Breaking...Lois Lerner Held In Contempt Of Congress

[Vigilante]

I'm confused by those who view Lois' actions as completely acceptable and actually defend a government official, who by definition is employed to serve the interests of the people, who refuses to answer to a congressional inquiry. Contempt of court and ultimately jail time is appropriate. I assume this is a partisan position - can you imagine the outrage if members of Bush administration, those officials paid by the taxpayers, took the 5th when asked about events/issues under their direct control/knowledge? Eric Holder takes the 5th, then Lois takes the 5th, who's next, joe Biden?
For those who put their heads in the sand and that nothing is going on here: by definition of pleading the 5th protects a person from "self incrimination" - so there's obviously some chance of incrimination. When Obama campaigned and touted the most "transparent" administration in history - this is what he meant? This stuff is not going way, its rotting and festering and more emails are surfacing that contradict their previous lies.

Actually I'm surprised the Manchurian muslim hasn't issued an E.O. for Lerner, as he did for the chief grafter Eric Holder! Guess it would look REALLY BAD if he did it now, and besides, she's neither BLACK or a muslim!

 

[Pheonixops]

There are other ways to get one for your mantle:

It seems some people think this Lerner chick is being held in contempt for lying. But how can you lie when you refuse to testify? Hmmmmm...

Yeah, it's funny to see all of the 'Constitutionalists' who act like they are such big advocates of "The Constitution!" , suddenly want to disregard the Fifth Amendment when it comes to Ms Lerner. What a bunch of partisan HYPOCRITES!

Ha! You call US hypocrites?

She made 17 separate responses to questioning before pleading the fifth. A prepared statement counts as testimony, and thus invalidated her right to plead the 5th. Yes, I know law doesn't come easy to some folks, but this was downright obvious. She began with "I did nothing wrong." In the court of law, that is testimony my friend. No two ways around it. The 5th Amendment cannot protect her, and now she will pay for her treachery.

So what and according to who, you?

Where in the Fifth Amendment does it state that once one makes any sort of statement that they can't invoke the Fifth Amendment rights? It wasn't a "court of law", it's was a Congressional hearing! Thanks for the laugh!

 

[Vigilante]

Lerner's attorney said she did not waive her rights.

"Today's vote has nothing to do with the facts or the law. Its only purpose is to keep the baseless IRS 'conspiracy' alive through the mid-term elections," said William W. Taylor III. "It is unfortunate that the majority party in the House has put politics before a citizen's constitutional rights."

House holds former IRS official Lerner in contempt

Exactly.

BUT now we know "Boner" can lock her up at his pleasure with that 1857 law!

 

[The Rabbi]

Taking the Fifth: A congressional tradition

Oh my, now there's a tradition we can be proud of. Maybe it should be a national holiday.

LOL, we should be proud that people are able to invoke the Constitutional rights.

You have a constitutional right to spout nonsense. And you exercise it frequently!

 

[The T]

I'm confused by those who view Lois' actions as completely acceptable and actually defend a government official, who by definition is employed to serve the interests of the people, who refuses to answer to a congressional inquiry. Contempt of court and ultimately jail time is appropriate. I assume this is a partisan position - can you imagine the outrage if members of Bush administration, those officials paid by the taxpayers, took the 5th when asked about events/issues under their direct control/knowledge? Eric Holder takes the 5th, then Lois takes the 5th, who's next, joe Biden?
For those who put their heads in the sand and that nothing is going on here: by definition of pleading the 5th protects a person from "self incrimination" - so there's obviously some chance of incrimination. When Obama campaigned and touted the most "transparent" administration in history - this is what he meant? This stuff is not going way, its rotting and festering and more emails are surfacing that contradict their previous lies.

Actually I'm surprised the Manchurian muslim hasn't issued an E.O. for Lerner, as he did for the chief grafter Eric Holder! Guess it would look REALLY BAD if he did it now, and besides, she's neither BLACK or a muslim!

Yeah Holder is still hiding behind Obama's skirt for Fast and Furious, isn't he?

 

[JakeStarkey]

She may not make a blanket statement of innocence, and then refuse to defend her assertions. You're simply wrong. As usual.

She made that statement in her opening remarks. She was not then being questioned.

When she was questioned, then she invoked the 5th. She's fine.

However, if the DA as a result of a grand jury investigation grants her immunity, then she must testify.

So far that has not happened.

Had she been worn in before her statement?

Doesn't matter. One cannot be forced to waive one's rights involuntarily.

 

[Vigilante]

She made that statement in her opening remarks. She was not then being questioned.

When she was questioned, then she invoked the 5th. She's fine.

However, if the DA as a result of a grand jury investigation grants her immunity, then she must testify.

So far that has not happened.

Had she been worn in before her statement?

Doesn't matter. One cannot be forced to waive one's rights involuntarily.

You're RIGHT, it REALLY doesn't matter anymore.... Republicans have the LEGAL MEANS to lock her contemptuous ass up!

The underlying offense which Lerner allegedly violated (on national television) is 2 U.S.C. § 192, a law passed by Congress in 1857 making it a federal crime for someone to appear before Congress and refuse to testify in answer to questions posed to her by committee members.

Perhaps, you can get a lawyer to refute that?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Had she been worn in before her statement?

Doesn't matter. One cannot be forced to waive one's rights involuntarily.

You're RIGHT, it REALLY doesn't matter anymore.... Republicans have the LEGAL MEANS to lock her contemptuous ass up!

The underlying offense which Lerner allegedly violated (on national television) is 2 U.S.C. § 192, a law passed by Congress in 1857 making it a federal crime for someone to appear before Congress and refuse to testify in answer to questions posed to her by committee members.

