Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

House says IRS official waived rights, contempt possible
Chicago Tribune ^ | 28 Jun 2013 | Kim Dixon

Posted on 06/28/2013 2:08:32 PM PDT by mandaladon

Edited on 06/28/2013 3:28:58 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An IRS official effectively waived her right not to testify about the tax agency's targeting of conservative groups, a Republican-led congressional committee concluded on Friday in a vote that cleared the way for Congress to hold her in contempt.


(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: 5thamendment; alreadyposted; congress; contempt; contemptofcongress; corruption; democrats; gowdy; irs; irsscandal; irsscandals; issa; lerner; loislerner; obama; scandals; search; searchisyourfriend; treygowdy
I say put this Rat in jail and get it over with.
1 posted on 06/28/2013 2:08:32 PM PDT by mandaladon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mandaladon
"A contempt of Congress vote could lead to her being prosecuted in a court and subject her to a maximum $1,000 fine and potential 12-month prison sentence."

Will the DOJ be responsible for initiating this prosecution?

If so, I'm sure Eric Holder will be all over this. /S

2 posted on 06/28/2013 2:13:41 PM PDT by SnuffaBolshevik (In a tornado, even turkeys can fly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon
Well, Eric Holder committed perjury, ‘Bam declared exec privilege over the F&F documents . . . I try to get excited over holding true marxist believers like Lerner responsible, but can't.
3 posted on 06/28/2013 2:15:23 PM PDT by Jacquerie (To restore the 10th Amendment, repeal the 17th.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

I hold the IRS in contempt.


4 posted on 06/28/2013 2:15:51 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

“A contempt of Congress vote could lead to her being prosecuted in a court and subject her to a maximum $1,000 fine and potential 12-month prison sentence”

Riiiiiiiight! Like that’s gonna happen!


5 posted on 06/28/2013 2:15:53 PM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

I hold the NSA in contempt too.


6 posted on 06/28/2013 2:16:49 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Yes. No “Contempt possible” or ‘probable’.

Just DO IT and put her Democratic, lyinhg ass in jail as a lesson to the other Obamite drones that there is a penalty that will be paid for lying to Congress (Hillary is next).


7 posted on 06/28/2013 2:18:38 PM PDT by MadMax, the Grinning Reaper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

The Democrats protected Lerner saying HER RIGHTS
were more important than the entire US public.

Why? Because the road leads to the IMPOSTER.


8 posted on 06/28/2013 2:19:20 PM PDT by Diogenesis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

How will she be prosecuted? By the Justice Department? Fat chance. The Congress already held Holder in contempt to no effect. The power of congress is the power of the purse and until they start using it they will be ignored by this lawless administration.


9 posted on 06/28/2013 2:20:17 PM PDT by Old North State
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

The plan is not to jail her, but threaten to.

Trey Gowdy explained the process: they are going to use this and their subpoena power to work their way up the chain, forcing people to talk.

This is just the starting point. She’s going to talk.


10 posted on 06/28/2013 2:22:12 PM PDT by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon
A contempt of Congress vote could lead to her being prosecuted in a court

A contempt charge will probably just get her a big fat promotion.

11 posted on 06/28/2013 2:25:48 PM PDT by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Agreed, but Chairman Issa screwed up the moment he let leave the Hearing Room.

Republicans still think Civility will earn them respect. There is no Civility coming from the Democrats.

BTW - Has anyone noticed that the term “The Loyal Opposition” is only used when the Democrats are the Minority Party?


12 posted on 06/28/2013 2:28:29 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (They can follow the Communist, I'll follow the Constitution...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

I was watching an old Rockford Files episode and he was called to testify before a Grand Jury. He was answering questions and then he said he didn’t want to answer citing the 5th amendment. His attorney told him that he couldn’t use the 5th because he had already willingly answered other questions. When I head that I thought immediately of Lois Lerner and how she had somewhat done the same thing.
Kind of funny I thought.


13 posted on 06/28/2013 2:32:16 PM PDT by funfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

She is going to talk alright, to MSNBC, CNN and the New York Times, telling them that going after her is all part of the Republican War against Women.

Just like the Zimmerman Case, the idiot 19 Year Old Girl testifying for the State is just being picked on by that mean White Cracker Defense Attorney.


14 posted on 06/28/2013 2:32:56 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (They can follow the Communist, I'll follow the Constitution...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: funfan

I remembered that episode when I first heard of this case.


