose responsibility for the targeting of conservative groups at the IRS has become a point of scrutiny in the controversy, had come under bipartisan fire. Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and John McCain, R-Ariz., wrote acting IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel earlier on Thursday seeking Lerner’s suspension.

Lerner had appeared before a House committee on Wednesday, but invoked her Fifth Amendment rights, and declined to testify. She offered a broad declaration denying any wrongdoing, however, which has prompted some Republicans to conclude she had effectively waived her Fifth Amendment rights. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who heads the oversight panel before which Lerner appeared, suggested Thursday he’ll seek to recall her as a witness.

This story was originally published on Thu May 23, 2013 5:52 PM EDT

President Barack Obama was repeatedly interrupted by a heckler whose taunts slowed the delivery of a major national security speech in the Washington, D.C. area.

The unidentified heckler began shouting at the president toward the tail end of his highly-anticipated address, when he touched upon U.S. policy toward detainees suspected of terrorist acts.

Obama was forced to pause three separate times and talk over the protester, interrupting the flow of the closing section of the speech at National Defense University.

“I'm about to address it ma'am, but you've got to let me speak,” Obama scolded the woman. “Why don't you sit down and let me tell you exactly what I'd do."

The antiwar group Code Pink, which often interrupts high-profile political events with vocal protests against U.S. foreign policy and national security strategy, said its founder Medea Benjamin was the person responsible for the interruption.

Though the president appeared somewhat irritated by the interruption, he said he was willing to cut the woman “some slack, because it’s worth being passionate about.”

He added after another interruption: “The voice of that woman is worth paying attention to. Obviously I do not agree with much of what she said. And obviously she wasn’t listening to me and much of what I said. But these are tough issues, and the suggestion that we can gloss over them is wrong.”

Thursday wasn’t the only instance in which Obama was interrupted during a high-profile speech. During remarks last year about immigration at the White House, a conservative reporter, Neil Munro, heckled the president with a question about the impact of his announcement that day.

This story was originally published on Thu May 23, 2013 3:06 PM EDT

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid indicated Thursday that he may postpone a confrontation with Republicans over stalled nominations until after the Senate considers the bipartisan immigration bill that the Judiciary Committee OK’d Tuesday.

“I am not going to do anything to interfere with the immigration bill,” he said.

At issue was the so-called “nuclear option,” a possible move by Reid and the Democrats to unilaterally curb filibusters by a simple majority vote, instead of by 67 votes as required by Senate rules.

Reid charged at a press conference Thursday that Republican foot-dragging had delayed or blocked confirmation of several key Obama nominees, with Republican senators submitting more than 1,100 written questions to Gina McCarthy, Obama’s choice to head the Environmental Protection Agency.

McCarthy, Labor Secretary nominee Tom Perez, consumer financial watchdog Richard Cordray,  and five nominees to the National Labor Relations Board are awaiting confirmation.

“Presidents need to have the team they want when they want them – and this is not working” Reid said told reporters. “It is time for this gridlock to end – that is my message.” He added, “There are no threats – we simply want the Senate to work the way that it should.” 

He added later, “We’re not threatening anybody with anything.”

But Sen. Charles Schumer, D- N.Y. argued that “the public would be happy to hear that the Senate is changing the way it is doing business. So the other side (the Republicans) must be careful – if they think they can win a debate over whether the Senate should change its rules, they might very well be mistaken.”

In a big victory for Obama, the Senate unanimously voted Thursday to confirm Sri Srinivasan to serve on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Senate Republican Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, R- Ky. indicated Wednesday that Republicans supported Srinivasan, a lawyer who has served in the Solicitor General’s office in both the Bush and Obama administrations, calling him "a nominee we all agree on.... We like him."

Discussing Srinivasan, Schumer smiled as he said to reporters, “We may be seeing him coming before the Senate again soon,” – a reference to speculation that Obama might nominate Srinivasan to the Supreme Court if a vacancy occurs. 

But looming in the weeks ahead is a potentially incendiary standoff over what many Democrats are urging: a change in Senate rules to end filibusters of nominees.

In 2005, Senate Republicans threatened to use the “nuclear option” after Democrats blocked votes on nominees to the federal courts by President George W. Bush. The roles were reversed in 2005 with Democrats supporting filibusters of nominee and Republicans accusing them of obstructionism. Eventually the two sides settled their dispute and allowed several Bush nominees to be confirmed to the federal bench.

Reid reminisced Wednesday about the agreement that Democrats had struck with Republicans on confirming those nominees. He said, “We agreed to put some people on the bench that we have regretted since then -- Janice Rogers Brown, Thomas Griffith, Brett Kavanaugh” – all of whom are judges now serving on the D.C. Circuit appeals court.

This story was originally published on Thu May 23, 2013 1:42 PM EDT

In a major address Thursday President Barack Obama sought to reframe the nation’s counterterrorism strategy, saying, “Our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must continue. But this war, like all wars, must end. That's what history advises. That's what our democracy demands.”

He said in a speech at the National Defense University in Washington, “America is at a crossroads. We must define our effort not as a boundless 'global war on terror' - but rather as a series of persistent, targeted efforts to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America."

