Posted on 05/22/2013 12:34:42 PM PDT by Second Amendment First
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa said embattled IRS official Lois Lerner waived her Fifth Amendment rights and will be hauled back to appear before his panel again.
The California Republican said Lerner’s Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination was voided when she gave an opening statement this morning denying any wrongdoing and professing pride in her government service.
“When I asked her her questions from the very beginning, I did so so she could assert her rights prior to any statement,” Issa told POLITICO. “She chose not to do so — so she waived.”
Lerner triggered the IRS scandal on May 10 when she acknowledged that the agency wrongly targeted conservative groups applying for a tax exemption. Her lawyer told the House committee earlier this week that she would exercise her Fifth Amendment.
She appeared before Issa’s committee this morning under the order of a subpoena and surprised many by reading a strong statement to the panel.
“I have not done anything wrong,” she said. “I have not broken any laws. I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations, and I have not provided false information to this or any other committee.”
Issa dismissed her from the committee room once it became clear she wouldn’t answer questions.
Lerner’s decision to speak at all immediately triggered a dust-up among lawmakers who were confused about whether she gave up her Fifth Amendment protections when she made an opening statement.
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), a former federal prosecutor, said Lerner lost her rights the minute she started proclaiming her innocence, and that lawmakers therefore were entitled to question her. But Ranking Democrat Elijah Cummings of Maryland said hearing rules were not like those of a courtroom.
During the incident, Issa did not flat-out say whether or not Lerner had indeed waived her rights but instead tried to coax her into staying by offering to narrow the scope of questions.
By the afternoon, Issa was taking a harder stand.
“The precedents are clear that this is not something you can turn on and turn off,” he told POLITICO. “She made testimony after she was sworn in, asserted her innocence in a number of areas, even answered questions asserting that a document was true … So she gave partial testimony and then tried to revoke that.”
He said he was not expecting that.
“I understand from her counsel that there was a plan to assert her Fifth Amendment rights,” he continued. “She went ahead and made a statement, so counsel let her effectively under the precedent, waive — so we now have someone who no longer has that ability.”
Not sure what that doc was...it had her name on it, though. She did seem to take a deep breath, after she put on her specs, and saw it.
Ask every question you want an answer to. Then repeat for every single Obamite. Then reap the benefit of endless commercial footage, ensure the dem defeat in 14, repeal all the BS, save the country and dare I say it...
WIN.
” I suppose Obama could toss a monkey wrench into the courts by claiming IRS investigations of the Tea Party groups tax status falls under national security,”
Well,,, someone has been sending the DHS to TEA Party gatherings.
We could only pray he is that stupid.
If that's a stealth bio hint, you're prolly finding this thread entertaining ! d:^)
I saw that too. Her facial expression changed dramatically. Gotcha!
What can you expect from a former car thief turned congress critter?
Well, Gowdy would seem to disagree with you on this. Since he is a former federal prosecutor, I would rely more on his opinion in this matter than yours.
LOL! Good one!
Wow.
Whose side are you on here?
Exactly. They have the power and have HAD the power to defund ALL Obama’s stalling. Shut down until compliance is gained.
They have not, instead funding Obama fully. You think by now people would notice...
“That’s probably technically true, just following Obozo’s orders, even though she knew they were illegal.”
I suggest you re-visit the Nuremburg trials post WWII. If what you assert is true and she was just following orders she deserves to hang alongside of Obama and the rest of that food chain.
Anyone can say “I’m innocent”, but it means nothing unless you can back it up. And she backed nothing up —
And she has a law degree of her own. Used to work as an attorney at the DOJ.
She sure blew it this time. She’ll probably end up going to jail.
Thanks! I disagree with them, but that doesn’t particularly matter, does it!
Have a great evening.
That's bull. I'm not saying there aren't courts acting like that, but our constitutional rights should not be able to be implicitly waived through that kind of trickery.
That's just wrong on the face of it, and we should throw judges and prosecutors that resort to such tactics in jail for violating peoples rights.
Prisons are filled to bursting with all the innocence in the world.
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.