Top IRS official will invoke Fifth Amendment

Originally posted by LeatherNLace

Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by LeatherNLace

 

pssst - Bush hasn't been in office for years......stop trying to deflect the issue.

Deflect what issue? Why are you shying away from the fact that the central focus of this scandal revolves around Republican appointed officials. That sir is very relevant to those of us who believe that this entire scandal was perpetuated by the right wing in an effort to sandbag the Obama administration.

The problem with your thinking is that it's not just one scandal....there's 4 of them. It's either the Obama administration being completely disingenuous or it's flat-out incompetence. Take your pick.

Originally posted by Destinyone
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)

Exactly.

How about the embarrasement of thousands of families who may not have been able to provide food, or christams presents to their kids. The reason being they could have been under investigation by the IRS for having a legit opinion on the absurdity of some of the taxes they are forced to pay.

Liberals rejoice.

Lois Lerner may be one of you after all !!

In fact, She may be deep cover commie all the way.

She apparently infiltrated Her way "inside" back in the 80's.

here are just some points:

Perhaps no other IRS official is more intimately associated with the tax agency's growing scandal than Lois Lerner, director of the IRS’s Exempt Organizations Division. Since admitting the IRS harassed hundreds of conservative and Tea Party groups for over two years, Lerner has been criticized for a number of untruths—including the revelation that she apparently lied about planting a question at an American Bar Association conference where she first publicly acknowledged IRS misconduct.

Still, Lerner has her defenders in the government and the media. Shortly after the scandal broke, The Daily Beast published an article headlined "IRS Scandal’s Central Figure, Lois Lerner, Described as ‘Apolitical.’" Insisting Lerner, and the IRS more broadly, were not not politically motivated has been a central contention of those trying to minimize the impact of the scandal.

The trouble with this defense is that, prior to joining the IRS, Lerner's tenure as head of the Enforcement Office at the Federal Election Commission (FEC) was marked by what appears to be politically motivated harassment of conservative groups.

IRS's Lerner Had History of Harassment, Inappropriate Religious Inquiries at FEC

I wonder what religion She subscribes to ?

Originally posted by xuenchen


I wonder what religion She subscribes to ?

Progressivism, with 0bama as the messiah.

And more about Her Husband.....

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) official who apologized for targeting conservative nonprofit groups for extra scrutiny is married to an attorney whose firm hosted a voter registration organizing event for the Obama presidential campaign, praised President Obama’s policy work, and had one of its partners appointed by Obama to a key ambassadorship.

IRS Exempt Organizations Division director Lois G. Lerner, who has been described as “apolitical” in mainstream press coverage of the IRS scandal, is married to tax attorney Michael R. Miles, a partner at the law firm Sutherland Asbill & Brennan. The firm is based in Atlanta but has a number of offices including in Washington, D.C., where Miles works.

The 400-attorney firm hosted an organizing meeting at its Atlanta office for people interested in helping with voter registration for the Obama re-election campaign.

Embattled IRS official Lois Lerner’s husband’s law firm has strong Obama connections

Still think She is a Bush Republican ?

reply to post by Carreau


That would be nice wouldn't it. But of course justice will not be served. It a court of LAW not JUSTICE.

Originally posted by xuenchen
Liberals rejoice.

Lois Lerner may be one of you after all !!

Still, Lerner has her defenders in the government and the media. Shortly after the scandal broke, The Daily Beast published an article headlined "IRS Scandal’s Central Figure, Lois Lerner, Described as ‘Apolitical.’" Insisting Lerner, and the IRS more broadly, were not not politically motivated has been a central contention of those trying to minimize the impact of the scandal.

The trouble with this defense is that, prior to joining the IRS, Lerner's tenure as head of the Enforcement Office at the Federal Election Commission (FEC) was marked by what appears to be politically motivated harassment of conservative groups.

IRS's Lerner Had History of Harassment, Inappropriate Religious Inquiries at FEC

That should be it's own thread.

Well, looks like Lois in is for a battle now....Issa is gonna haul her in!
Wanna bet she still wont talk?

Darrell Issa: Lois Lerner lost her rights

reply to post by _Del_


Yeah, she has a history of attacking conservative groups. And maybe sheds a little light on why she was asking people what was in their prayers.

That article actually details that she harassed the Christian Coalition back when she was with the FEC. After she LOST that case, costing the conservative group hundreds of thousands in legal fees, she was PROMOTED. Haha

It is definitely Bush's fault, eh?

reply to post by xuenchen


At the end of the day...this is what the ploy was about...