In an attempt to define a new post-Sept. 11 era, Obama outlined new guidelines for the use of drones to kill terrorists overseas and pledged a

renewed effort to close the military detention center in Guantanamo Bay.  In the speech, Obama argued that, “In the years to come, not every collection of thugs that labels themselves al Qaida will pose a credible threat to the United States.” He warned that “unless we discipline our thinking and our actions, we may be drawn into more wars we don't need to fight.”

With efforts under way in Congress to redefine the 2001 authorization to use military force (AUMF) against al Qaida, Obama said he would work with Congress “in efforts to refine, and ultimately repeal, the AUMF's mandate. And I will not sign laws designed to expand this mandate further.”

Toward the end of Obama’s address as he discussed the Guantanamo detainees, he was repeatedly interrupted by heckling from Medea Benjamin, founder of the antiwar group Code Pink, whose members have frequently been arrested for disrupting hearings on Capitol Hill – but Obama patiently said that Benjamin’s concerns are “something to be passionate about.”

“We must define the nature and scope of this struggle, or else it will define us, mindful of James Madison's warning that ‘No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.’ Neither I, nor any president, can promise the total defeat of terror,” he declared. 

As part of his redefinition of counterterrorism, the president announced several initiatives:

• Setting narrower parameters for the use of remotely piloted aircraft, or drones, to kill terrorists overseas and to limit collateral casualties;
• Renewing efforts to persuade Congress to agree to close the Guantanamo detention site in Cuba where 110 terrorist suspects are being held;
• Appointing a new envoy at the State Department and an official at the Defense Department who will attempt to negotiate transfers of Guantanamo detainees to other countries. 
• Lifting the moratorium he imposed in 2010 on transferring some detainees at Guantanamo to Yemen. Obama imposed that moratorium after it was revealed that Detroit “underwear bomber” Umar Farouq Abdulmuttalab was trained in Yemen.

Obama argued that when compared to the Sept. 11, 2001 attackers, “the threat today is more diffuse, with Al Qaida's affiliates in the

Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP

President Barack Obama talks about national security, Thursday, May 23, 2013, at the National Defense University at Fort McNair in Washington.

Arabian Peninsula – AQAP – the most active in plotting against our homeland. While none of AQAP's efforts approach the scale of 9/11 they have continued to plot acts of terror, like the attempt to blow up an airplane on Christmas Day in 2009.”

So he said, “As we shape our response, we have to recognize that the scale of this threat closely resembles the types of attacks we faced before 9/11.”

He said that the current threat is often from “deranged or alienated individuals – often U.S. citizens or legal residents – (who) can do enormous damage, particularly when inspired by larger notions of violent jihad. That pull towards extremism appears to have led to the shooting at Fort Hood, and the bombing of the Boston Marathon.”

In discussing his drone strategy he indicated his remorse over the innocent people who had been killed: “it is a hard fact that U.S. strikes have resulted in civilian casualties, a risk that exists in all wars. For the families of those civilians, no words or legal construct can justify their loss. For me, and those in my chain of command, these deaths will haunt us as long as we live, just as we are haunted by the civilian casualties that have occurred through conventional fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq.”

There remains considerable doubt about Obama’s ability to persuade a majority in Congress to change the current law on releasing detainees held there.

Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

Demonstrators stand near a mock drone at the gates of Fort McNair where President Barack Obama will speak at the National Defense University in Washington May 23, 2013.

The defense spending bill which Obama signed into law last year prohibits any transfers to the United States of any detainee at Guantanamo who was held there on or before Jan. 20, 2009, the day Obama became president.

And the law sets a very high legal bar for Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to transfer a detainee to his country of origin or to any other foreign country.

Hagel would need to certify to Congress that the detainee will not be transferred to a country that is a designated state sponsor of terrorism. The country must have agreed to take steps to ensure that the detainee cannot take action to threaten the United States, U.S. citizens, or its allies in the future.

The law allows Hagel to use waivers in some cases to transfer detainees.

In a mostly skeptical and sometimes dismissive reaction to Obama’s speech, key Republican senators said at a press conference that he still had not offered a coherent plan for what to do with the different types of detainees held at Guantanamo, some of whom they said need to be held indefinitely, while others might be eligible for release.

Obama’s 2008 opponent, Sen. John McCain, R- Ariz., said that “to somehow argue that al Qaida is ‘on the run’ comes from a degree of unreality that to me is really incredible.” He argued that al Qaida is “expanding all over the Middle East” and in North Africa. He said repealing the congressional authorization to use military force “contradicts the reality of the facts on the ground.”

Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R- Ga., the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, noted that 56 of the Guantanamo detainees are Yemenis and that since 2010 the Yemeni government has “absolutely not” shown any indication that it can prevent released detainees from planning and carrying out terrorist attacks on Americans. “If we were to transfer those individuals to Yemen, it would be just like turning them loose,” Chambliss told reporters.

Sen. Lindsay Graham, R- S.C. said “I believe we're in a war that's not winding down; we're in a war that's morphing. And the theme of the speech was that this war is winding down…. the justification for closing Gitmo is that we've destroyed the al Qaida leadership” but “that is not true.”

