Posted on 05/22/2013 10:21:23 AM PDT by smoothsailing
May 22, 2013
Via Andrew Johnson at NRO, Lois Lerner’s decision to take the Fifth came as no surprise. What did come as a surprise was that Lerner actually started off by, er, testifying on her own behalf. Surprisingly, Lerner accepted Darrell Issa’s invitation to deliver an opening statement under oath, and then testified to the provenance of a transcript of her deposition to the Inspector General. Only at that point did Lerner plead the Fifth:
That poses a big question as to whether Lerner waived her Fifth Amendment rights to avoid self-incrimination. Rep. Trey Gowdy argued that the law does not allow a witness to testify on her behalf and then refuse to answer any other questions:
After Lerner’s statements, Representative Trey Gowdy (R., S.C.) argued she “waved her right to Fifth Amendment privilege” by making those statements and urged that she stay and answer questions: ”You don’t get to tell your side of the story and then not be subjected to cross-examination.” Lerner was ultimately allowed to invoke her Fifth Amendment rights and leave the hearing.
Issa did allow Lerner to leave the hearing after asking her twice whether she’d be willing to answer questions on narrower grounds, to which Lerner twice refused. However, Issa warned her she’d be subject to recall — and that the committee would be consulting counsel about her use of the Fifth Amendment. I’d guess that nothing much will come of it, except perhaps to purge her opening statement from the record, but shouldn’t an attorney like Lerner have seen that trap coming a mile away? It might explain how Lerner thought the question-plant strategy was a good idea, too.
The following might be relevant:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3022577/posts?q=1&;page=60#60
Rep Goudy was a Federal Prosecutor and he said that in giving her statement she had waived her right to claim the 5th.
*Gowdy
If she was sworn in before making that statement, then she waived her fifth amendment rights as to anything in that statement.
She can't refuse to be cross examined on those questions and Issa should have issued a contempt of Congress citation and put her in jail under she answered every question that was relevant and on point as to the subject of her opening statement.
Her claim that she did nothing wrong and violated no laws was a waiver of any right she had not to testify. She did testify. I am disappointed in Issa on this, although he did state that the witness is subject to being recalled.
Is this just another dog and pony show, or are these guys serious?
For a minute there I began to wonder if I had only thought it and not posted it. Here, I found it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3022577/posts?page=30#30
No problem...
Looks like we may have a conflict on interpretation.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3022577/posts?q=1&;page=60#60
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3022577/posts?page=62#62
I’m going back to the 90s for my answer. IMO they had the Clinton administration on the ropes a number of times. Then nothing.
I really gave up thinking House or Senate hearings would ever accomplish anything much.
Even the Articles of Impeachment were so watered down that it was a joke to even send them to the Senate.
There was so much more there, even that we were aware of. It mostly served to destroy my faith in our government.
Sadly, here we go again..., a chance to destroy this generations faith in government.
I agree with Gowdy, but I think that there is enough grey area here that the matter can be given better consideration.
There’s no need to rush that I can think of (as Issa reserved the right to recall Lerner for future testimony)
Here we go...
Lerner will be called back!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3022621/posts?page=1
I doubt it. The Republican Party is
too wimpy to say or do anything about it.
There will be no impeachments.
There will be no prosecutions.
The wimpy Republicans will make some noises to get themselves some publicity, then quietly put their tails between their legs and slink away once the media starts calling them "racists."
I think you are mixing up a court trial with an investigation. During investigative questioning you can stop answering questions at any time you want.
If you take the stand in a trial you are fair game if you refuse to answer questions you are in contempt.
In this case there is no way to compel here to answer questions short of water boarding her.
She knew what she was doing. Yes, her opening statement will be purged, but none of the bells can be unrung.
She did not break any laws. IF the President tell you to do something it’s not illegal. The patriot act made all this possible.
There seems to be some disagreement on this. I’m not an attorney or an expert, so I’ll have to defer ultimately.
Check this out... (two opinions are expressed / polar opposites)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3022577/posts?page=66#66
Except,perhaps,for uniformed members of the Armed Forces I suspect that you're wrong.
It occurs to me, that by allowing her to make and statement and then allowing her to take the 5th, Issa is educating the low information voters on this issue as everyone yaps about is it right, legal or fair, etc.
This can easily gel public opinion even further against the IRS (and Obama) and then Issa can call her back to ask more pointed questions for her to plead the 5th on.
Maybe he is playing chess, when we want him to play checkers.
Have you seen this woman in public speaking D1? She is absolutely so full of herself that she couldn't resist and I think Issa knew it.
If not recalled then Issa blew a great opportunity to spend just few minutes to get some powerful soundbites out of her. We'll see.
Have you seen this woman in public speaking D1? She is absolutely so full of herself that she couldn't resist and I think Issa knew it.
If not recalled then Issa blew a great opportunity to spend just few minutes to get some powerful soundbites out of her. We'll see.
Damn doubles...
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.