Skip to comments.Lois Lerner didnít say anything today. Why thatís a bad thing for the Obama Administration.
Posted on 05/22/2013 12:10:59 PM PDT by Red Steel
Oh Lois Lerner, you say it best when you say nothing at all.
As expected, Lerner, the head of the Internal Revenue Services tax-exempt office, pled the Fifth Amendment rather than testify today in front of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee about her role in the targeting of conservative groups.
In her silence she technically didnt refuse to testify but rather she invoked her right to not incriminate herself Lerner may have done herself some good, legally speaking, but she didnt do any favors for an Obama Administration that is doing all it can to snuff the controversy out.
First of all, Lerner has been, from the get-go, the face of this scandal. But now she is the face AND the voice of it. After today, the entire country or at least those people paying some attention to the news will have seen the clip of Lerner saying that she had not done anything wrong just before she invoked her right not to answer questions from members of Congress.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Josh Marshall (10:15a.m.): Lerner Must Go talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/ Ezra Klein (9:45a.m.): Heads should roll at IRS washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog — John McCormack (@McCormackJohn) May 22, 2013
If you didn’t do anything wrong then why not testify?
Can she take the fifth if she is sued in civil court? You can find out a lot more in a civil proceeding than a criminal.
She deprived thousands of people their First Amendment rights of Speech and Association.
They are suing.
Drag this b*tch through courts for the rest of her life.
But she says she did nothing wrong. Alrighty then, let’s move on.
She would need witness protection and plastic surgery to go along with her immunity. It’s the Chicago Way, doncha know.
She’s in ‘protect 0bama’ mode. Trey Gowdy was the only conscious person in the room and called her on making a proclamation while at the same time pleading the 5th. She essentially testified then said she wouldn’t. One strike against Issa.
I say get the Federal Marshalls or the Capitol police to arrest this woman and send her to Gitmo until she speaks about her terrorist activities against the American people.
Does this mean I can "move on" if - when called in for an IRS audit - I simply say "I did nothing wrong."
I don't think you can "take the 5th" in a civil court because there's no prospect of a *criminal* conviction.I think you can refuse to testify but doing so,at the very least,places your chances of victory at risk.and if you're found to have *perjured* yourself in a civil proceeding...well,just refer to Jones v Clinton.
Incredible comments on that WaPo story.
“Effort by Bush era holdovers in IRS to embarrass the administration”
I have to say the huge squad of internet posters on the Baraqqi staff are quick to respond.....
I didn’t do anything wrong = I did not have sex with that woman.
“Does this mean I can “move on” if - when called in for an IRS audit - I simply say “I did nothing wrong.””
Actually, tax court is the only place where you must prove your innocence. Reasonable doubt is not enough.
We need to find out more about the Washington legal office that Lerner’s group was collaborating with on these cases.
He’s correcting that right now.
Calling her back. Recessed, not adjourned.
Issa just said that he is “looking in to the possibility of recalling her and that the hearing stands in recess”. It looks like Issa is calling her back in!
I see that. He should’ve seized upon Gowdy’s observation and not let Lerner go. Gowdy is firing on all cylinders throughout these hearings.
“The 5th ONLY applies to criminal charges. It has no bearing at all in civil cases.”
That is in the Constitution?
In a courtroom situation (criminal case), a defendant does not have to testify since the government has the burden of proving guilt with independent evidence.
However, if the defendant does decide to testify, he or she can no longer invoke the 5th amendment right (against self-incrimination)and must answer questions posed by the prosecution.
So applying the same standard to today’s hearing, once Lerner gave her opening statement she, in my opinion, no longer had the right to invoke her 5th Amendment right.
Well, then, can she even be sued? Does she have immunity?
Too late. Her child has a cold and requires her full attention. /s LOL
She screwed up her 5th amendment claim, though. She swore in, declared herself innocent (i.e.: testified to her own innocence of wrongdoing), THEN invoked the 5th.
By making her declaratory statement under oath, she waived her 5th amendment rights.
Yes. “in a criminal case...”
I agree, and I agree with Gowdy’s lightening quick assessment. Issa did entrap her further by getting her to ‘testify’ to a report. She had the wool pulled over her eyes on that one. LOL
‘lightening’ should be ‘lightning’. Ooops.
Is this one of the talking points that the lefties agreed to late yesterday at the West Wing? It appears that Zero has zeroed in on another scapegoat.
What’s sickening about this process is that the DOJ is involved in legal issues. That’s like having a bunch of terrorists guard a consulate! Oh wait..
She screwed up by giving sworn testimony of her innocence THEN trying to claim the Fifth.
Apparently you cannot give your version and then clam up- you have to allow cross examination.
True. Throughout this hearing and the Benghazi hearing I have been amazed.
"Lois Lerner lost her rights"
And why they are fighting the special prosecutor idea. But it is becoming clear to most that the idea holds merit in this type of situation.
Maybe there is still time for her to hit her head and catch the flu as Hillarity did before allegedly testifying before Congress on BenghaziGhazi.
Seems fair. :0)
She misused her office to change the outcome of a Presidential election.
She needs to be charged with a federal crime and sent to prison.
If Lerner cannot extricate herself, legally, from this situation she does not seem the type to fall on the sword for Obama. She seems arrogant, self-absorbed, full of hubris, and believes she is smarter than anyone else. If she feels like her tits are in a wringer she will squeal like a stuck pig....unless Obama threatens her or her family before she speakes.
Maybe she’s a member of the Choom Gang?
How do you invoke the protection against self-incrimination if you “didn’t do anything wrong”? What’s to incriminate?
What did the president know and when did he know it?
I still can’t help thinking this a trap of some type; she has voluntarily crawled under the Bus and is pounding on the undercarriage to have the driver take off. Maybe she did this so she couldn’t get fired as just exercising her Constitutional rights is not grounds for termination. Eventually her underlings will have to testify, how comfortable will that be to come to work the next day and have her there glaring out her window at you.
Maybe they gave her a little something to calm her nerves.
most transparent administration ever!
I understand your point but what is the end game? If she refuses to answer questions she can be held in contempt and sit in jail?I don’t think it would be a good idea at this early stage in the game.