Speaking a day before Obama’s speech, Ben Wittes, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-founder of the Lawfare blog which covers detainee news, said, “I don’t see any significant change in congressional sentiment right now” on closing the Guantanamo site.

Obama has “got a lot of domestic pressure from his base to be seen to be doing something and he’s also got a hunger strike there (at Guantanamo) — and I think there’s a lot of genuine sentiment in the administration that they want to do something (about Guantanamo) so they’re committed to another push and trying again – but the question of what they actually could get done is a difficult question. There’s very limited latitude.”

This story was originally published on Thu May 23, 2013 2:00 PM EDT

The sponsor of a new bill to combat sexual assault in the military pledged Thursday that her legislation would ensure that “never again will a victim have to salute an assaulter."

The effort, led by Sen. Claire McCaskill, a Missouri Democrat, would require a dismissal or a dishonorable discharge for a member of the military found guilty of rape or sexual assault.

The new legislation – the second bill aimed at addressing sexual assault in the military this month – comes just the day after the Army disclosed that the commander of Fort Jackson, S.C., is being investigated for charges including adultery and a physical altercation.

The incident is just the latest in a string of military sexual misconduct scandals, including two separate cases of men charged with dealing with sexual assault cases being involved in crimes against women.

While the bill would also both prohibit commanders from nullifying or changing a sexual assault conviction, it would not require a charge of sexual assault to be handled outside the chain of command, a provision included in a competing measure sponsored by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.

Proponents of McCaskill’s measure fear that Gillibrand’s legislation may face too much opposition from the Pentagon to pass through Congress.

"The important thing is to try to get as many of us to agree so we don't end up with a party line vote,"  McCaskill said.  "I am tired of trying to legislate around the gridlock in Congress."

Sen. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican who is a cosponsor of both bills, said that action is necessary to help protect women in the armed services.

"What is not acceptable is for us to take half measures, or to do nothing, or pass something that cannot become law,” she said.

They aim to have the measure included in the annual Defense Authorization Act.

Kasie Hunt contributed to this report.

This story was originally published on Thu May 23, 2013 12:26 PM EDT

Obama to scale back his administration’s drone policy… Also expected in his 2:00 pm ET national security speech: better securing diplomatic facilities and stating his desire to close Gitmo… About that Holder letter… WaPo on the White House trying to shield Obama from IRS investigation… Cruz: “I don’t trust the Republicans”… Scott Walker heads to the Hawkeye State… And Happy (upcoming) Memorial Day weekend.

Pool / Getty Images

President Barack Obama delivers remarks at a concert honoring singer-songwriter Carole King with the 2013 Library of Congress Gershwin Prize for Popular Song at the White House on May 22, 2013.

*** Obama to scale back drone policy: In his first major national security speech of his second term, President Obama today is expected to both defend -- but also announce changes to -- his administration’s use of drones to kill suspected terrorists and foreign enemies. “A new classified policy guidance signed by Mr. Obama will sharply curtail the instances when unmanned aircraft can be used to attack in places that are not overt war zones, countries like Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia,” the New York Times reports. “The rules will impose the same standard for strikes on foreign enemies now used only for American citizens deemed to be terrorists” -- i.e., force can be used against targets who are 1) an imminent threat against Americans, and 2) cannot be feasibly captured. The Times also says that the Obama administration will shift control of drone strikes from the CIA to the U.S. military. “The significance is the Pentagon will now control the drone program, which increases transparency both for Congress and the American people,” NBC terrorism analyst Roger Cressey said on “TODAY” this morning.

*** What’s also expected in the speech: A White House official, per NBC’s Shawna Thomas, says that the president’s speech also will discuss better securing U.S. diplomatic facilities (after the 2012 Benghazi attack), balancing security while protecting civil liberties at home (see the leak investigations), and stating his desire to close the Guantanamo Bay prison (an action which Congress opposes). Don’t be surprised if Obama says something along the lines of, “We will never send another detainee to Gitmo” as a way to express his willingness to close the facility. And don’t be surprised if he addresses -- head on -- the Justice Department’s seizure of reporters’ phone records in its prosecution of national security leaks. Obama delivers his remarks at 2:00 pm ET at the National Defense University in DC.

*** About that Holder letter: Obama’s remarks come a day after Attorney General Eric Holder released a letter acknowledging -- for the first time by the administration -- that four American citizens were killed in U.S. drone strikes. NBC’s Pete Williams says the letter discloses what had been widely reported and known: that three citizens were killed in counter-terrorism operations, including Anwar al Awlaki. The letter also gives the legal justification for those drone strikes. And finally, Williams adds, it discloses the death of an additional U.S. citizen, Jude Kenan Mohammed, who was indicted by a federal grand jury in North Carolina for taking part in a plot to stage a terror attack against US military targets. Speaking of drones, the Feb. 2013 NBC/WSJ poll found that 64% of Americans favored using them to target suspected members of Al Qaeda and other terrorists, while 12% opposed and another 22% didn’t have an opinion. And in a separate question, 42% said the program should be continued, and 28% said it should be changed or modified.