Issa excused Lerner anyway “subject to recall” if the committee determines she did not properly invoke her right. He added that he might consult with the Justice Department about giving Lerner “limited immunity” to testify.

www.washingtonpost.com... 47e8ca_story.html

reply to post by burntheships


Thanks for that.
That's what I was hoping to hear.
Like I said, though, at this point she may need witness protection.

reply to post by xuenchen


Taking the fifth does lead one to think that person is guilty, but the fact is that it is up to the State to prove one's guilt in criminal proceedings. The problem here is she has not been charged in any crime. I would wonder why she is obligated to give any testimony if they are not charging her and this is not a trial. I rather liked the youtube presentation from a defense attorney who clearly explains why one should NEVER talk to cops, and in effect that is what this "Congressional hearing" would be, an interrogation meant to dig up some dirt.

It is not Ms. Lerner's job to incriminate herself or anyone else. This is obviously a political adversarial situation and from what has already come out it appears the IRS is guilty of targeting conservatives. Now, either lay out charges, and if AG Holder cannot be trusted to do an impartial job (and he can't) then they need to appoint a special prosecutor and start trials soon.

I can't help but appreciate the blatant hypocrisy of the Republicans and their supporters because they all defended Oliver North's right claim the fifth until he received limited immunity for his very limited testimony. Nor can one ignore the Democrat's hypocrisy in defending her right to claim the fifth when one remembers how the major media and the Democrats made a stink over it years ago. This is nothing but more political theatre. We are being robbed blind, slowly killed via vaccines, fluoride, GMO's, chemtrails all while our young men (mostly men) are being used to wage their wars against countries who don't play by their games. We are being robbed of our wealth as they claim global economics and ruin every country until we are all begging for them to save us and we accept their total dominion over us.

Yes, by all means let the gladiatorial games continue and let's see what new circus events they can come up with to keep us distracted, bickering and not working together, because my friends we have more than enough resources in the world if we worked as one in harmony, but then there wouldn't be the immense wealth held by 1% while we all strive to live the good life. Yes, this is my rant, and I'm sick of the games.

Lois G. Lerner Selected as Director of IRS Exempt Organizations Division

Dec. 22, 2005

www.irs.gov...

She was promoted, not appointed, during the "Bush Adminstration"...And has held that role ever since.

So my only comment would be the logic that her position/authority is a result of the President does not hold water.

Calling her "Obama adminsitration"...sure, as valid as calling her "Bush Administration", since it was the "Bush Administration" that gave her the job.

So absent painting with foul and large brushes for political convenience, the GOP must hope for some further thread that she was following orders of some sort from the top rather than engaging in her own management perogative.

Will wait and see...

reply to post by Indigo5

Star.
You are doing excellent work in this thread.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


Interesting to bring up North.
Check out this transcript from his trial. Lois Lerner at the helm again, before being promoted to the IRS:

hat all sounds like it could simply behat all sounds like it could simply be Bopp's jaundiced characterization of the Bopp's jaundiced characterization of the FEC's inquiries, Bopp's testimony includes FEC's inquiries, Bopp's testimony includes this transcript of the FEC's deposition of Lt. this transcript of the FEC's deposition of Lt. Col. Oliver North. An attorney for the FEC Col. Oliver North. An attorney for the FEC asks North about prayers between him and asks North about prayers between him and the Christian Coalition's Pat Robertson. Bopp the Christian Coalition's Pat Robertson. Bopp and other attorneys are present for the and other attorneys are present for the questions, which leads to this testy questions, which leads to this testy exchange. The letter Q denotes the FEC's exchange. The letter Q denotes the FEC's lawyer, the letter A denotes North's lawyer, the letter A denotes North's responses, and the letter O is used to responses, and the letter O is used to represent attorneys representing North and represent attorneys representing North and the Christian Coalition: the Christian Coalition:

Q: (reading from a letter from Oliver North Q: (reading from a letter from Oliver North to Pat Robertson) “‘Betsy and I thank you for to Pat Robertson) “‘Betsy and I thank you for your kind regards and prayers.’ The next your kind regards and prayers.’ The next paragraph is, ‘Please give our love to Dede paragraph is, ‘Please give our love to Dede and I hope to see you in the near future.’ and I hope to see you in the near future.’ Who is Dede?” Who is Dede?”

A: “That is Mrs. Robertson.” A: “That is Mrs. Robertson.”

Q: “What did you mean in paragraph 2, Q: “What did you mean in paragraph 2, about thanking -you and your wife thanking about thanking -you and your wife thanking Pat Robertson for kind regards?” Pat Robertson for kind regards?”

A: “Last time I checked in America, prayers A: “Last time I checked in America, prayers were still legal. I am sure that Pat had said were still legal. I am sure that Pat had said he was praying for my family and me in he was praying for my family and me in some correspondence or phone call.” some correspondence or phone call.”

