Lois Lerner to take the 5th. Again.

[BlindBoo]

The worst part is you lay out what is obviously the truth:

Lerner was a partisan operative working in the IRS to suppress Tea Party activity ahead of a contested election where such activity would be expected to contribute to GOP gains.

And the libs here are like, yeah, so what? They don't get it. They don't see anything at stake. It's OK because it's their side doing it. They assume if McCain were president Republicans would be doing the same thing. Because they are lying dimocrap scum.

Clever girl she is. Knowing back in 2006 that she was going head the division that would oversee such an important political revenue stream.

You're even less coherent than normal.

Lois Lerner's husband's law firm hosted campaign organizing | The Daily Caller

Lerner was appointed as head of the IRS Exempt Organizations Division during the Bush administration, in 2006. She served as director the IRS Exempt Organizations Rulings and Agreements Division for four years before that.

Larry Noble, who served as general counsel at the FEC from 1987 to 2000, was involved in hiring and promoting Lerner. “I worked with Lois for a number of years and she is really one of the more apolitical people I’ve met,” Noble told The Daily Beast. “That doesn’t mean she doesn’t have political views, but she really focuses on the job and what the rules are. She doesn’t have an agenda.

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

 

[The Rabbi]

Clever girl she is. Knowing back in 2006 that she was going head the division that would oversee such an important political revenue stream.

You're even less coherent than normal.

Lois Lerner's husband's law firm hosted campaign organizing | The Daily Caller

Lerner was appointed as head of the IRS Exempt Organizations Division during the Bush administration, in 2006. She served as director the IRS Exempt Organizations Rulings and Agreements Division for four years before that.

Larry Noble, who served as general counsel at the FEC from 1987 to 2000, was involved in hiring and promoting Lerner. “I worked with Lois for a number of years and she is really one of the more apolitical people I’ve met,” Noble told The Daily Beast. “That doesn’t mean she doesn’t have political views, but she really focuses on the job and what the rules are. She doesn’t have an agenda.

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

Yes, and a conservative Republican lawyer in the IRS was responsible for all this to begin with. Yeah, tell us all about it.

 

[The T]

And look for the Ukraine farce to be used as a 'Wag the Dog' distraction for the Dear Leader. This IRS scandal is awful enough to bring this whole Administration down. And they know it. So look for the Ukraine farce to pick up in intensity in the coming days.

The IRS, Benghazi, Fast and Furious, ObaCare and Obama's extra-Constitutional orders over the heads of the Congress...you're correct. Ukraine is shit that should be handled by the Eu for Heaven's sake...it's IN their backyard. It IS a deflection.

 

[bripat9643]

Clever girl she is. Knowing back in 2006 that she was going head the division that would oversee such an important political revenue stream.

You're even less coherent than normal.

Lois Lerner's husband's law firm hosted campaign organizing | The Daily Caller

Lerner was appointed as head of the IRS Exempt Organizations Division during the Bush administration, in 2006. She served as director the IRS Exempt Organizations Rulings and Agreements Division for four years before that.

Larry Noble, who served as general counsel at the FEC from 1987 to 2000, was involved in hiring and promoting Lerner. “I worked with Lois for a number of years and she is really one of the more apolitical people I’ve met,” Noble told The Daily Beast. “That doesn’t mean she doesn’t have political views, but she really focuses on the job and what the rules are. She doesn’t have an agenda.

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

The fact that she was appointed during the Bush Administration doesn't mean jack squat. There are only two positions in the entire IRS that the president gets to appoint. The rest are filled by career bureaucrats.

Why should anyone take Larry Noble's word for anything? What makes him any more credible than Harry Reid or Nazi Pelosi?

Lerner's record at the IRS shows that she's highly political.

 

[bripat9643]

Come on, she's so cool. All the tarded Obamabots just adore her. They can't be wrong, can they? Some are even calling her a 'Hero.' Go figure, a corrupt IRS bastard a 'Hero.' If a Republican was in there, i'm pretty sure the same Bot morons would be demanding Impeachment. Obama knew what was going on. He should be Impeached for these awful abuses.

She's a hero to the Dims because she's taking a fall for Obama.

