Lois Lerner to take the 5th. Again.

[PaintMyHouse]

so what? then why take the 5th?

Because it's her Constitutional Right.

Everyone has that same right. But not everyone takes the 5th.
So bad response.

Everyone probably should. It's why we invented the thing. Innocent until proven...

 

[The Rabbi]

Because it's her Constitutional Right.

Everyone has that same right. But not everyone takes the 5th.
So bad response.

Everyone probably should. It's why we invented the thing. Innocent until proven...

Everyone should take the 5th? Tell me you're not a lawyer.

 

[Little-Acorn]

I have no issues with obeying the law, for the most part, but that's not what we were discussing.

I'd try to divert the subject from "obeying the law", too, if I were you. It's the thing the Obamanites want to talk about LEAST.

The laws apply to everyone little friend but politics is still politics and partisans are still partisans. I prefer to call a spade a spade.

TRANSLATION: Breaking the law is OK if you believe you have a good reason to do it... and can get away with it. Taking the 5th amendment, which was designed to protect the INNOCENT from getting "confessions" beaten out of them, will help you get away with it when you're guilty.

Noted.

 

[BlindBoo]

That tired old bromide: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH


Get a life.

Truth hurts? I tell you what, I'll stop bringing up the consequences of Bushes policies and decisions when the Rabid Right stops trying to equivocate everything President Obama does into one of President Bushes gigantic fuckups, K?

Hmmm, was she reporting to Bush when she told IRS agents to target conservative groups? Did Bush tell her to do that?

Yeah I think you have something there. She was a ticking time bomb left behind by the Bush Regime to discredit the Democrats. Conspiracy 101.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Truth hurts? I tell you what, I'll stop bringing up the consequences of Bushes policies and decisions when the Rabid Right stops trying to equivocate everything President Obama does into one of President Bushes gigantic fuckups, K?

Hmmm, was she reporting to Bush when she told IRS agents to target conservative groups? Did Bush tell her to do that?

Yeah I think you have something there.

Yep. And if you keep holding it in your hand that way, you may go blind.

 

[Redfish]

President GW Bush was the one who appointed her to her most recent position.

IRS Scandal?s Central Figure, Lois Lerner, Described as ?Apolitical? - The Daily Beast

so what? then why take the 5th?

Because it's her Constitutional Right.

But, if she has nothing to hide---------------only a person with something to hide takes the fifth.

a guy is on trial for shooting Joe the barkeep. He did shoot him.

the prosecuter asks 'did you shoot Joe?' the guys pleads the fifth.

same scenario, but he did not shoot Joe. 'did you shoot Joe?' No sir, I did not. I was in Cleveland at the time.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Everyone has that same right. But not everyone takes the 5th.
So bad response.

Everyone probably should. It's why we invented the thing. Innocent until proven...

Everyone should take the 5th? Tell me you're not a lawyer.

I'll have to invoke my right against......on that one.

Did you know you have to "say" you want to remain "silent" now? Ironic Supreme Court decision.

 

[Redfish]

Everyone probably should. It's why we invented the thing. Innocent until proven...

Everyone should take the 5th? Tell me you're not a lawyer.

I'll have to invoke my right against......on that one.

what planet do you live on? taking the 5th is an admission of guilt. what you are saying is "yes I did it, but you have to prove it, I refuse to confess"

 

[Little-Acorn]

The good news is, the 5th amendment was designed mostly to protect INNOCENT PEOPLE from getting "confession" beaten out of them by unscrupulous police.

The bad news is, it gives guilty people a convenient place to hide, too.

Is the "good news" worth the "bad news" that necessarily comes with it?

I believe that it is.

Even when it shields the guilty too... liars and thugs like Lois Lerner.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Everyone should take the 5th? Tell me you're not a lawyer.

I'll have to invoke my right against......on that one.

what planet do you live on? taking the 5th is an admission of guilt. what you are saying is "yes I did it, but you have to prove it, I refuse to confess"

It's nothing of the kind, but people think that a lot.

If I don't let the cops search my car or house without a warrant, am I hiding something or do I just not want the cops poking around?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The good news is, the 5th amendment was designed mostly to protect INNOCENT PEOPLE from getting "confession" beaten out of them by unscrupulous police.

