Lois Lerner’s price for testimony: Immunity

[zimmer]

Embattled IRS official Lois Lerner will not testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee unless she’s given immunity from prosecution, her lawyer told POLITICO Tuesday.

Read more: Lois Lerner?s price for testimony: Immunity - Rachael Bade and John Bresnahan - POLITICO.com
​

My... another transparent Obama administration employee.

Well... I think we should go into the files and see who she and her Gestapo style Posse called, and for how long and how often. If they can log our calls... I'm sure they would be watching our little IRS/Gestapo too.

Put those records to good use... lets' have Lerner and her Posse of Taxholes at bat, and learn a thing or two more about how these thugs operate.

 

[MaggieD]

My... another transparent Obama administration employee.

Well... I think we should go into the files and see who she and her Gestapo style Posse called, and for how long and how often. If they can log our calls... I'm sure they would be watching our little IRS/Gestapo too.

Put those records to good use... lets' have Lerner and her Posse of Taxholes at bat, and learn a thing or two more about how these thugs operate.

By what right will she not testify? I didn't know testifying was optional.

 

[humbolt]

It had to come down to this. Testimony comes with a price tag. Who knows what the truth might cost?

 

[Fisher]

By what right will she not testify? I didn't know testifying was optional.

She has invoked her 5th Amendment rights.

If you want the truth then immunity will be appropriate. The political hostility that leads people to twist people's words and engage in trickery are the reason people are like this. "Well early you testified that the file was big and now you are saying it is large. Which is it, big or large and why are you changing your story?"

 

[MaggieD]

She has invoked her 5th Amendment rights.

If you want the truth then immunity will be appropriate. The political hostility that leads people to twist people's words and engage in trickery are the reason people are like this. "Well early you testified that the file was big and now you are saying it is large. Which is it, big or large and why are you changing your story?"

It's my understanding that a court ruled that, since she gave a statement, she effectively waived those rights. ??

 

[Wehrwolfen]

By what right will she not testify? I didn't know testifying was optional.

Guess Ms. Lerner and her attorney are aware of the criminality involved and rather than falling on her sword for the higher-ups and Obama in this case she will ask for immunity and tell all she knows. I'm sure that the Lame Stream Media and the Progressive criminals in DC will demonize her as soon as she tells all.

 

[Fisher]

It's my understanding that a court ruled that, since she gave a statement, she effectively waived those rights. ??

News to me this has been litigated in relation to her. You have a link to that as I have not seen it reported? Either way, the most she could get would be a year for not testifying and being in contempt of Congress.

 

[Wehrwolfen]

It had to come down to this. Testimony comes with a price tag. Who knows what the truth might cost?

The Left seems to been paying high prices for silence lately, in some cases it's been bloody. Now I'm not saying that something might happen to Ms. Lerner, however there has been some discussion previously about the deaths of people within the church Obama used to attend. Didn't Jesse Jackson Jr. just get sent down the river. Heard there's a reunion for Dems at the Federal prison. Blago and Rezko will sing a duet for them.

 

[ttwtt78640]

If this slime ball wants full immunity then what is prevent her from simply lying and saying the she acted "alone", taking her full retirement (and whatever other perks are offered to her) and helping to put the matter to rest?

 

[MaggieD]

News to me this has been litigated in relation to her. You have a link to that as I have not seen it reported? Either way, the most she could get would be a year for not testifying and being in contempt of Congress.

I guess I'm wrong here...it seems it was the committee -- I sure thought I read it was a court, though. Anybody?

A House Republican-led committee approved a resolution Friday declaring that high-ranking IRS official Lois Lerner waived her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination by delivering a statement before the committee in May.

Read more: House panel finds IRS official waived Fifth Amendment right, can be forced to testify in targeting probe | Fox News

Edit: Nah, don't bother looking. I was wrong.

 

[iliveonramen]

My... another transparent Obama administration employee.

Well... I think we should go into the files and see who she and her Gestapo style Posse called, and for how long and how often. If they can log our calls... I'm sure they would be watching our little IRS/Gestapo too.

Put those records to good use... lets' have Lerner and her Posse of Taxholes at bat, and learn a thing or two more about how these thugs operate.

There's no doubt I would want immunity as well....it's a witch hunt.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

My... another transparent Obama administration employee.

Well... I think we should go into the files and see who she and her Gestapo style Posse called, and for how long and how often. If they can log our calls... I'm sure they would be watching our little IRS/Gestapo too.

Put those records to good use... lets' have Lerner and her Posse of Taxholes at bat, and learn a thing or two more about how these thugs operate.

Immunity, good grief, are we watching an episode of 24? Obama can't even get his own government officials under control...

 

[rocket88]

It had to come down to this. Testimony comes with a price tag. Who knows what the truth might cost?

Who knows indeed, but I don't think the committee is as interested in truth as they are with a crucifixion.

 

[humbolt]

Who knows indeed, but I don't think the committee is as interested in truth as they are with a crucifixion.

Maybe they can compromise and get both. Every time I conclude that the GOP is as dumb as a box of rocks, they surprise me a little. Just a little.

