Posted on 05/22/2013 8:45:43 AM PDT by Sopater
I have to disagree with Issa. He handled Lerner like a politician( what the Democrats want) and not like a possible crimimnal( what the taxpayers want).
Thumbs down for a bonehead move by Issa.
>> why wouldn’t people always do this if they’re being investigated?
It’s situational. You don’t “plead the fifth” when you’re merely being investigated (i.e. one form or another of cop is grilling you in some back room). In those situations, you simply don’t talk.
You “plead the fifth” when you’re being compelled to give testimony under oath and penalty of perjury, but (ostensibly) not under threat of being charged with a crime yourself.
The rub is, a judge can still compel you to testify by granting you immunity from being prosecuted for whatever it is you’re afraid of. This immunity can be broad or narrow. If you fail to testify after being granted immunity you can be held in contempt.
DISCLAIMER: I’m not a lawyer but I watched a lot of Perry Mason. :-) And I *am* rather judgmental.
Her answer was basically, I’ll say what I want to say and screw you and your questions. Typical Obamist maneuver, and Issa, typical of all rope-a-dope victims, fell for it.
A Federal employee who takes the 5th in connection to answering job related questions should be automatically fired.
>> couldn’t someone claim that they were deprived of property without due process of law if they were legitimately exempt from paying taxes, but wasn’t legally granted that exemption due to the IRS deliberately holding up the process due to the name of their organization?
I think the door has been opened to all sorts of creative ways to legally attack the IRS and other agencies.
There are some smart lawyers out there and not all of them are ambulance chasers.
Whether any of the attacks will succeed depends upon the whim of our loveable federal court system.
Great.
She should have been hammered with questions for at least a half hour. Instead she got to make her statement for the cameras and then just walk away. You know what will be on the news tonight? Video of her saying she’s innocent. And that’s all! No video of her being asked pointed questions and then repeatedly telling the hearing to go pound sand.
Thanks Issa!
Some people have argued, quite reasonably IMO, that being required by law to file an income tax return, which can and will be used against you in a court of law, is a violation of the 5th amendment. These people were thrown in jail.
But in fact this logical thorn is why statist keep insisting, irrationally, that the income tax is voluntary.
Been tried. Failed. The income tax is the foundation of the state and the state isn’t going to let anyone tamper with the foundation. Anyone.
Can we go after this woman’s government pension in some way?
“an unprecedented level of openness in government”...
So much for transparency
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2188721/posts
Video: Transparency on parade!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2720555/posts
Obama’s Empty Transparency Rhetoric
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2715013/posts
As far as I am concerned, Lerner is guilty until proven innocent.
Of course, seeing as how Issa, genius, just allowed her to say that she’s innocent, he offered zero evidence of any sort to the contrary, it looks like she is innocent.
Thanks, Daryl, you’re the best.
What would the democrats do without you?
>> Been tried. Failed.
If at first you don’t succeed... reload and try, try again.
The motivation is strong on the other side, too. :-)
That's how the IRS gets to treat us, so it's only "fair" to apply the same standard to her.
“May I ask: What do you mean? “
I’ll answer that! He has no testicles! He’s just like Boner. We need men like Trey Gowdy as leaders not these a$$holes!
You are on track. My understanding is that there has to be a real potential, that you are going to be prosecuted for the subject matter in which you are pleading the Fifth. If no prosecuting agency has any interest, it calls into question as to whether the Fifth applies (which is kind of a goofy statement, b/c they might get interested after you testify). But the bottom line is, to plead the Fifth, your statements would have the potential to convict you of a crime by any criminal court. Have not researched it, but I could possibly see where a crime that was past the statute of limitations no longer would apply to the Fifth, or where immunity was granted.
So, bottom line is, that if she properly invoked the Fifth Amendment, her truthful answers had the potential to convict her of a crime.
Yes indeed.
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.