Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Top IRS official will invoke Fifth Amendment

page: 1
37
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+3 more 
posted on May, 21 2013 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Top IRS official will invoke Fifth Amendment


WASHINGTON – A top IRS official in the division that reviews nonprofit groups will invoke the Fifth Amendment and refuse to answer questions before a House committee investigating the agency’s improper screening of conservative nonprofit groups.

Lois Lerner, the head of the exempt organizations division of the IRS, won’t answer questions about what she knew about the improper screening – or why she didn’t reveal it to Congress, according to a letter from her defense lawyer, William W. Taylor 3rd.

Lerner was scheduled to appear before the House Oversight committee Wednesday...................


Oh Oh !!

Using the 5th means She would be afraid of self incrimination !!

the poor thing might be overburdened


Since Lerner won’t answer questions, Taylor asked that she be excused from appearing, saying that would “have no purpose other than to embarrass or burden her.” There was no immediate word whether the committee will grant her request.
 


I think maybe She is a liar......

here's a list:
The Nine Lies of Lois Lerner




posted on May, 21 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   
I would hate for her to be overburdened. Thank god the IRS system is fair though and never lays any burden on your average citizen. Or embarrasses them...

Yep, just nasty 'ol congress and their witch hunts do that.



+2 more 
posted on May, 21 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Ha, they should drag her into that room, put her on CSPAN and grill her for hours.

Even if she does plead the 5th the whole time it'll just drive the point home that somebody, somewhere did something VERY illegal and people need to know about it.

I find it very funny that her lawyer would request that she not be burdened or humiliated by her clear choice to obstruct an important investigation.

~Tenth
edit on 5/21/2013 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Why not grant her immunity so she can't plead the 5th and ask her everything, who knew what, who ordered what, ect.

Personally I'd rather have the person who gave her the orders instead of her in prison.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Ha, they should drag her into that room, put her on CSPAN and grill her for hours.

Even if she does plead the 5th the whole time it'll just drive the point home that somebody, somewhere did something VERY illegal and people need to know about it.

I find it very funny that her lawyer would request that she not be burdened or humiliated by her clear choice to obstruct an important investigation.

~Tenth
edit on 5/21/2013 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)

Very good idea.
Then the news media needs to play that over and over again... showing her pleading the Fifth.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Good Job ! Thanks for the heads up and
.

Shove the Immunity onto her, and pump her in private session! The Fifth doesn't apply,
and the truth will be out. It didn't work for anybody else witholding information crucial to an
investigation and it won't here-- if these people have any sense of history.
The IRS has turned the most dangerous tool of this thug government since the H-bomb: and
the teeth need to come out like Reagan did the EPA in the 80's. These are Constitutional
issues and just as important as a looming war in the ME... maybe MORE.

I don't care if we never find out, because we already know. House needs to be sure of what
we already are 95% sure of before the I-ball comes mirroring out.(I for Impeachment).

Party Line... Nothing. I'm one of a few around here who don't trust anybody in the Mall to
do the work for us anymore. This has me a notch past livid now, because Fed government
agencies aren't here nor were formed to intimidate and rob us. I need a break---
I'm going back to make a couple more cigarette lighters.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I hope they do just that.... Then I will burn it onto DVD and send it to her weekly....



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Her incrimination?

Or someone else's ?

Another one bites the dust for 'corruption incorporated'.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
A question. Does she have the right to invoke the 5th?



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
A question. Does she have the right to invoke the 5th?


No one is arguing she doesn't have the right, everyone has the right to plead the fifth, and only the guilty do.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
A question. Does she have the right to invoke the 5th?


I believe legally she certainly can.

Maybe it's like out of the movies, where she pleads the 5th cause secretly she's been an informant working with some 3 letter agency doing the investigations?!



Not likely, but, self incrimination is more the thing she wants to avoid I would think.

~Tenth
edit on 5/21/2013 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96

Originally posted by intrepid
A question. Does she have the right to invoke the 5th?


No one is arguing she doesn't have the right, everyone has the right to plead the fifth...


Thus she is exercising her rights. Funny how everyone here is all about rights. THEIR rights. Others have them too.


....and only the guilty do.


Really?



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
A question. Does she have the right to invoke the 5th?


She does. But she shouldn't. Public servants paid with public dollars should tell the truth about any matters concerning that public office. And who ever is found to have been a part of this corruption should hand over all that public money that they were paid with. Oh, and then go to jail.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


Yeah well invoking the fith amendment as a 'protection' from government abuse of power after abusing government power.

Pretty messed up.


Lois Lerner, the head of the exempt organizations division of the IRS, won’t answer questions about what she knew about the improper screening – or why she didn’t reveal it to Congress, according to a letter from her defense lawyer, William W. Taylor 3rd.


If she was 'innocent' all she has to do is answer, but she doesn't want means either she is guilty or hiding information that can lead to the guilty party.
edit on 21-5-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Then she should pull a Holder, and recuse herself until she has something to tell the House Oversight Committee.

For her to do this, and still remain in such a high position of power in the intermingled mess of IRS and Obamacare...is not ethical.

Des



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Taking the 5th is essentially saying to the world..

"Yes, I've done everything you're accusing me of and this is the only way I can defend myself"



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Ooooohhhh this quote from the article stuck a bee up my bum....

Taylor asked that she be excused from appearing, saying that would “have no purpose other than to embarrass or burden her.”...



Taylor, a criminal defense attorney from the Washington firm Zuckerman Spaeder, said that the Department of Justice has launched a criminal investigation, and that the House committee has asked Lerner to explain why she provided “false or misleading information” to the committee four times last year.

Since Lerner won’t answer questions, Taylor asked that she be excused from appearing, saying that would “have no purpose other than to embarrass or burden her.” There was no immediate word whether the committee will grant her request.


Really...for real??? She should not have to appear because it would embarrass her???????

That is the most arrogant, lame excuse I've ever heard for not complying with a legal investigation.

She doesn't want video of her actually pleading the fifth in front of the House Committee to be made for all to see her in her glorious guilt. She's so *special* She doesn't even want to appear in person.

Des





edit on 21-5-2013 by Destinyone because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
If she was 'innocent' all she has to do is answer, but she doesn't want means either she is guilty or hiding information that can lead to the guilty party.
edit on 21-5-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)


If that is the case then the 5th is a useless Amendment then. Are there others?



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 





No one is arguing she doesn't have the right, everyone has the right to plead the fifth, and only the guilty do.


This is not a true statement... There is word known as duress.

1.
compulsion by threat or force; coercion; constraint.
2.
Law. such constraint or coercion as will render void a contract or other legal act entered or performed under its influence.
3.
forcible restraint, especially imprisonment.

Not everyone who pleads the 5th does so because they are guilty.

She could be afraid of what "they" will do when she throws "them" under the bus.
edit on 21-5-2013 by knowledgedesired because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 





If that is the case then the 5th is a useless Amendment then. Are there others?


No one said it was 'useless'.

Is it being abused/taken advantage of in this case?

Most likely.

She is not going to be denied her 5th amendment right.





new topics

top topics



 
37
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join