 

[Fisher]

I guess I'm wrong here...it seems it was the committee -- I sure thought I read it was a court, though. Anybody?



Edit: Nah, don't bother looking. I was wrong.

I am not an Obama apologist and I contend that she did not waive her rights. Congressional committees are not Courts of Law so trying to import court room rulings into the political committees is just pathetic partisanship as evidenced by the vote. Even if she were declared in contempt, she would still have the case referred to the real prosecutors--the same ones who did nothing when Eric Holder was declared in contempt. Like I said, grant her the immunity or the GOP will not get her to testify against her will.

 

[rocket88]

Maybe they can compromise and get both. Every time I conclude that the GOP is as dumb as a box of rocks, they surprise me a little. Just a little.

Well that's because your expectations are low...:2razz:

 

[Bronson]

Who knows indeed, but I don't think the committee is as interested in truth as they are with a crucifixion.

The only people not interested in the truth are the Fascist thugs defending this corrupt and vile administration using the IRS like the Gestapo

 

[rocket88]

The only people not interested in the truth are the Fascist thugs defending this corrupt and vile administration using the IRS like the Gestapo

Since when are you interested in truth?

We've already seen the righties come out and denounce any evidence that didn't support their theory of Obama directing it personally as "lies."

 

[ttwtt78640]

Since when are you interested in truth?

We've already seen the righties come out and denounce any evidence that didn't support their theory of Obama directing it personally as "lies."

Breaking the law is still a crime even if Obama did not direct it. Why is it OK to target anyone for special treatment under the federal tax law based upon their name? Whether the IRS BOLO names listed were based on a particular political slant or not - it is still illegal.

 

[iliveonramen]

Breaking the law is still a crime even if Obama did not direct it. Why is it OK to target anyone for special treatment under the federal tax law based upon their name? Whether the IRS BOLO names listed were based on a particular political slant or not - it is still illegal.

It's not special treatment it's about scrutiny and applying the law. It's a no brainer that looking at organizations with "Tea Party" is a great way to funnel out organizations that are political not social welfare groups. Just like "9/12" or "Progressive" or any of the other names they used. Now if they were denying "Tea Party" groups and allowing progressive/liberal groups to get the status that would be unequal treatment.

 

[Bronson]

Since when are you interested in truth?

We've already seen the righties come out and denounce any evidence that didn't support their theory of Obama directing it personally as "lies."

You're projecting again and tossing out strawmen. Par for the course.

You're the one already assuming that the committee investigating the IRS acting like the Gestapo wants to "crucify" someone. The IRS has already admitted specifically targeting Tea Party and Conservative Groups. Liberal Groups were not targeted with the same level of scrutiny. Not even close. Liberal requests were immediately approved while Tea Party requests were held up in limbo until after the election. Tea Party and religious groups had their requests sent to a special technical group. Many are still pending.

You and your cronies want to obfuscate and misdirect. Make this about the committee and not about the IRS acting like the Gestapo for the Obama Administration. That's how corruption grows and spreads. People like you excuse it, rationalize it and cheer it on because the power behind that corruption is directed against your opposition. Why don't you tell us why the Bill of Rights only applies to one political ideology in the United States under the Obama Administration. Instead of playing cowardly games and trying to smear the people investigating the corruption, why don't you tell us all why this corruption and abuse of power should be allowed to flourish and continue.

 

[rocket88]

Breaking the law is still a crime even if Obama did not direct it. Why is it OK to target anyone for special treatment under the federal tax law based upon their name? Whether the IRS BOLO names listed were based on a particular political slant or not - it is still illegal.

I'm not saying it wasn't breaking the law. I'm just saying that the committee, which is a political body, cares more about politics than truth.

 

[ttwtt78640]

It's not special treatment it's about scrutiny and applying the law. It's a no brainer that looking at organizations with "Tea Party" is a great way to funnel out organizations that are political not social welfare groups. Just like "9/12" or "Progressive" or any of the other names they used. Now if they were denying "Tea Party" groups and allowing progressive/liberal groups to get the status that would be unequal treatment.

:lol: :doh What about those with "union" in the name? :roll: What social welfare mission does Media Matters involve itself in? They clearly state their mission as having an anti-conservative bias.

 

[rocket88]

:lol: :doh What about those with "union" in the name? :roll: What social welfare mission does Media Matters involve itself in? They clearly state their mission as having an anti-conservative bias.

Someone should start a group called "Media Matters to the Union of Tea Parties" just to screw with them.

 

[rocket88]

You and your cronies want to obfuscate and misdirect. Make this about the committee and not about the IRS acting like the Gestapo for the Obama Administration. That's how corruption grows and spreads. People like you excuse it, rationalize it and cheer it on because the power behind that corruption is directed against your opposition. Why don't you tell us why the Bill of Rights only applies to one political ideology in the United States under the Obama Administration. Instead of playing cowardly games and trying to smear the people investigating the corruption, why don't you tell us all why this corruption and abuse of power should be allowed to flourish and continue.

I have cronies? Awesome.

Pointing out that the committee is a political exercise done by politicians for political reasons is not excusing anybody or anything.