*** The Shield: Turning from national security to the domestic/political controversies hitting the Obama administration, the Washington Post notes what we did yesterday about the IRS story -- that the White House’s top goal was to ensure that Obama had nothing to do with it. “This account of how the White House tried to deal with the IRS inquiry … shows how carefully Obama’s top aides were trying to shield him from any second-term scandal that might swamp his agenda or, worse, jeopardize his presidency.” The Post story also reveals that the White House brought in many of the old hands to manage the P.R. relating to the inspector general’s report. “Late last week, [White House Chief of Staff Denis] McDonough summoned Plouffe and a cadre of former Obama and Clinton advisers — including Stephanie Cutter, Robert Gibbs, Anita Dunn, Paul Begala and Mike McCurry — to the White House for two separate public relations strategy sessions. White House aides said they urged getting out information about the IRS situation as quickly as possible, and provided advice on refocusing attention on Obama’s jobs agenda.”

*** Cruz: “I don’t trust the Republicans”: Here’s something you don’t see every day: A U.S. senator announcing, on the Senate floor, that he doesn’t trust his own party. Of course, in his first few months in office, Ted Cruz isn’t your average senator. “The senior senator from Arizona urged this body to trust the Republicans,” Cruz said, per Politico referring to Sen. John McCain in the debate over whether to go to conference in the budget negotiations. “Let me be clear, I don’t trust the Republicans. I don’t trust the Democrats and I think a whole lot of Americans likewise don’t trust the Republicans or the Democrats because it is leadership in both parties that has got us into this mess.”

*** Scott Walker heads to the Hawkeye State: Meanwhile, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker today travels to Iowa, where he addresses the Polk County, IA GOP dinner that begins at 7:00 pm ET. We’ve said it before, and we’ll say it again: Walker could very well be the most significant 2016er on the GOP side that no one is talking about right now. There is A LOT of room for a presidential candidate who hails from outside of Washington.

*** State shopping isn’t the best policy for success: Don’t miss the piece on the “Daily Rundown” site about how politicians who run for office in one state and then another usually don’t have that much success.

*** Happy Memorial Day: Lastly, to get an early start on the upcoming Memorial Day weekend, your morning First Read note won’t be publishing on Friday. We’ll return on Tuesday. Happy Memorial Day!!!

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

On the eve of a major address by President Barack Obama on his counterterrorism policy, the Obama administration revealed Wednesday that drone strikes since 2009 had killed four Americans overseas – one of whom, Anwar al-Aulaqi, was targeted in Yemen because he’d planned and was planning terrorist attacks on the United States – principally the plot to blow up an airliner over Detroit on Christmas Eve 2009.

Three others who were not “specifically targeted” were killed in circumstances the administration did not explain.

The revelation came in a letter from Attorney General Eric Holder to congressional leaders and chairmen of key congressional committees in which Holder said, “the president has directed me to disclose to you certain information” about the number of Americans killed by U.S. counterterrorism operations outside of areas of active combat such as Afghanistan.

Holder said the U.S. government was “aware of three other U.S. citizens who have been killed in such U.S. counterterrorism operations over that same time period (since 2009): Samir Khan, 'Abd al-Rahman Anwar al-Aulaqi, and Jude Kenan Mohammed. These individuals were not specifically targeted by the United States.”

Jude Kenan Mohammed was on the FBI’s Most Wanted List and the FBI notice said, “On July 22, 2009, a Federal Grand Jury in North Carolina indicted Jude Kenan Mohammad for conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists and conspiracy to murder, kidnap, maim, and injure persons in a foreign country. Mohammad is at large and a federal warrant was issued by the United States District Court, Eastern District of North Carolina, Raleigh, North Carolina, for his arrest.”

The FBI notice also said, “Mohammad speaks English and very limited Pashtun. Mohammad is believed to be in Pakistan.”

Jonathan Ernst / Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder

On al-Aulaqi, Holder said, “it was al-Aulaqi's actions -- and, in particular, his direct personal involvement in the continued planning and execution of terrorist attacks against the U.S. homeland -- that made him a lawful target and led the United States to take action.” Holder also told congressional leaders that secret information proves “al-Aulaqi's involvement in the planning of numerous plots against U.S. and Western interests and makes clear he was continuing to plot attacks when he was killed.” The origins of this information are being kept secret to protect U.S. intelligence methods and sources.Holder’s letter said, “Today's disclosure builds on the Administration's effort to pursue greater transparency around our counter-terrorism operations, including the President's commitment in this year's State of the Union. This disclosure was also intended to coincide with the speech the President will give tomorrow, in which he will discuss our broader counter-terrorism strategy.”

This story was originally published on Wed May 22, 2013 4:59 PM EDT

With one of President Barack Obama’s key nominees on the verge of being confirmed by the Senate on Thursday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid appeared to edge away Wednesday from an idea that some Democrats are calling for: enacting a change in Senate rules to stop filibusters which delay votes on Obama appointees.

During a debate on the Senate floor with Republican Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, Reid said, "I'm not saying we're going to change the rules" regarding the filibuster, but argued that the Senate must move faster to confirm Obama nominees.

He accused Republicans of “slow-walking” nominees and bogging them down by submitting hundreds and, in one case, a thousand written questions to the nominee before the confirmation vote could occur.