 

[bripat9643]

Looks like Issa's little blow up last week may have some ramifications for Issa's plan to hold Lerner in Contempt.

The hasty way he adjourned the meeting, not allowing Cummings to offer a proffer to the lawyer (which, as I remarked earlier was Cumming intention of asking to speak -- when Issa cut his microphone) and the correct procedure needed to be used when a witness takes the Fifth and Contempt charges pending was something Issa ("I have an in IQ of a little over a 100") didn't bother to concern himself with.

"Cummings, citing opinions from two legal experts and “Supreme Court case law,” said Republicans cannot pursue contempt charges against Lerner because of how the committee’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), abruptly adjourned a hearing with the former official last week."

Cummings says Issa killed chances for Lois Lerner contempt proceedings

The lawyers who wrote the opinion have some cred: Morton Rosenberg, was formerly with the Congressional Research Service, and Stan Brand, b formerly the House of Representatives General Counsel -- and they both say Issa dropped the ball on this one.

Here's the letter sent to Boehner: http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/uploads/2014-03-12%20EEC%20to%20Speaker%20Boehner.pdf


Issa “failed to take the basic — but Constitutionally required — steps necessary to hold [Lerner] in contempt."

Of course Issa's folks reject the legalities presented. Boehner hasn't commented, and it's a new ride and another wicked twist in the How Inept Is Issa Saga.

Utter horseshit. What is Cummings going to do if Issa holds Lerner in contempt, have another royal hissy fit?

 

[bripat9643]

Looks like Issa's little blow up last week may have some ramifications for Issa's plan to hold Lerner in Contempt.

The hasty way he adjourned the meeting, not allowing Cummings to offer a proffer to the lawyer (which, as I remarked earlier was Cumming intention of asking to speak -- when Issa cut his microphone) and the correct procedure needed to be used when a witness takes the Fifth and Contempt charges pending was something Issa ("I have an in IQ of a little over a 100") didn't bother to concern himself with.

"Cummings, citing opinions from two legal experts and “Supreme Court case law,” said Republicans cannot pursue contempt charges against Lerner because of how the committee’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), abruptly adjourned a hearing with the former official last week."

Cummings says Issa killed chances for Lois Lerner contempt proceedings

The lawyers who wrote the opinion have some cred: Morton Rosenberg, was formerly with the Congressional Research Service, and Stan Brand, b formerly the House of Representatives General Counsel -- and they both say Issa dropped the ball on this one.

Here's the letter sent to Boehner: http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/uploads/2014-03-12%20EEC%20to%20Speaker%20Boehner.pdf


Issa “failed to take the basic — but Constitutionally required — steps necessary to hold [Lerner] in contempt."

Of course Issa's folks reject the legalities presented. Boehner hasn't commented, and it's a new ride and another wicked twist in the How Inept Is Issa Saga.

Really doesn't matter.

Even if Issa holds her in contempt?

So what. Congress doesn't have the power to do anything to a private citizen.

Issa's basically beating a dead flat horse at this point.

Wrong again, turd. Congress can put you in jail for contempt.

 

[The T]

Looks like Issa's little blow up last week may have some ramifications for Issa's plan to hold Lerner in Contempt.

The hasty way he adjourned the meeting, not allowing Cummings to offer a proffer to the lawyer (which, as I remarked earlier was Cumming intention of asking to speak -- when Issa cut his microphone) and the correct procedure needed to be used when a witness takes the Fifth and Contempt charges pending was something Issa ("I have an in IQ of a little over a 100") didn't bother to concern himself with.

"Cummings, citing opinions from two legal experts and “Supreme Court case law,” said Republicans cannot pursue contempt charges against Lerner because of how the committee’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), abruptly adjourned a hearing with the former official last week."

Cummings says Issa killed chances for Lois Lerner contempt proceedings

The lawyers who wrote the opinion have some cred: Morton Rosenberg, was formerly with the Congressional Research Service, and Stan Brand, b formerly the House of Representatives General Counsel -- and they both say Issa dropped the ball on this one.

Here's the letter sent to Boehner: http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/uploads/2014-03-12%20EEC%20to%20Speaker%20Boehner.pdf


Issa “failed to take the basic — but Constitutionally required — steps necessary to hold [Lerner] in contempt."

