Paz's Lawyer Attacks House Investigators' Tactics

As legal counsel for Ms. Holly Paz, I provide an initial response from Ms. Paz to your letter to her, dated August 20, 2013 (hereafter, referred to as "your letter" or "your letter of August 20"). In your letter, you state that you have "uncovered additional information that appears to contradict your [Ms. Paz's] testimony in several areas relevant to the Committee's investigation."

Let me state emphatically, Ms. Paz testified truthfully to the best of her recollection. Ms. Paz has at all times cooperated completely with your Committee, other Congressional committees, TIGTA, the Department of Justice, and IRS investigators. She agreed to be interviewed by your Committee despite being given only four days to refresh her recollection of events spanning over three years. On May 21, she voluntarily submitted herself to nearly seven hours of interrogation with minimal breaks.

Despite Ms. Paz's full cooperation, you chose to publicly attack her truthfulness through your letter and press release, providing little opportunity for me and Ms. Paz to provide her explanations publicly at the same point in time as your allegations of inconsistencies. If your objective was to reconcile efficiently what you thought were inconsistencies in testimony, your staff could have simply contacted me, on behalf of Ms. Paz directly, and requested a follow-on interview. In that way any questions could have been resolved promptly, with Ms. Paz's explanations being on the record and available for publication with your questions. Having cooperated at all times to date, Ms. Paz would have agreed to another interview and responded fully. This type of one-side public attack adds to the physical danger faced by Ms. Paz and her family.

Because of prior inaccurate reports and allegations, Ms. Paz and her family have received threatening phone calls, messages, and visits at their home. Her oldest son jumps every time the home phone rings because he has heard the threatening messages. Her son was followed home from the school bus and harassed by a stranger claiming to be a reporter. Ms. Paz's sons had to hide up in their room one night when a process server tried to force his way into Ms. Paz's home and would not leave until escorted away by the police. These are but a few examples of the many forms of harassment to which the Paz family has been subjected. Your letter and accompanying press release recklessly adds to the danger and damage to Ms. Paz and her family.

Your claims of inconsistencies are supposedly supported by the testimony of other IRS witnesses. However, those witnesses' transcripts have not been made available to me or Ms. Paz. My prior request to your Committee to view the transcripts of other IRS witnesses, which have previously been shared with the media, was denied by your staff. If Ms. Paz is to explain other witnesses' testimony, it is important to understand the context of that testimony and whether other statements made by those witnesses bear on the purported inconsistencies described in your letter. Confronting an accuser and reviewing their testimony is a fundamental constitutional right.

Moreover, Ms. Paz has not been allowed a copy of her own interview transcript. The Committee would only allow us to view her transcript in your offices under the watchful eye of one of your staffers, after it had already been made available to the media. We were even instructed that we were only permitted to take very limited notes of the transcript's contents. You also chose not to provide Ms. Paz and me copies of the emails and documents you cite in support of your concerns.

Accordingly, to enable Ms. Paz to respond fully and accurately to your contentions, I respectfully request that you promptly produce to Ms. Paz and me all of the materials relied upon by your staff in making the allegations in your letter, including, but not limited to, the items described in "Attachment 1" to this letter,

If we are not provided with these materials promptly, Ms. Paz will respond to the best of her ability to your letter of August 20, in a separate letter before the deadline you imposed of September 3, 2013.

Chairmen Issa and Jordan, I submit to you that the facts surrounding this IRS investigation clearly show that Holly Paz has at all times been an outstanding public servant and did nothing wrong. During much of the period being examined, she was not in a supervisory role in EO Rulings & Agreements, as she was on two separate maternity leaves of absence within that timeframe. The facts clearly show that Holly Paz had nothing to do with the creation or the use of political or other descriptive labels by the IRS. She worked tirelessly to correct the inappropriate use of labels by the Service for both conservative and progressive groups. When she became aware of the use in the field of inappropriate criteria, she elevated the concern to her supervisors and thereafter helped direct corrective actions. Ms. Paz drafted a written instruction in 2012 regarding the use of a lookout list in examining applications that the Inspector General found laudable and recommended that her instructions be memorialized as part of IRS written procedures. In the same way, she was part of a team that worked diligently to overcome the backlog and expedite approvals, where possible, of applications for 501(c)(4) status for both conservative and progressive groups. Ms. Paz deserves praise and not the abuse she has received.

Holly Paz in many respects embodies the best characteristics of "every day" Americans. She is from a modest income family, the daughter of a social worker and a professor at a small college in rural Pennsylvania. Through hard work she was admitted to a well-known law school and worked for several years in large prestigious law firms. Seeking to serve the public, she left a lucrative law firm position to help taxpayers at the IRS's Taxpayer Advocate Service, where she began her IRS career.

Chairmen Issa and Jordan, all Americans, whatever their political or chosen affiliations and faiths, deserve and expect fairness and due process from their government. As we all know, American courts demand that government officials not poison public opinion against individuals during an investigation. You and your Congressional Committee have immunities and powers that are not subject to normal judicial review. However, you should rise to the high trust the electorate has placed in you, and be scrupulous in treating fairly all citizens that you call as witnesses through your Committee process.

Surely, Holly Paz and all the IRS public servants deserve a fair process that allows their side to behead. Most critically, you should conduct your Committee's business in a manner that does not place Holly Paz, her family, and other IRS witnesses and their families in harm's way.