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 Service’s 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 didn’t refuse to testify but rather she invoked her right to not incriminate herself — Lerner may have done herself some good, legally speaking, but she didn’t do any favors for an Obama Administration that is doing all it can to snuff the controversy out.
Here’s why.
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 ...
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.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