Alex Wong / Getty Images

Senate Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid speaks after a weekly Senate Democratic caucus meeting May 21, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.

McConnell accused Reid of using the threat of a unilateral change in in Senate rules – the so-called “nuclear option” – to create “the majority’s own culture of intimidation right here in the Senate.”

The roles were reversed back in 2005 when the Republican majority, including McConnell, threatened to use the “nuclear option” to stop Democratic filibusters, supported by Reid at the time, of President George W. Bush’s judicial nominees.

McConnell noted Wednesday that Republicans had agreed to an up-or-down vote on Obama’s nomination of Sri Srinivasan to serve on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, with that vote to occur the Tuesday after the Senate returns from its one-week Memorial Day recess.

“Instead the majority leader chose to jam the minority,” McConnell complained, accusing the Democrats of “manufacturing a crisis to justify their heavy-handed behavior.”

Reid moved on Tuesday to limit debate on Srinivasan and have his confirmation vote Thursday.

McConnell called Srinivasan "a nominee we all agree on.... we like him" and argued that speeding up his nearly certain confirmation was Reid gratuitously using his power.

Srinivasan is crucial because so far in the four and a half years of his presidency, Obama has gotten no one confirmed to that court, which handles most legal challenges to regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency and other regulatory bodies and serves as a major stepping stone to the Supreme Court.

In March, Republicans blocked a confirmation vote on another Obama nominee to that court, Caitlin Halligan.

 “You have a majority on that court that is wreaking havoc with the country,” Reid said, adding that with further GOP delays perhaps the judges on that court will issue more opinions in the next couple of weeks favorable to the Republicans – as that court did in January when it ruled that Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board were unconstitutional since he had made them when there was no Senate recess.

Reid also reminisced Wednesday about the agreement that he and other Democrats had struck with Republicans in 2005 on confirming Bush’s judicial nominees, an agreement that was made under the threat of the Republicans using the nuclear option.

He said, “We agreed to put some people on the bench that we have regretted since then -- Janice Rogers Brown, Thomas Griffith, Brett Kavanaugh” – all of whom are judges now serving on the D.C. Circuit appeals court.

Awaiting Senate action after the Memorial Day recess are other nominees such as Thomas Perez to be labor secretary, Gina McCarthy to head the EPA, and five Obama nominees to serve on the National Labor Relations Board.

George Kohl, senior director for the Communications Workers of America, a labor union, said he didn’t interpret Reid’s comment Wednesday as him ruling out any future use of the nuclear option.

For the CWA, the NLRB nominees are crucial. “If they don’t get that (floor) vote in July, the Labor Board will cease to function on Aug. 27 when the chairman’s term expires. We think that’s a crisis for America.”

If McConnell doesn’t allow a vote on the NLRB nominees, “we think the rules (on ending debate) need to be changed” so the NLRB can protect workers’ right, Kohl said.

This story was originally published on Wed May 22, 2013 3:36 PM EDT

Lawmakers expressed both anger and bewilderment that IRS leaders had not told Congress sooner about indications that the tax agency had improperly singled out conservatives and Tea Party groups seeking tax-exempt status.

A highly anticipated hearing by the top investigative committee in the Republican-controlled House delivered on the drama that was expected. Lois Lerner, the IRS official in charge of the division accused of wrongdoing, invoked her Fifth Amendment right against testifying, and defiantly asserted her innocence.

"I have not done anything wrong. I have not broken any laws," she said. "I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations and I have not provided any false information to this or any other committee."

But her refusal to testify left the hearing on an uncertain note. Republicans only recessed the meeting – versus formally adjourning it – and threatened to re-call Lerner, whom they asserted had waived her Fifth Amendment privileges by making her brief statement.

"I am looking into the possibility of recalling her and insist she answer questions in light of a waiver,” said Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the chairman of the committee.

But much of lawmakers' ire was trained on the IRS leadership for failing to disclose any indication of IRS wrongdoing to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, whose inquiry into the matter prompted an inspector general inquiry into targeting of conservative groups. Both Democrats and Republicans voiced outrage that Douglas Shulman, the commissioner of the IRS during much of the abuses, did not tell lawmakers that an internal IRS investigation had suggested improper action by the IRS to single out conservative groups.

"At that point, I didn’t have anything concrete," Shulman responded. "I didn’t have a full set of facts to come back to Congress or the committee with."

His answered angered Democrats as much as Republicans.

"If you didn’t know, you were derelict in your duty," said Issa.

Carolyn Kaster / AP

House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif. holds up a document as he speaks to IRS official Lois Lerner on Capitol Hill, Wednesday, May 22, 2013, during the committee's hearing to investigate the extra scrutiny IRS gave to Tea Party and other conservative groups that applied for tax-exempt status.

"You misled Congress. Make no question about it … When you learned there was a list, you did nothing," said Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., who raised the prospect of appointing a special prosecutor in his opening remarks. "You abdicated your responsibility and you allowed Congress to proceed under your prior information that was false, that was untrue."

And for the first time, the IRS inspector general who generated the report that laid out the explosive allegations, J. Russell George, came under scrutiny from lawmakers. Issa pressed George as to why his office hadn't told Congress about indications of targeting at an earlier point during the investigation.