15 posted on 06/28/2013 2:35:58 PM PDT by packrat35 (Admit it! We are almost ready to be called a police state!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

She should have her bank accounts frozen, passport revoked, and FIRED! Not this paid vacay bullsh!t.

After she’s convicted, hang the traitor!


16 posted on 06/28/2013 2:40:02 PM PDT by unixfox (Abolish Slavery, Repeal The 16th Amendment!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Throw her in jail. Let her serve as an example to others.


17 posted on 06/28/2013 2:55:12 PM PDT by Qwackertoo (Going into Politic Free Zone Momma Grizzly hibernation for a while after this week, maybe forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

I hope you you’re right. I hope she does talk, but I don’t think she will.

Maybe they should offer her immunity.


18 posted on 06/28/2013 2:57:16 PM PDT by skinndogNN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: funfan
I was watching an old Rockford Files episode and he was called to testify before a Grand Jury. He was answering questions and then he said he didn’t want to answer citing the 5th amendment. His attorney told him that he couldn’t use the 5th because he had already willingly answered other questions. When I head that I thought immediately of Lois Lerner and how she had somewhat done the same thing. Kind of funny I thought.

And that is exactly the way the 5th Amendment has always worked. It cannot be applied selectively, as Lerner did.

It is now apparent, however, that this is part of the Democrat defensive strategy -- which assumes a compliant media.

Make a statement claiming your innocence, then claim 5th Amendment protection against self-incrimination. The actual law doesn't allow that -- but claim that it does. Let the media assert that the Republicans are being "partisan" in their "interpretation". Convince the Low Info Voter that it's just a "partisan squabble" and the Republican Congressmen are acting out of hatred for women, government, whatever.

This is exactly how Clinton won the impeachment issue -- by using the media to contend it was "all about sex" when it was really "all about perjury and obstruction of justice".

The media is liberalism's first line of defense.

19 posted on 06/28/2013 2:59:29 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: skinndogNN

well first fire her or at least suspend her pay then put her in the gray bar hotel till she softens up.


20 posted on 06/28/2013 3:03:15 PM PDT by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: okie01
And that is exactly the way the 5th Amendment has always worked. It cannot be applied selectively, as Lerner did.

While it is proper to recognize that people can waive rights, I dislike the idea of having Fifth Amendment rights be implicitly waived. I think it would be better if an attempt to introduce self-serving statements by someone who has not overtly waived his or her Fifth Amendment rights would be met with an objection, whereupon the person could then either explicitly waive Fifth Amendment rights or else refrain from introducing the statements.

21 posted on 06/28/2013 3:12:36 PM PDT by supercat (Renounce Covetousness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: packrat35

I just bought one of that shows series because I can not handle the regular tv programming any longer. I just watch it over and over and it is actually pretty entertaining. I am going to get the rest of the series as well.


22 posted on 06/28/2013 3:19:09 PM PDT by funfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon
contempt possible

Oh Woopie Di Doo - I will only rest when someone from the IRS is in prison and the boss is impeached.
23 posted on 06/28/2013 3:21:29 PM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unixfox

Wow, a thousand dollar fine! What is that, two days
pay for her?

Now a hundred thousand that would be better, and five
to ten years for abusing the public trust...


24 posted on 06/28/2013 3:24:33 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Obama will use the Presidential Pardon Power.


25 posted on 06/28/2013 3:26:40 PM PDT by eCSMaster (Palin was right (again)!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Naw. She ain’t going to the slam. Obama will give her an ambassadorship to some country. Maybe Iran, Iraq, Egypt, etc. One of his muzzie friend nations. She’d fit in good there.


26 posted on 06/28/2013 3:26:45 PM PDT by RetiredArmy (1 Cor 15: 50-54 & 1 Thess 4: 13-17. That about covers it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: supercat
I dislike the idea of having Fifth Amendment rights be implicitly waived.

Lerner had an attorney. A very expensive attorney. Questions like that is what they are for.

Either:

a.) he was caught unaware by her opening statement.

or b.) they are willingly following a political defense via the media as opposed to a legal defense via the law.

Further, employment of the 5th Amendment isn't rocket science. I took Civics in the 8th grade...and our textbook addressed this very question. At one time, it was what is called "common knowledge".

