Ok, I'll buy that, in a court of law. But in the court of public opinion, if she didn't commit a crime, why take the fifth?
I can certainly see where someone would take the fifth even when they didn't think they committed a crime. The law is often vague and this has major political overtones.
That said. She doesn't have to testify. You are the division head of the Tax Exempt division of the IRS and your division has been targeting political opponents for the last 3 years. And Congress now wants to know why you mislead them on 4 separate occasions? Are you guilty?
Best case: you are guilty of complete incompetence, not knowing what was going on in your division and allowing political targeting because it IS your responsibility.
Worst Case: You're a a partisan hack who directed the targeting and you are guilty as Hell.
Either way you should rot in jail. And both legal courts and the court of public opinion should rule this way. At this point I really think the burden of proof is on her, to prove that she is innocent. Because the evidence is overwhelming that the political targeting occurred and she had the responsibility as the division director.