"I think it would behoove all of us to make sure that accurate information is given to Congress so we don’t act precipitously," George responded in reference to his office's actions.

The tense exchanges followed a somewhat explosive opening to the hearing, in which Lerner refused to answer lawmakers’ questions. But she delivered a brief statement explaining her role at the IRS and denying any wrongdoing.

That statement angered committee conservatives, who said that Lerner had essentially offered testimony, and thus had waived her ability to invoke her constitutional right to not testify. Issa dismissed Lerner nonetheless, but warned that his panel might again seek her testimony in the future. Following her dismissal, Lerner’s role remained largely absent through the questioning of the other witnesses.

The scrutiny of the IRS witnesses was characteristic of a hearing that focused far more on the actions of the agency and the subsequent investigation than whether the IRS came under undue influence from the Obama administration to single out conservatives.

The one administration witness, Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin, denied that he had ever directed the targeting of conservative groups. "Absolutely not, congresswoman," he said in response to a question on that matter, one of the few questions he faced during the hearing.

While Republicans have insinuated for much of the last two weeks that the IRS abuses were part of a "culture of intimidation" within the Obama administration, that line of inquiry generally took a backseat during Wednesday's hearing. (By contrast, Republicans focused on finding ties to Obama much more during a hearing last Friday by the House Ways and Means Committee and a hearing Tuesday before the Senate Finance Committee.)

An exception to that came when Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, linked the Obama administration’s assertion that the IRS abuses were limited to rogue employees to its initial assertion following last year’s terror attack in Benghazi that it was the outgrowth of a spontaneous protest. (This assertion about Benghazi was eventually proved wrong, and has become another point of contention between the White House and congressional Republicans.)

Related Stories:

• Ex-Cincy IRS official doubts agency's explanation for Tea Party scandal

This story was originally published on Wed May 22, 2013 10:41 AM EDT

The White House finds itself in a public relations mess… Even as it argues that the press is seeing the trees (like the IG report) but missing the forest (Obama had no role in IRS controversy)… Issa’s committee knew about the IG report, too?... Senate Judiciary Committee clears immigration bill, which now moves to the Senate floor… NYT: The number of drone strikes declines… WaPo on Petraeus’ role in the Benghazi talking points… Florida shooting connected to Boston bombing… Will Weiner get his second chance?... And Garcetti wins LA mayoral run-off.

Jacquelyn Martin / AP

President Barack Obama meets with Myanmar's President Thein Sein in the Oval Office of the White House, Monday, May 20, 2013.

*** The White House’s public relations mess: While there is still no evidence connecting the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups directly to the White House or to the president personally, or to his re-election campaign, it doesn’t mean the White House doesn’t have a PR problem on its hands. And this PR mess is largely self-inflicted. For starters, its explanation about when it learned of the inspector general’s IRS investigation keeps changing. “Just a day after telling reporters that chief of staff Denis McDonough and other senior White House staff learned of the situation nearly a month ago, press secretary Jay Carney revealed Tuesday that White House officials had consulted with the Treasury Department on how to make the findings public,” Politico writes. Then we discover that the IRS official Lois Lerner plans to plead the 5^th Amendment at today’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Both developments make it SEEM like the White House or the administration has something to hide -- even if the evidence (so far) is that Team Obama wasn’t directly connected to this IRS story. And speaking of a PR mess, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney didn’t help things when he compared a question about HHS’s fundraising to questions about the president’s birth certificate. That’s the way a White House acting as if it’s in a bunker mentality responds to legitimate questions.

*** White House: Press is seeing the trees but missing the forest: All that said, the White House believes reporters are seeing the trees but missing the forest. According to an administration official, its P.R. priorities were 1) demonstrating that the president had NO role in this controversy and 2) demanding accountability and new hires immediately. And this official believes both of those priorities have been met. For the White House, all other questions -- including who knew about the IG report and when they knew it -- are secondary, and it has taken them time to get their facts straight. But that explanation also assumes that the White House’s story won’t continue to change. And that gets at the issue of a credibility problem. And right now, the White House press shop has a credibility problem with many reporters in that press room. And assuming they have nothing to hide, it’s a self-inflicted credibility problem.

*** Issa’s committee knew about the IG report, too? Speaking of the IG report, the inspector general who investigated the IRS’s targeting of conservative-sounding groups testified at the Senate Finance Committee yesterday that Rep. Darrell Issa’s House Oversight Committee also knew about the report back in 2012 and communicated with the IG’s office. So Democrats argue something along the lines of, “Issa’s committee knew about it, too, and didn’t say anything public!!!” But an Issa spokesman tells First Read, “The administration is trying to draw a false a parallel between its own responsibilities and an Oversight Committee that requested the IG audit. This includes a false characterization that the Committee voluntarily waited for [the IG’s office] to complete its investigation. In reality, the committee made extensive efforts to ask [the inspector general] if wrongdoing had been found but was rebuffed on multiple occasions. Administration officials drawing a false parallel have offered no evidence that they made a similar effort to learn all that they could about wrongdoing.” 

