Posted on 05/22/2013 12:10:59 PM PDT by Red Steel
If Lerner cannot extricate herself, legally, from this situation she does not seem the type to fall on the sword for Obama. She seems arrogant, self-absorbed, full of hubris, and believes she is smarter than anyone else. If she feels like her tits are in a wringer she will squeal like a stuck pig....unless Obama threatens her or her family before she speakes.
Maybe she’s a member of the Choom Gang?
How do you invoke the protection against self-incrimination if you “didn’t do anything wrong”? What’s to incriminate?
What did the president know and when did he know it?
I still can’t help thinking this a trap of some type; she has voluntarily crawled under the Bus and is pounding on the undercarriage to have the driver take off. Maybe she did this so she couldn’t get fired as just exercising her Constitutional rights is not grounds for termination. Eventually her underlings will have to testify, how comfortable will that be to come to work the next day and have her there glaring out her window at you.
Maybe they gave her a little something to calm her nerves.
“words matter”
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/09/05/words-matter-amateur-compilation-reel-pits-obama-against-himself/
most transparent administration ever!
I understand your point but what is the end game? If she refuses to answer questions she can be held in contempt and sit in jail?I don’t think it would be a good idea at this early stage in the game.
She said something about the 5th being there to protect the innocent as well as the guilty from self-incrimination. I guess that means those wily lawyers can make you say things you didn’t mean. Any lawyers out there with an idea on this?
She might have poor legal counsel if they didn’t warn her not to make a speech or, even worse, answer a question.
What if you were assured by your bosses that what you were doing was completely legal? That there would be no repercussions?
Then.... all of a sudden they point their fingers at you, and you know what will happen.
From what I can tell, Lerner wants immunity from prosecution before she gives further testimony, and that is what happened yesterday between her and Issa. He even mentioned immunity in his response to her.
Was it ?
It seemed like Lerner wanted immunity before testifying, and may have made that decision just before the hearing. So... her (awkward) refusal to testify had to be 'on record' before her counsel could negotiate immunity. It is only logical.
AFTER her counsel negotiates immunity from prosecution in return for answering further questions.
If she admits she committed a crime and falls on her sword for The One, her punishment will be.. A PROMOTION BY 0BAMA!
Which, I think anyone would admit, is very important in the modern (used loosely) world.
If she admits she committed a crime and falls on her sword for The One, her punishment will be.. A PROMOTION BY 0BAMA!
Oh... come on. He wouldn't do something like that.....
Obama picks Victoria Nuland for assistant state secretary, Douglas Lute for NATO
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.