Skip to comments.House panel says IRS official waived 5th Amendment right ( Lois Lerner )
Posted on 06/28/2013 12:51:08 PM PDT by george76
Republicans on a House committee rejected strenuous Democratic objections in voting Friday that Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner waived her constitutional right against self-incrimination at a prior hearing.
The resolution was the first step in an effort by Rep. Darrell Issa of California, the GOP chairman of the House Oversight Committee, to force Lerner to return to answer questions about targeting of conservative groups by the unit she headed.
It passed on a 22-17 vote, with every Republican in favor and every Democrat opposed, following an unusually vitriolic hearing.
Under subpoena to testify before Issa's panel on May 22, Lerner instead made a statement that declared she did nothing wrong, and then invoked her 5th Amendment right. Issa dismissed her, but warned the committee might call her back.
Friday's hearing was the first step toward forcing Lerner to appear again. If approved, Issa's resolution would set the stage for requesting her to come back and testify because she had waived her 5th Amendment right in the view of the committee.
"I believe Lois Lerner waived her 5th Amendment privileges," Issa said. "She did so when she voluntarily chose to deliver an opening statement" that included what he described as "four specific denials ....at the core of the committee's investigation into this matter."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
It always bothered me that O.J. Simpson was allowed to speak to the jury and proclaim his innocence without being obliged to face cross-examination.
Other than show up....I don’t think you have to utter a word once they open up the proceedings. You could just sit there...sipping buttermilk...and drawing circles on a pad.
This is great because they can call her back and hold her in contempt if she now refuses to testify.
Better do it quick before Lois has an unfortunate and totally coincidental accident.
Can't she be held in contempt of congress? of course, I think they did that to Holder and nothing came of it - he should be impeached and imprisoned. Too bad Boehner and McConnell are invertebrates.
Good. Get her back, let everyone see her smug arrogant mug again. Ask her how she’s enjoying her taxpayer paid vacation. I’d love to see her plead the 5th to that question.
Dropped a '0' ... that should be $150,000.
Even behind, Democrats have no problem getting ‘vitriolic,’ vehement, unruly or even physical when it suits them to get a union goon on scene.
Republicans will not govern ever again if they can’t learn to do this. Screw dignity, propriety and logic; in politics, that’s for fools.
With what’s gone on in the last 5 years, our Founding Fathers would be frigging shooting by now - with musket balls or anything else they could get their hands on.
Proverbially speaking, I want blood. Issa and the gang need to pin these scoundrels to the wall. And there are many involved.
She should be in a hard time prison.
It bugs me that the Gov't[Congress] has the final say. They could/can accuse someone in front of them, yet if someone responds they lose the chance of taking the 5th.
Look at the vote on the committee...this is the most the US House has been this bitterly divided since the Civil War. It’s not just a partisan divide...it’s a divide about right and wrong.
What the IRS and the administration did was wrong...and the Dems on the committee know it...but they are only prepared to obstruct the truth from coming out.
During Watergate most Republicans were appalled at the actions of the Nixon administration and helped discover the truth because it was the right thing to do.
Not these criminals.
That one pissed me off beyond words Lance Ito was an idiot and let that whole thing turned into one giant cluster fkdgjdsfjkhbjnfgh
Who was yhe idiot Dem rep who claimed this was “McCarthyism” when he gave his vote?? What an ass!!!
Even IF she comes back, she’s not going to tell us anything. They are NEVER going to tell us the truth.
So what can we do about it?
Sometime tonight she’ll be checking into Bethesda Naval Hospital for an unspecified malady. Unavailable for further testimony until further notice. Have a nice summer, boys.
I was going to say.....she doesn't look like she picks fruit..... :-)
A good cross-examiner usually knows the answers to the questions he’s asking. Sometimes it’s fishing but that can be dangerous. They just want to put her on the record. She’ll just refuse to answer.
So she’s found in contempt. Like Holder she just waits for this session to expire. She perjures herself, who knows. Sounds like the ‘pub’s have been taking boner pills. What’s gotten into them, acting like they got a pair.
HOUSE Republicans. There it is—different species.
Give her personal immunity, but make her testify re IRS actions. Government agencies/ employees should not be able to hide from congressional oversight.
Lerner is a criminal and should be in jail.
An executive order in place for federal employees states that pleading the Fifth Amendment before Congress means dismissal.
‘hold her in contempt if she now refuses to testify.’
I am sure Eric Holder would have her promptly arrested.
“It always bothered me that O.J. Simpson was allowed to speak to the jury and proclaim his innocence without being obliged to face cross-examination.”
I don’t remember this,please jog my memory.
I don’t=it should be but it isn’t
Some Pundits are saying to give the witch immunity for testimony. Well hopefully if they do this there is guarantees on what her testimony will be. I can just see the dumb Party giving her immunity and then her having nothing to say on the stand. IMO she gladly, and without suggestion subjugated the Rights of Conservatives, Perp walk her!