*** Senate Judiciary Committee clears immigration bill: Despite everything else happening (IRS, the Oklahoma disaster, etc.), the immigration train keeps moving forward. By a 13-5 vote, the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday approved the sweeping bipartisan immigration-reform legislation, which now heads to the Senate floor. Per NBC’s Carrie Dann, “Three Republicans -- Sens. Jeff Flake of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Orrin Hatch of Utah -- joined the panel's 10 Democrats to vote in favor of the bill. Flake and Graham are both members of the bipartisan "Gang of Eight" that originally drafted the 844-page immigration legislation. Hatch's support was won after the Utah lawmaker secured changes to the bill's provisions for the hiring of high-skilled foreign workers.” But there also was some drama, Dann notes. “In an emotional moment shortly before final passage, committee chairman Patrick Leahy of Vermont announced that he would not call for a vote on an amendment that would have recognized the marriages of same-sex spouses in immigration law. Republicans in the bipartisan Gang of Eight said the LGBT measure would have broken apart the fragile coalition crafted by the bill's drafters.” The decision to pull the same-sex amendment only highlights the fact that Leahy wasn’t in charge of his own committee hearing; Chuck Schumer was.  

*** NYT: The number of drone strikes decline: A day before Obama’s speech on national security at the National Defense University, the New York Times reports that the number of drone strikes overseas has declined. “Strikes in Pakistan peaked in 2010 and have fallen sharply since then; their pace in Yemen has slowed to half of last year’s rate; and no strike has been reported in Somalia for more than a year.” We expect that the president will discuss the drone wars, as well the Guatanamo Bay prison. But it would also be a smart place for Obama to discuss and either defend, denounce, or explain the Justice Department tough actions against national-security leaks, which seem to have infringed on press freedoms. If he fails to use tomorrow’s speech to deal with the press’ growing anger about the targeting of individual journalists, it could be a missed opportunity.

*** On Petraeus’ role in the Benghazi talking points: We’ve told you that the fight over the Benghazi talking points seemed to be more bureaucratic politics than electoral politics. And this Washington Post article seems to further confirm that. “A close reading of recently released government e-mails that were sent during the editing process, and interviews with senior officials from several government agencies, reveal [former CIA head David] Petraeus’s early role and ambitions in going well beyond the committee’s request, apparently to produce a set of talking points favorable to his image and his agency. The information Petraeus ordered up when he returned to his Langley office that morning included far more than the minimalist version that [Rep.] Ruppersberger had requested. It included early classified intelligence assessments of who might be responsible for the attack and an account of prior CIA warnings — information that put Petraeus at odds with the State Department, the FBI and senior officials within his own agency.” 

*** Florida shooting connected to Boston bombing: Don’t be surprised if this story grabs a lot more attention later today. “An FBI agent was involved in a fatal shooting in Orlando early Wednesday that a local TV station says may have ties to the Boston Marathon bombings,” USA Today writes. “FBI officials have confirmed that a man died while one of its agents was "conducting official duties," the Orlando Sentinelreports, but would not elaborate. WESH-TV [an NBC affiliate] identifies the victim as 27-year-old Ibragim Todashev.” NBC’s Richard Esposito reports that the shooting IS connected to Boston bombing case. “It is connected in that the person shot is linked to Tsarnaev and has associates who are extremists overseas. They were interviewing him regarding his connections to Tsarnaev. He had been interviewed before. He started out cooperative. Flipped out. Went to attack agent. Then was shot.”

*** Will Weiner get his second chance? Anthony Weiner has released a slick two-minute video announcing his bid for New York mayor. "Look, I made some big mistakes, and I know I let a lot of people down,” he says in the video, which also features his wife Huma Abedin and young son. “But I've also learned some tough lessons. I'm running for mayor because I’ve been fighting for the middle class and those struggling my entire life. And I hope I get a second chance to work for you." Later in the video, wife Huma adds, “We love this city, and no one will work harder to make it better than Anthony.” While we still have our doubts that Weiner becomes NYC’s next mayor, his presence in the race likely means that front-runner Christine Quinn would face a run-off -- one in which she could struggle.

*** Garcetti to become LA’s next mayor: And in Los Angeles’ mayoral run-off, City Councilman Eric Garcetti defeated City Comptroller Wendy Greuel by eight percentage points, 54%-46%, succeeding outgoing Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. The Los Angeles Times: “Garcetti will be the first elected Jewish mayor of the city. At 42, he will also be the youngest in more than a century. He is scheduled to take office July 1.” More: “At $33 million, the mayoral campaign was the most expensive in city history. The flood of money and advertising from those groups largely went toward tearing down the two contenders, alienating many Angelenos who hadn't already been left cold.”

http://is.gd/ccxyrR%22%20%5Ct%20%22_blank">Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on http://is.gd/TzuR1b%22%20%5Ct%20%22_blank">Facebook and also on http://is.gd/hkhSDT%22%20%5Ct%20%22_blank">Twitter. Follow us @http://twitter.com/#!/chucktodd">chucktodd, @http://twitter.com/#!/mmurraypolitics">mmurraypolitics, @http://twitter.com/#!/DomenicoNBC">DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

Yuri Gripas / Reuters, file

Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin testifies before a Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs committee hearing on December 6, 2011. Wolin was the Treasury official who learned about the investigation into the IRS in 2012.

