Posted on 05/23/2013 7:37:41 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
Okay, I admit it. The main reason for this DUmmie FUnnies edition is so I can post the VIDEO of the sublime moment in yesterday's Congressional IRS hearing when Trey Gowdy let the world and Lois Lerner know that she BLEW it by accidentally waiving her Fifth Amendment rights when she delivered a self-serving opening statement proclaiming her innocence. One moment she is relieved to be dismissed by the committee's chairman and the next moment she is having a Depends Moment when she realizes, thanks to Trey Gowdy, that she completely BLEW her invocation of her Fifth Amendment rights. The DUmmies also noticed that too as you can see in this THREAD, "IRS - Did Lois Lerner botch 5th Amendment assertion." So let us now watch the DUmmies observe in Bolshevik Red how Lois Lerner blew her Fifth Amendment shield while the commentary of your humble correspondent, who notes that Lois Lerner after admitting she was bad at math is even worse at basic legal matters, is in the [brackets]:
IRS - Did Lois Lerner botch 5th Amendment assertion.
[Measured by the sudden expansion of her Depends...YES.]
Lois Lerner started off her appearance by proclaiming her innocence and then Rep(tilian)Trey Gowdy SC said:
["Depends...FILL!"]
“She just testified. She just waived her Fifth Amendment right to privilege,” Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., a former federal prosecutor, said, “You don’t get to tell your side of the story and then not be subjected to cross-examination. That’s not the way it works. She waived her right to Fifth Amendment privilege by issuing and opening statement. She ought to stand here and answer our questions.”
Members of the public watching in the committee room applauded enthusiastically.
Anyone know how the whole "plead the fifth" thing works and what else you're allowed to say?
[Is that question coming from Lois Lerner's lawyer? ...And now to the DUmmie reactions.]
Too bad - she blew it. You can't defend yourself and then invoke the 5th.
[Unfortunately Lois Lerner's lawyer was sleeping in class the day they taught that.]
No one said she perjured herself. She simply began to tesify, and then invoked the Fifth. Prosecutors would say that is a no-no.
[A no-no which caused poor Lois to do doo-doo.]
Then she should have kept her mouth shut, ya think?
[Keep your mouth shut so your other end doesn't go wide open.]
You can invoke the 5th at any time. Even mid-sentence.
[Sure. Even in mid-burp.]
Can't use it as a sword and a shield. If you decide to shut up, you need to shut up. If you decide to talk, you talk. You don't get to make self-serving statements and then refuse to answer questions about those statements or their subject matter.
[LOUSY FREEPER TROLL!!!]
I agree but I think she will make Issa get a judge to force her testimony . That takes time and effort. The judge may or may not agree. Her answers will be just as evasive if not more so than what we heard yesterday. And there is a difference of opinion on the waiver issue.
In any case, I bet Issa turns it down.
Very astute observation. Maybe I am guilty of giving to much credit when no credit is due, but the Obama administration is the ultimate political animal. Nothing said or written by this administration does not serve a tactical purpose in promoting or protecting the ideology and existence of the regime. Issa and Gowdy will have their courage tested.
IMHO, this should not matter...She also stated previously that the reason she was taking the fifth was to not incriminate others. She is innocent, remember...as a new born babe.
However, the the fifth amendment protects one against "SELF" incrimination, right? So...
1. You cannot take the fifth for someone else and,
2. She knows incriminating information on someone else.
The fifth amendment does not apply here and she admitted she has knowledge of criminal activity. She needs to be compelled and held in contempt if she tries to plead again.
You need to do a post on The Magistrate always tries to bring order to chaos.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2890205
He wasn’t referring to you, he was referring to Lois’ lawyer, who apparently didn’t read the entire law
textbook, only the Cliff notes.
Time to restock the popcorn bin.
And I wasn’t referring to you. So what’s your point?
My point was, just as I stated, that I don’t have time these days to delve deeply into the news of the day, so I cherry pick threads, hoping to get the important parts in condensed form. I was searching for the Cliff’s Notes version of today’s news, and this thread wasn’t it. This thread is obviously for those FReepers who have more time on their hands. That is neither a compliment, nor an insult. Just an observation.
When I came across Smarty’s post, referring to the lawyer relying on Cliff’s Notes, when I was already conscious of the fact that I have been doing just that recently, and I already had the term “Cliff’s Notes” in my head before I read that comment, it just seemed natural to respond accordingly. Sorry if I offended anyone.
Sorry. I’ll stay out of your business. Thought I was doing you a favor.
No problem. I was just returning the favor. Have a nice day.
You didn’t get what I said but that’s OK
I have a suspicion that that would get the poster an instant granite cookie. Oceania is at war with Eastasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
IANAL, but I believe that this would mean that Lerner and anyone else involved in the scandal could then be compelled to testify, since they could no longer incriminate themselves. IMO, they're going under the bus.
I did get what you said. I said something else. I explained it to you twice. (Once in reply to your freepmail, and once in a courtesy ping here.) I didn’t think it was complicated or disruptive. I don’t see why anybody would be upset about it.
It sounds like you are upset... I sure am not. Mostly because I don’t know what you are talking about. OK?
LOL. I’m not upset. I was just wondering why you were.
She was fatigued and actually tried to invoke the 5th Dimension:
"I'm sorry, Mr. Issa …. Last night, I didn't get to sleep at all (No, No)."
Oops. Forgot the courtesy ping. And when I said “you” I meant chaguito.
LOL, seems there are more posts on this thread because of my bad judgment in posting to BykrBayb than on the topic at hand. Normally I’m not the author of such confusion. I’ll try not to do that again.
You mean you’re not upset either?! Then who was upset? Okay, let’s start over. I don’t have time to read the whole thread. Can I borrow the Cliff’s Notes?
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.