This is such a great Summer! It’s the best Summer I’ve had since I was a kid! Democrats squirming like worms.
But I don't think apply to the Lerner case. I'm no lawyer, but in a formal (not street) situation, you cannot give testimony and then refuse to be cross-examined.
For example, a defendant at a trial does not have to take the stand.
But if the defendant does take the stand to proclaim his innocence, the prosecution has every right to cross-examine. The defendant has waived his 5th amendment rights in that case.
If I'm wrong, perhaps a FR lawyer will correct me.
Not contempt, but fired for violating Executive Order 10491. I e-mailed a contact at Dana Rohrabacher’s office to clue them in on the Ex O.
I assumed it was the monthly salary. With hush money...er I mean bonuses, it probably is.
“No person shall...be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself...”
The House Republicans are wrong on this issue. She has the right to invoke the 5th at any point. The only way to “waive” it is to answer a question. The 5th is also called “the right to be silent.” This means she could answer some questions but not all.
she wasn’t silent
Garrity Warnings: criminal prosecution forthcoming. You can plead the Fifth, and not face disciplinary action.
Lerner will just hold congress in contempt and maybe be considered for a higher level cabinet poition. Holder will file obstruction charges against Issa’s committee.
That’s the way it works in the upside down Alice in Wonderland USSA.
If she continues with the 5th I don't believe Issa has the ba!! to hold her in contempt and charge her.
Congress needs to pass a law:
If you are a government employee and are called to testify before Congress about official government business, a invocation of your 5th Amendment rights automatically results in your being fired from your job.
No arrest powers for the Sgt. At Arms of the House:
wikipedia: “For daily sessions of the House, the Sergeant at Arms carries the silver and ebony Mace of the United States House of Representatives in front of the speaker in procession to the rostrum. When the House is in session, the mace stands on a pedestal to the speaker’s own right.
When the body resolves itself into a Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, the Sergeant at Arms moves the mace to a lowered position, more or less out of sight. In accordance with the Rules of the House, on the rare occasions when a Member becomes unruly, the Sergeant at Arms, on order of the Speaker, lifts the mace from its pedestal and presents it before the offenders and restore order.”
There is, unbeknownst or spoken about a jail in the Congress building. Who has arrest powers?
Sorry. But she was asked questions, after making her self-serving statement. She was asked to confirm whether certain documents were, indeed, what she had certified them to be.
She answered willingly.
She's SOL on the 5th Amendment.
The only time in that hearing Issa followed advice of counsel. That said... he should then have ruled she had waiver her 5th Amendment rights by so stating and answering. And the look of her attorney-— he knew it.
The next step, right then was to continue to ask questions, and then when she refused, cite her for contempt, actionable contempt. And.. firing. She must answer.
to wit... an article in NYTimes states there is a jail. excerpt from article re: Bolten and Harriett Meirs from GWB admin:
Washington lawyers are dusting off an old but apparently sturdy doctrine called inherent contempt that gives Congress the power to bring the recalcitrant witnesses in by force, if necessary.
What we know that Congress has learned in its investigation of the purge of nine top federal prosecutors is disturbing. Cases appear to have been brought against Democrats and blocked against Republicans to help Republicans win elections. .......
This is where inherent contempt comes in. From the Republics earliest days, Congress has had the right to hold recalcitrant witnesses in contempt and even imprison them all by itself. In 1795, shortly after the Constitution was ratified, the House ordered its sergeant at arms to arrest and detain two men accused of trying to bribe members of Congress. The House held a trial and convicted one of them. “ All NYTimes article from Dec 4, 2007 Jail in Congress as search. enjoy. They would do it to us...
I tend to disagree. Solely because this was not a courtroom and it will inevitably be played out in the press.
Had Issa gone on to your "next step", asking further questions and then, "when she refused, citing her for contempt" -- nobody in the media audience (or in the media)would've understood.
Now, when Lerner is recalled...and refuses to testify...and is warned of contempt...the media audience will understand why.
Certainly, you can argue whether Issa and the Republicans have used this "pause for effect" to effectively establish the parameters of the 5th Amendment in the public mind. But I believe it was appropriate for them to defer the issue.
So very much of what the Republicans (and we) are fighting -- day in, day out -- is caused by a MSM that has degenerated into a Ministry of Propaganda and can no longer be relied upon to inform the public correctly.
For some years, I have asserted that the Unnited States of America faces three enemies:
1. Domestic radicals.
2. Islamic terrorists
3. The so-called Mainstream Media.
< And, of these three enemies, the most dangerous is the MSM. Because, were it not for the MSM, the other two enemies would've been defeated ten years ago.