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 ...
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.
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.
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...
Obama will use the Presidential Pardon Power.
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.
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".
No, make sure he testifies first as this stinks at the source which is the top of the White Hut.
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).
Yep, Creepy Ass Cracker, just like me. LOL
They used to burn witches! Oh dear so insensitive... Buhahahaha!!!!
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.
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!
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.
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".
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?
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)
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.
war is coming. Oh hai NSA
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.