Perhaps, you can get a lawyer to refute that?

Yep, look at the Monica Gooding case, where it is discussed and not even put into play.

When are you guys going to realize every time you start this nonsense, your points get easily thumped?

 

[Vigilante]

Doesn't matter. One cannot be forced to waive one's rights involuntarily.

You're RIGHT, it REALLY doesn't matter anymore.... Republicans have the LEGAL MEANS to lock her contemptuous ass up!

The underlying offense which Lerner allegedly violated (on national television) is 2 U.S.C. § 192, a law passed by Congress in 1857 making it a federal crime for someone to appear before Congress and refuse to testify in answer to questions posed to her by committee members.

Perhaps, you can get a lawyer to refute that?

Yep, look at the Monica Gooding case, where it is discussed and not even put into play.

When are you guys going to realize every time you start this nonsense, your points get easily thumped?

Miss GOODLING was granted immunity for her testimony.... does that sound like the current case?..... No wonder you and your friends are such assholes. You KNOW LITTLE of what you speak!

 

[Pheonixops]

Oh my, now there's a tradition we can be proud of. Maybe it should be a national holiday.

LOL, we should be proud that people are able to invoke the Constitutional rights.

You have a constitutional right to spout nonsense. And you exercise it frequently!

LOL, thanks for the laugh!

Anytime you want to try to refute my assertions, please do so.

 

[The Rabbi]

LOL, we should be proud that people are able to invoke the Constitutional rights.

You have a constitutional right to spout nonsense. And you exercise it frequently!

LOL, thanks for the laugh!

Anytime you want to try to refute my assertions, please do so.

You didnt make any assertions. You spouted platitudes. Like most stupid people.

 

[Pheonixops]

You have a constitutional right to spout nonsense. And you exercise it frequently!

LOL, thanks for the laugh!

Anytime you want to try to refute my assertions, please do so.

You didnt make any assertions. You spouted platitudes. Like most stupid people.

What platitudes are you referring to?

 

[RandallFlagg]

I'm confused by those who view Lois' actions as completely acceptable and actually defend a government official, who by definition is employed to serve the interests of the people, who refuses to answer to a congressional inquiry. Contempt of court and ultimately jail time is appropriate. I assume this is a partisan position - can you imagine the outrage if members of Bush administration, those officials paid by the taxpayers, took the 5th when asked about events/issues under their direct control/knowledge? Eric Holder takes the 5th, then Lois takes the 5th, who's next, joe Biden?
For those who put their heads in the sand and that nothing is going on here: by definition of pleading the 5th protects a person from "self incrimination" - so there's obviously some chance of incrimination. When Obama campaigned and touted the most "transparent" administration in history - this is what he meant? This stuff is not going way, its rotting and festering and more emails are surfacing that contradict their previous lies.

Actually I'm surprised the Manchurian muslim hasn't issued an E.O. for Lerner, as he did for the chief grafter Eric Holder! Guess it would look REALLY BAD if he did it now, and besides, she's neither BLACK or a muslim!

Yeah Holder is still hiding behind Obama's skirt for Fast and Furious, isn't he?

Exactly, and if he were ever CHARGED with a crime, it "might" be different. However, he is working in the capacity of the government (which he represents). Screw his 5th amendment "rights". If he stole a car in his off-time, it would be different. He was, however, on the PEOPLE'S CLOCK.

I mean, C'Mon! These Nazis on this board are OK with a POLITICIAN who ANSWERS TO THE PUBLIC claiming 5th amendment privilege when questioned about possible criminal activities. Lerner - just like Steadman Holder are CONDUCTING THE PEOPLE'S BUSINESS. If Congress suspects that, in their capacity as "servants" of the public. they have broken the law - they have NO CHOICE but to submit to questioning.

Lerner is suspected of committing crimes WHILE working for the people. What? Do we have to have a national vote of the people to ask if it's OK for this ***** to dodge questioning!?!?!?!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Miss GOODLING was granted immunity for her testimony..

Yes, it does, silly one. She would not testify either until she got immunity. Guess what is going to happen with Miss Lerner, bud

If you run your business they way you act on this board, you are a failure.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And the nazi RF accuses his opponents of being nazis.

Typical nazi behavior.

 

[Truthseeker420]

So? ...they voted 51 times to appeal Obama Care.

 

[RandallFlagg]

And the nazi RF accuses his opponents of being nazis.

Typical nazi behavior.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCqQRflUWd4

Give it up fakey. If you are left (and you are) you are a Nazi. Get used to it.

Damned Brownshirt.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Flagg, you are the fascist, and we all know it.

You want to take power from the people and give it to a small group to all of us how to live.

Not going to happen.

And don't ever try Tea Speak with those who know better: you are a fraud.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Flagg, you are the fascist, and we all know it.

You want to take power from the people and give it to a small group to all of us how to live.

Not going to happen.

And don't ever try Tea Speak with those who know better: you are a fraud.

"Tea Speak"


That all you got Nazi??

I get it, next, you'll call me a Tea Bagger. Then a racist.


Same old shit - different day. You clowns got nothing.

 

[The T]

Flagg, you are the fascist, and we all know it.

You want to take power from the people and give it to a small group to all of us how to live.

Not going to happen.

And don't ever try Tea Speak with those who know better: you are a fraud.

"Tea Speak"


That all you got Nazi??

I get it, next, you'll call me a Tea Bagger. Then a racist.


Same old shit - different day. You clowns got nothing.

Especially Starkey. He's a ******* Circus Clown masquerading as a Republican.