The bad news is, it gives guilty people a convenient place to hide, too.

Is the "good news" worth the "bad news" that necessarily comes with it?

I believe that it is.

Even when it shields the guilty too... liars and thugs like Lois Lerner.

Better to let 100 guilty men go free than to convict one innocent man. Not everyone agrees, like my wife for instance. She figures that's just rollin' the dice of life.

 

[Redfish]

I'll have to invoke my right against......on that one.

what planet do you live on? taking the 5th is an admission of guilt. what you are saying is "yes I did it, but you have to prove it, I refuse to confess"

It's nothing of the kind, but people think that a lot.

If I don't let the cops search my car or house without a warrant, am I hiding something or do I just not want the cops poking around?

flawed analogy. you should have said: when the cops come to search with a warrant I will invoke my 5th amendment rights and not allow them in. see how that works in real life.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

what planet do you live on? taking the 5th is an admission of guilt. what you are saying is "yes I did it, but you have to prove it, I refuse to confess"

It's nothing of the kind, but people think that a lot.

If I don't let the cops search my car or house without a warrant, am I hiding something or do I just not want the cops poking around?

flawed analogy. you should have said: when the cops come to search with a warrant I will invoke my 5th amendment rights and not allow them in. see how that works in real life.

Staying quiet is an option then, but they can come in regardless of what I say. The advice is to make sure you protest their search but you have almost no legal way to stop them. You;d have to prove, quickly, that the warrant was invalid, like for the guy next door.

 

[Oldstyle]

That's having your legal cake and eating it too.

You're right, that's exactly what it is.

And the 5th amendment says, exactly, that you CAN do that.

You can clam up any time and refuse to say anything more, on grounds that it might incriminate you, and no one can compel you to do otherwise. No matter what you said five minutes ago.

Once again I respectfully disagree. You don't have the right to "clam up" on material that you have already made a statement on. You can't testify to something and then refuse to answer questions on that subject under cross examination.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

That's having your legal cake and eating it too.

You're right, that's exactly what it is.

And the 5th amendment says, exactly, that you CAN do that.

You can clam up any time and refuse to say anything more, on grounds that it might incriminate you, and no one can compel you to do otherwise. No matter what you said five minutes ago.

Once again I respectfully disagree. You don't have the right to "clam up" on material that you have already made a statement on. You can't testify to something and then refuse to answer questions on that subject under cross examination.

The Supremes just had a case on that. You can clam up, and this guy did, but they also decided that the prosecutor could use the fact that he was talking to the cops and then stopped talking at a certain question against him, and they did. He's in prison now.

Never Talk To The Cops, unless you have to.

 

[Little-Acorn]

OTOH, the ONLY grounds you have for refusing to answer questions, according to the 5th amendment, is that the answers might incriminate you.

If the prosecutors formally agree in court that you will not be prosecuted for what you say (aka "give you immunity"), then that satisfies the 5th amendment's requirement. And then they CAN compel you to testify, and can throw you in jail for contempt of court if you don't.

My guess is, Lerner will go this way. She's protecting her own @ss, not Obama's. Once hers is secure from prosecution, Obama's is toast.

 

[paperview]

what planet do you live on? taking the 5th is an admission of guilt. what you are saying is "yes I did it, but you have to prove it, I refuse to confess"

It's nothing of the kind, but people think that a lot.

If I don't let the cops search my car or house without a warrant, am I hiding something or do I just not want the cops poking around?

flawed analogy. you should have said: when the cops come to search with a warrant I will invoke my 5th amendment rights and not allow them in. see how that works in real life.

Ever heard of the term "probable cause?"

 

[paperview]

Follow up: do people here know what the Founders thought it so important to include the 5th Amendment in the Bill of Rights?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Follow up: do people here know what the Founders thought it so important to include the 5th Amendment in the Bill of Rights?

I would be that's a no. They usually stop at the Second.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Follow up: do people here know what the Founders thought it so important to include the 5th Amendment in the Bill of Rights?

I would be that's a no. They usually stop at the Second.

I'm not surprised that you carefully forget who has answered that question twice already, in this thread alone.