Q: “Would that be something that Pat Q: “Would that be something that Pat Robertson was doing for you?” Robertson was doing for you?”

A: “I hope a lot of people were praying for A: “I hope a lot of people were praying for me, Holly.” me, Holly.”

Q: “But you knew that Pat Robertson was?” Q: “But you knew that Pat Robertson was?”

A: “Well, apparently at that time I was A: “Well, apparently at that time I was reflecting something that Pat had either, as I reflecting something that Pat had either, as I said, had told me or conveyed to me in some said, had told me or conveyed to me in some fashion, and it is my habit to thank people fashion, and it is my habit to thank people for things like that.” for things like that.”

Q: “During the time that you knew Pat Q: “During the time that you knew Pat Robertson, was it your impression that he Robertson, was it your impression that he had - he was praying for you?” had - he was praying for you?”

O: “I object. There is no allegation that O: “I object. There is no allegation that praying creates a violation of the Federal praying creates a violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act and there is no such Election Campaign Act and there is no such allegation in the complaint. This is allegation in the complaint. This is completely irrelevant and intrusive on the completely irrelevant and intrusive on the religious beliefs of this witness.” religious beliefs of this witness.”

O: “It is a very strange line of questioning. O: “It is a very strange line of questioning. You have got to be kidding, really. What are You have got to be kidding, really. What are you thinking of, to ask questions like that? I you thinking of, to ask questions like that? I mean, really. I have been to some strange mean, really. I have been to some strange depositions, but I don't think I have ever had depositions, but I don't think I have ever had anybody inquire into somebody’s prayers. I anybody inquire into somebody’s prayers. I think that is really just outrageous. And if think that is really just outrageous. And if you want to ask some questions regarding you want to ask some questions regarding political activities, please do and then we political activities, please do and then we can get over this very quickly. But if you can get over this very quickly. But if you want to ask abou somebody’s religious want to ask abou somebody’s religious activities, that is outrageous.” activities, that is outrageous.”

Q: “I am allowed to make-’’ Q: “I am allowed to make-’’

edit on 22-5-2013 by JayinAR because: m.weeklystandard.com...

Originally posted by wills120

Originally posted by Moshpet
It's her right under the law, is it not?

After all, this is a witch-hunt by the GOP, I sure as hell would not want to speak under such conditions, even if I was innocent.

M.

Please don't think because they went after TEA partiers that it's acceptable, a GOP administration could do the same thing to liberal/progressive-minded groups in the future. This scandal was perpetrated against the American people....it should not be seen from a partisan viewpoint. If the shoe was on the other foot, would you also characterize this as a witch-hunt by the Democrats?

If anything, I think the GOP is being too lenient in it's investigation. This thing is bigger than Watergate, Iran-Contra, and especially Monicagate. Those were issues that effected the players within in the Washington power cabal. This thing is a direct attack on citizens and every single American should be outraged this was allowed to go on.

As long as it is their team doing it, all good.

Now when the shoe is on the other foot get ready for the screaming. Their lack of foresight into future implications is scary.

reply to post by JayinAR


I don't know what went wrong on my last post. Sorry it is hard to read.

The two offices within the IRS that the President may appoint someone to is:

IRS Commisioner
and
IRS Chief Counsel

The Commisioner reports to the Deputy Secretary of the Treasury.

* What is interesting is that the Commisioner of the IRS is limited to 5 year terms that intentionally overlap Presidential elections, and the 5 year limit is meant to limit political influence. He's got his job for 5 years, no more and no less...and it will always overlap two Presidents.

For example the IRS Commissioner during this scandal...

some observers noted that Mr. Shulman was appointed to a five-year term at the Internal Revenue Service by Republican President George W. Bush in March 2008

www.washingtontimes.com...

So Lerner reports to the Commissioner and the Commissioner was appointed by Pres. Bush and keeps/kept his job until recently through the Obama admin...

I don't see a clear path to Pres. Obama or his administration?

I suspect this is a scandal that ends with Lerner, but no doubt the GOP will try to link it to Obama, whatever evidence comes out.

Either way...The IRS needs some serious hammering and reform and I hope that doesn't get lost in the political BS.

When a public ranking official takes the 5th, is because the lawyer that is handling the case have already exhausted the options of how the information that the person have that is incriminating could be used to protect the person, this is done in order to get immunity like other people have said here before me.

So for anybody that is speculating on her Innocentnt" sadly taking the 5th is protection for self incrimination

In other words she is guilty as sin.

More in regards with this woman and her links to the Clintons by association.

Rumors have it that she is been used by the Clintons to deflect from the Benghazi criticism Occurs this not new to the Conspiracy theorist in ATS.