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.”
I think there is a difference between a court room and testimony before an investigating or oversight committee.
By making an opening statement, she has introduced into the record issues she must then answer questions about.
He did know what he was doing. A couple of posters kept ranting that 30 minutes should have been spent on asking her questions and her taking the 5th.
He knew what he was doing here. Instead of doing that, which would be ridiculous....he let her go for the time being while they had people do research.
If you paid attention to the Live thread you would have seen that I called it exactly as it played out. AND I SAID, there would be people in the back checking it out while the rest of the testimony was going on.
She will show and claim 5th amendment rights. Our side will say she waived them. Their side will say she didn’t. Then what? I would love to believe she will be compelled to tell the truth but liberals lie, cheat and steal.
So? At least this will get more publicity for the fact that she took the fifth in the first place.
ARROGANCE! Pure and simple. These people are surperior to everyone else. They can do anything they want. Why wouldn’t they believe that? She has been doing this type of behavior for YEARS and getting bonuses for it.
I wuld not be surprised if Obama asserts executive privilege on behalf of the IRS, including Lerner...
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
In her statement, Lerner said under oath that she "did not do anything wrong."
Now, if you "did not do anything wrong", how is it possible that anything you say could incriminate you? You can't testify against yourself if you didn't do anything, can you?
Why has nobody called her on this?
I thought she waived when she said, “I do.”
Cummings says that but it is a self-serving attempt to protect the Administration. If what he says is true, Congress loses its power to subpoena and to prosecute people for lying to Congress. There would be no meaning to the oath given before testimony.
The Dems will grudgingly give on this because they realize the may be in the GOP’s role in a different administration.
Do the courts have jurisdiction over Congress (separation of powers)?
I do not believe so.
Troll.
“Booyah!!! Issa kicks some arse!!!”
I would wait until he actually does something before I would get to excited. For the most part, these guys have been all talk and no action.
Gowdy seems to be pretty darn competent. I am absolutely enthralled by that man.
I have to say we have some of the most inspiring conservative congress members that I can remember.
As a particular note, Lerner swore in for testimony, THEN avowed she did nothing wrong, THEN invoked her 5th amendment rights.
By stating she was innocent of wrongdoing under oath, she testified. Therefore, she waived her rights.
If she wasn’t under oath, she may still have had an argument that she was making an administrative declaration, not testifying to her innocence. As it is, she screwed up. She waived her 5th amendment rights.
Yep. Her attorney has changed the subject, no doubt.
Every GOP member of that committee got rolled, except Gowdy!
Every news channel is running the self serving video of Lerner proclaiming
her innocence.
Issa got rolled. Again.
That’s not what I said.
You can bet someone -Probably not Issa directly - has to contact her counsel about this.
that doesn’t mean that they contact her counsel to determine if she waived her rights.
Issa did not know what he was doing. He just wasn’t sure Trey Grady knew what he was saying.
I also suspect that Gowdy told Issa that he better not screw this hearing up and get her back ASAP. Doubt Gowdy was subtle about it.
We shall see...but I will tentatively retract my criticism of Issa in light of this position. IF he hauls her back and IF every question that needs to be asked is asked, and she takes the 5th, then I will make it complete.
Issa has been such a paper tiger on so many issues, it will be great, not to mention “unexpected”, to see him take a firm stance for once.
Why, didn’t ya hear the first day: the lady’s ‘apolitical’!
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.