Capitol Hill readied Wednesday for perhaps the most explosive -- or at least dramatic -- of the three hearings into IRS abuses of conservative and Tea Party groups in the past week, with one of the key witnesses expected to invoke her constitutional right to remain silent.

The Republican-controlled House Oversight and Government Reform committee was set to convene its own hearing on the revelations that the tax-collecting agency had singled out conservative groups for additional scrutiny in their applications for nonprofit status. Though the panel will hear from two of the same witnesses who appeared at hearings of the House Ways and Means Committee last Friday and the Senate Finance Committee on Tuesday, two witnesses who have not yet appeared before Congress could make Wednesday’s hearing into the most eventful yet.

Those two witnesses are Neal Wolin, a deputy Treasury secretary, and Lois Lerner, who oversees the tax-exempt division within the IRS. Wolin was the Treasury official who learned about the investigation into the IRS in 2012; Lerner was the official who planted a question at an American Bar Association conference with the purpose of disclosing the IRS’s targeting of conservatives in public for the first time and who is in charge of the agency’s division in charge of overseeing tax-exempt status for such groups.

In perhaps an ominous precursor for the hearing, Lerner’s attorney said Tuesday that her client would invoke her Fifth Amendment rights against having to offer self-incriminating testimony. She will still appear, though, to voice that claim.

The oversight panel has been one of the most doggedly critical of the White House, providing Republicans with an ideal platform to ding President Barack Obama and his team. The committee, for example, hosted a hearing earlier this month featuring whistleblowers that helped breathe new life into Republicans’ questions about the administration’s handling of last year’s terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya.

The two other witnesses, former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman and IRS Inspector General J. Russell George, featured Wednesday have appeared in previous congressional hearings.

Throughout these hearings, IRS officials have blamed “foolish mistakes” for the abuses at the IRS, but have denied that partisan motivations or influence from outside the agency fueled IRS officials’ targeting of conservative groups. That hasn’t stopped Republicans from insinuating otherwise; GOP lawmakers have spent much of the last two hearings probing whether the Obama administration had any role in directing the efforts to single out its ideological adversaries.

This story was originally published on Wed May 22, 2013 4:39 AM EDT

Anthony Weiner, whose career as a congressman collapsed after he posted sexually suggestive pictures of himself on Twitter, has announced that he’s running for mayor of New York City.

“I made some big mistakes and I know I let a lot of people down. But I've also learned some tough lessons,” the Democrat said in a video posted on his website late on Tuesday.

"I'm running for mayor because I've been fighting for the middle class and those struggling to make it my entire life," he added. “I hope I get a second chance to work for you."

The video, which features his son and wife Huma Abedin, an aide to former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, focused on his middle-class roots in Brooklyn. 

With this bold attempt at a comeback ahead of the primary in September, Weiner is hoping to erase the image of a tweeted crotch shot that precipitated his resignation. 

He at first claimed that his Twitter account had been hacked after a photo of an underwear-clad groin appeared on his feed in 2011. But when more pictures came out, the congressman admitted he had exchanged risqué messages with a number of women and soon resigned.

Prior to his 2011 unraveling, Weiner had begun to plan for a 2013 campaign, NBCNewYork.com reported, and he still has more than $4 million in his campaign account.

Read more on NBCNewYork.com

The video announcing his run is set around New York City and highlights his mother’s career as a public school teacher and father’s as a lawyer who trained under the G.I. Bill.

“Theirs was a classic New York story,” he said. “You work hard, you make it into the middle class and make life a little bit better for your kids. That’s how this city was built. But it is getting harder and harder every day.”

Weiner said he would tackle a slew of issues facing the middle class, including rising rents and house prices and regulations stifling small businesses, and champion education, safety, and “real” health reform. 

“The very people who put everything they had into this city are getting priced right out of it,” he said in the video.

Elsa / Getty Images, file

Anthony Weiner, seen at a Brooklyn Nets-Toronto Raptors game in November, hopes people will give him a "second chance."

Weiner’s Democratic opponents include City Councilman Sal Albanese, Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, Comptroller John Liu, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, the Rev. Erick Salgado, a pastor, and former Comptroller Bill Thompson, The Associated Press reported.

On the Republican side, he is likely to face billionaire businessman John Catsimatidis, former Metropolitan Transportation Authority Chairman Joseph Lhota and homelessness-aid organization head George McDonald.

Former White House housing official Aldolfo Carrion Jr., a Democrat who recently dropped his party affiliation, is running on the Independence Party line and also interested in the Republican nomination, the AP said.

A recent poll found that if Weiner entered the race, he would get 15 percent of Democratic votes, putting him in second place after City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, but much less that he would need to achieve an outright victory, according to NBCNewYork.com.

Weiner ran for mayor in 2005, and came close to forcing a runoff against Fernando Ferrer – his party’s eventual nominee. He was considered a main contender in 2009 but quit the race after current Mayor Michael Bloomberg decided to run for a third term.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Related:

Off to the races: Weiner could jump into NY mayor’s race next week

Weiner 'can't say with certitude' that lewd photo isn't of him

Weiner admits to 'several' racy online relationships