27 posted on 06/28/2013 3:34:24 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Kickass Conservative
Just like the Zimmerman Case, the idiot 19 Year Old Girl testifying for the State is just being picked on by that mean White Cracker Defense Attorney.

lol, you mean Creepy *ss Cracker Defense Attorney...right?
28 posted on 06/28/2013 3:35:26 PM PDT by Girlene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

No, make sure he testifies first as this stinks at the source which is the top of the White Hut.


29 posted on 06/28/2013 3:41:22 PM PDT by max americana (fired liberals in our company after the election, & laughed while they cried (true story))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okie01
b.) they are willingly following a political defense via the media as opposed to a legal defense via the law.

I've come to regard Congressional hearings as largely political theater, since Congress feels free to make up the rules as it goes along. Certainly a criminal defendant is allowed to make public statements to the media without waiving Fifth Amendment rights; the main case where statements without waiver may be restricted is before the jury (since jurors are not expected to be able to forget such statements).

Personally, I think one of the most important things that should be done to curb Fifth Amendment abuse by public officials is to make clear that federal employees' duties includes testifying regarding their actions on the job; while the Fifth Amendment applies to federal employees as it does to anyone else, refusal to testify about what one was doing on one's job should be regarded as a refusal to do one's job (i.e. a basis for immediate dismissal).

30 posted on 06/28/2013 3:48:12 PM PDT by supercat (Renounce Covetousness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Girlene

Yep, Creepy Ass Cracker, just like me. LOL


31 posted on 06/28/2013 4:07:52 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (They can follow the Communist, I'll follow the Constitution...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

They used to burn witches! Oh dear so insensitive... Buhahahaha!!!!


32 posted on 06/28/2013 4:28:10 PM PDT by thegrump
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cementjungle

As a SES Federal employee, her salary is probably in excess of $230,000 - at least. Also, no furlough for her. As a political employee she is exempt.


33 posted on 06/28/2013 4:35:49 PM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

As a federal employee, she works for the People.
She doesn’t want to testify to the representatives of the People?
Then she should be relieved of her position, give up her TSP and face the charges. Better yet, just ship her filthy communist rat azz off to Gitmo and let those super spooks work on her a while. She’ll sing like a canary then!


34 posted on 06/28/2013 4:57:00 PM PDT by lgjhn23 (It's easy to be liberal when you're dumber than a box of rocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Pish posh. Even though Holder has proven that this administration has no regard for Congressional contempt, look to Congress to blather and dither over whether or not to take such a “serious” action involving Lerner. I hold them ALL in contempt, and I don’t think they care either.


35 posted on 06/28/2013 5:08:54 PM PDT by lonevoice (Today I broke my personal record for most consecutive days lived)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: supercat
Personally, I think one of the most important things that should be done to curb Fifth Amendment abuse by public officials is to make clear that federal employees' duties includes testifying regarding their actions on the job; while the Fifth Amendment applies to federal employees as it does to anyone else, refusal to testify about what one was doing on one's job should be regarded as a refusal to do one's job (i.e. a basis for immediate dismissal).

Interestingly, you have just cited a condition of employment by the IRS. The IRS code states that any employee who invokes the 5th Amendment in a legal procedure shall lose their employment forthwith.

You could look it up.

However, this administration seems to take such points of law as "advisory", if not "obsolete".

36 posted on 06/28/2013 5:12:56 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Sure. We’re going to get them all and put them in jail, and go after their bosses. We have that Right, you know.

We need a Revolution in this country, and it isn’t happening. If so many people are so pissed off about so many things the “Government” is doing or not doing, then why are we even having this conversation?

We should all exercise our 2nd Amendment and head for Washington, DC, to let the a$$hoes know WE WANT AMERICA BACK NOW!!!

What is it going to take to galvanize this country into action?


37 posted on 06/28/2013 5:54:10 PM PDT by Monkey Face (Happiness comes through the door you didn't know you left open.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

I’m just curious, just exactly what sort of punishment does one get for being held in contempt of Congress?

Do they simply send you a nasty letter telling you how bad you are, and that’s it?

I ask this because I don’t see anyone trembling in their boots with a threat like this... (e.g. Eric Holder)


38 posted on 06/28/2013 7:34:41 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: supercat

nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,

I don’t see any waiver of self incrimination here.

I believe I can shut up anytime I want to.

