Breaking: IRS Lois Learner Placed On Administrative Leave...With Pay!

Lois Lerner, the Internal Revenue Service’s director of exempt organizations, has been placed on administrative leave, according to a source in the agency’s Cincinnati office. Lerner on Thursday afternoon sent an e-mail to employees in the exempt-organizations division she oversees stating, “Due to the events of recent days, I am on administrative leave starting today.

An announcement will be made shortly informing you who will be acting while I am on administrative leave. I know all of you will continue to support EO’s mission during these difficult times.” She concluded, “I thank you for all your hard work and dedication,” adding, “The work you do is important.”

At a House oversight-committee hearing yesterday, Lerner invoked her Fifth Amendment right and refused to answer questions posed to her by lawmakers, stating only, “I did nothing wrong.” She has been at the center of the scandal roiling the IRS and the Obama administration since she clumsily planted the question that allowed her to reveal — and apologize for — the agency’s improper targeting of tea-party and other conservative groups.

www.nationalreview.com...

gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com...
pjmedia.com...

Very interesting. Apparently, Ms. Learner's asinine botching of her 5th. Amendment assertion, didn't go over too well with TPTB.

Why is she still getting paid???????????????

Good grief.

Here's more; This was just announced...and new updates are coming in fast...and furious (couldn't resist...sorry).

Old White House ally Carl Levin and new White House ally John McCain sent the IRS a letter just this morning calling for Lerner’s termination, and now here we are.

Why “administrative leave” instead of a firing? Three reasons.
One: Now that Lerner’s stated publicly that she did no wrong and invoked her Fifth Amendment right in Congress, the Due Process President probably doesn’t want to pull the trapdoor until she’s given her side of the story. If in fact it turns out that the order to target conservative groups came from somewhere else, canning her straightaway would make a bad situation worse.

Two: As we know from Benghazi, “administrative leave” is the administration’s preferred way to handle a crisis. It’s a nice middle ground between doing nothing at all, which plays badly with voters, and firing someone outright. Why kick someone off the payroll when you can simply “suspend” them, keep the checks coming so they stay quiet, and then quietly reinstate them later after the public’s stopped paying attention?

And three, as Dan Foster reminds us today at NRO: It’s exceedingly hard to fire a federal employee, thanks in part to the sort of government unions that are routinely championed by Barack Obama.

hotair.com...

reply to post by AutOmatIc


Wouldn't you hate to be caught up in something that you had nothing to do with, or were just doing as you were told, and lost your income over it?

Administrative leave with pay helps protect the innocent during investigations.

Seems she's not so innocent and will most likely lose her job. But if she was innocent.....good thing they paid her.

reply to post by sheepslayer247

I think the administration is angry for her having messed-up the ol' 5th. Amendment plea...and now they're considering her expendable. The 'With Pay' element...is probably to keep her from asking for immunity and reporting her higher-ups.

reply to post by IAMTAT


Yea.... Were gonna find her dead in a few days for pissing of TPTB.... Administrative leave.... That's called being Fired in the real world.

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by AutOmatIc

 

Wouldn't you hate to be caught up in something that you had nothing to do with, or were just doing as you were told, and lost your income over it?

Administrative leave with pay helps protect the innocent during investigations.

Seems she's not so innocent and will most likely lose her job. But if she was innocent.....good thing they paid her.

She worked for the IRS. She knew exactly what she was doing, and who was telling her to do it. Just watch in the coming months when all things concerning this come to light. Why else would she all of a sudden clam up? No. She should be outright fired, audited, and have all of her assets, and past bonuses taken away from her retroactive to when she was hired.

reply to post by IAMTAT


That's entirely possible.

All I know is that if a person is put on leave, without pay, it can create legal issues if the person is found to not be guilty or an accessory.

ETA:

Administrative leave is a temporary leave from a job assignment, with pay and benefits intact.[1] Generally, the term is reserved for employees of non-business institutions such as schools, police, and hospitals. Usually, an employee is placed on administrative leave when an allegation of misconduct is made against an employee, either by a coworker, student or parent, an alleged victim or police officer. During the leave, employers may investigate the situation before determining an appropriate course of action. Administrative leave does not in itself imply that an employee will be disciplined or even that an allegation is credible, which is why pay and benefits are not discontinued. It simply allows the employer to investigate the situation, maintaining the employee's present status while at the same time removing them from the environment, eventually leading to either their return or termination.

Source

Her replacement was just announced:

RS acting commissioner Daniel Werfel announced that Ken Corbin, currently the Deputy Director, Submission Processing, Wage and Investment (W&I) Division, has been selected to be the acting Director, Exempt Organizations, Tax Exempt/Government Entities Division.

“Ken is a proven leader during challenging times. He has strong management experience inside the IRS handling a wide range of processing issues and compliance topics as well as taxpayer service areas,” Werfel stated. “Combined with his track record of leading large work groups, these skills make him an ideal choice to help lead the Exempt Organizations area through this difficult period.”

abcnews.go.com...

reply to post by IAMTAT


I just saw on the news that her boss first asked her to resign...to which she flat out refused. Now the way this usually happens is when someone is asked to resign and they refuse then they are normally told they are fired. However in this case instead of firing her they put her on leave with pay.. How can this kid glove handling by her
superiors mean anything other than she has dirt and isn't afraid to use it if necessary.