House panel says IRS official waived 5th Amendment right ( Lois Lerner )

CNN ^ | June 28, 2013 | Tom Cohen

[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."

[Logical me]

This is great because they can call her back and hold her in contempt if she now refuses to testify.

If she continues with the 5th I don't believe Issa has the ba!! to hold her in contempt and charge her.

[Bryan24]

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.

[John S Mosby]

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?

[okie01]

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.

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.

[John S Mosby]

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.

[John S Mosby]

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 Republic’s 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...

[okie01]

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.

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.