But, but ... if you don’t talk, you must be guilty (for what you would not say) ...

Kind of like, let us search, if you are innocent, what is the problem.

If ‘they’ want it their way, I guess I will zip my lips at the initial contact.

But what does in matter, anyway. Just lock me up, you know you want to.


39 posted on 06/28/2013 10:14:41 PM PDT by Scrambler Bob ( Concerning bo -- that refers to the president. If I capitalize it, I mean the dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Regulator
You're dreaming. Nonone is going to say a damn thing and no one will be punished. The gubment is corrupt and out of control and nothing will be done to stop it.

war is coming. Oh hai NSA

40 posted on 06/28/2013 10:58:42 PM PDT by Drill Thrawl (The Gubment Has No Legitimacy. It needs to be Removed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: funfan
Ref:"old Rockford Files episode" & taking the 5th Amendment, testifying before a Grand Jury, or Congress. The most important FACT of that episode was when he invoked his 5th Amendment "Right", he was immediately tossed into jail, for "Contempt of Court," his lawyer gets him out via the summons / subpoena was improper, due to name or address if I remember correctly.

When served with a proper summons / subpoena, and the prosecutor, conducting the Grand Jury asks the first question something to the effect of "is your name Jim Rockford," he invokes his 5th Amendment. Then proceeds, trying to get Jim Rockford to answer any question, like "Your such a criminal that you have to invoke your 5th Amendment, and so on.

Once you answer any questions, ding, ding, ding we have a winner, you must answer the questions or face "Contempt of Court" {"Contempt of Congress"} for which there is no time limit in jail, that is until the next Grand Jury {"Congress"} convenes, then they could haul you back into the new Grand Jury {"Congress"}, and if you answer to your name, but take the 5th Amendment, on some question(s), then back to jail with you.

In that episode, after taking the 5th Amendment, and the prosecutor berating him, the prosecutor excuses him from the "Witness Stand," it was then, he asked for permission from the judge if he could make a statement, and was granted permission, he made his speech if you will.

41 posted on 06/28/2013 11:46:44 PM PDT by Stanwood_Dave ("Testilying." Cop's don't lie, they just Testily{ing} as taught in their respected Police Academy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

A charge of contempt of congress? Wouldn’t that make her....American?


42 posted on 06/29/2013 6:38:10 AM PDT by Caipirabob (Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon
IRS should be abolished!
43 posted on 06/29/2013 8:10:58 AM PDT by Drawn7979
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Maybe Ms. Lerner just thinks the rules are different for her than the common people.


44 posted on 06/29/2013 8:44:03 AM PDT by AtlasStalled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

“The plan is not to jail her, but threaten to.”

You got it, but they’ll need something, or a lot of somethings that add up to a lot more than 1 yr and a $1,000.

Then again, if they just make her KEEP talking, they’ll Get those other things.


45 posted on 06/29/2013 9:35:10 AM PDT by To-Whose-Benefit? (It is Error alone which needs the support of Government. The Truth can stand by itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Old North State

Then do it and let Holder refuse to prosecute. That’s a card in our hand.


46 posted on 06/29/2013 12:45:02 PM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

and the RATS, take another one in the.........HA ha!!!

47 posted on 06/29/2013 7:42:40 PM PDT by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scrambler Bob
I don’t see any waiver of self incrimination here.

There is a long-established rule of court procedure which indicates that, with very few exceptions, the testimony of a witness for either side should only be considered reliable when it is subjected to cross-examination by the opposing side; neither side is allowed to introduce testimony from a witness which will not be available for cross-examination unless they can demonstrate either that the witness meets certain conditions that would justify a presumption of reliability, or that the adverse party is responsible for the witness' inability to testify. The Zimmerman case is an example of the latter: any statements that Trayvon Martin can be shown to have made could be admitted by the prosecution because George Zimmerman's actions, whether legal or not, caused Trayvon Martin to be unavailable for cross-examination.

48 posted on 06/30/2013 10:29:08 AM PDT by supercat (Renounce Covetousness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon
It's about time. I've been wondering about this matter and eagerly anticipating just reprisal.

You can't get up there, bend slightly at the waist, and stick your tongue out at a congressional committee saying, "nyaa, nyaa! I'm innocent and you can't examine me!"

Seems you have a few questions to answer, ma'am.

49 posted on 07/01/2013 12:21:38 AM PDT by Lexinom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson