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.”
You are not as smart as I had hoped you would be
Yep, I think Issa/Izza (I love z’s!) and Rowdy Gowdy have got the upper hand.
Thanks Syncro, that’s encouraging.
Lerner said she broke no IRS regulation. If they find that she broke even one - even such as taking office supplies for personal use, she can be questioned about it. She had no 5th Amendment protection for that since she had declared that she broke no regulation. She would also be open to perjury since she was under oath.
Obviously, the above is an absurd case, but if there is a significant regulation broken, she is in deep doo-doo ...
Lerner now has a choice between testifying and going to jail until she agrees to testify (see McDougal, Susan).
Her attorney knows this. And will advise her of a third option: immunity. Indeed, he has likely begun negotiations with the Committee over exactly this issue.
At some point, probably sooner rather than later, Lerner will spill her guts in a deposition -- and Issa, Gowdy, et al will learn more about how far up the chain-of-command this scandal goes.
Conceivably, Lerner may never testify in an open hearing -- until it's time to wrap this thing up.
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.
She is not in any do-do, because Issa is not going to let this case harm Obama.
Oui!
I would hate to be the insurance company holding her life policies right about now. Her life expectancy just plummeted.
The good news for her is that it may be restored to original duration, if she lets *all* the cats out of the bag.
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.