Of course Issa's folks reject the legalities presented. Boehner hasn't commented, and it's a new ride and another wicked twist in the How Inept Is Issa Saga.

Really doesn't matter.

Even if Issa holds her in contempt?

So what. Congress doesn't have the power to do anything to a private citizen.

Issa's basically beating a dead flat horse at this point.

Contempt Of Congress is a CRIMINAL OFFENSE dumbass. And YES she can go to JAIL over it.

 

[JoeB131]

Looks like Issa's little blow up last week may have some ramifications for Issa's plan to hold Lerner in Contempt.

The hasty way he adjourned the meeting, not allowing Cummings to offer a proffer to the lawyer (which, as I remarked earlier was Cumming intention of asking to speak -- when Issa cut his microphone) and the correct procedure needed to be used when a witness takes the Fifth and Contempt charges pending was something Issa ("I have an in IQ of a little over a 100") didn't bother to concern himself with.

"Cummings, citing opinions from two legal experts and “Supreme Court case law,” said Republicans cannot pursue contempt charges against Lerner because of how the committee’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), abruptly adjourned a hearing with the former official last week."

Cummings says Issa killed chances for Lois Lerner contempt proceedings

The lawyers who wrote the opinion have some cred: Morton Rosenberg, was formerly with the Congressional Research Service, and Stan Brand, b formerly the House of Representatives General Counsel -- and they both say Issa dropped the ball on this one.

Here's the letter sent to Boehner: http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/uploads/2014-03-12%20EEC%20to%20Speaker%20Boehner.pdf


Issa “failed to take the basic — but Constitutionally required — steps necessary to hold [Lerner] in contempt."

Of course Issa's folks reject the legalities presented. Boehner hasn't commented, and it's a new ride and another wicked twist in the How Inept Is Issa Saga.

Really doesn't matter.

Even if Issa holds her in contempt?

So what. Congress doesn't have the power to do anything to a private citizen.

Issa's basically beating a dead flat horse at this point.

Wrong again, turd. Congress can put you in jail for contempt.

ONly if a judge enforces the order.

Which they almost never do. SOmething about due process and all that.

 

[Rambunctious]

Lois Lerner is guilty of treason, she attempted and succeeded in some cases to use the IRS as a weapon to go after anyone that disagreed with her king Hussein Obama. Seeing the absolute wrecking ball that the Obama administration has been, I believe she and others in the IRS would be put on trial for treason if this were a just nation.

 

[bripat9643]

Really doesn't matter.

Even if Issa holds her in contempt?

So what. Congress doesn't have the power to do anything to a private citizen.

Issa's basically beating a dead flat horse at this point.

Wrong again, turd. Congress can put you in jail for contempt.

ONly if a judge enforces the order.

Which they almost never do. SOmething about due process and all that.

So a contempt charge is a violation of due process?

 

[The T]

Lois Lerner is guilty of treason, she attempted and succeeded in some cases to use the IRS as a weapon to go after anyone that disagreed with her king Hussein Obama. Seeing the absolute wrecking ball that the Obama administration has been, I believe she and others in the IRS would be put on trial for treason if this were a just nation.

She was a TOOL of this administration. SHE doesn't want to spill the beans because SHE has been threatened as have her Lawyers. And you may take that to the bank. This is high corruption that leads all the way to Obama.

 

[JoeB131]

Wrong again, turd. Congress can put you in jail for contempt.

ONly if a judge enforces the order.

Which they almost never do. SOmething about due process and all that.

So a contempt charge is a violation of due process?

Well, um, yeah.

Seems to me that the court would have to rule she has no Fifth Amendment rights, and then throw her into jail on the word of Darryl Issa, who can't even get his own committee to go along with what he wants to do.

 

[paulitician]

Lois Lerner is guilty of treason, she attempted and succeeded in some cases to use the IRS as a weapon to go after anyone that disagreed with her king Hussein Obama. Seeing the absolute wrecking ball that the Obama administration has been, I believe she and others in the IRS would be put on trial for treason if this were a just nation.

Well said. Thanks.

 

[JoeB131]

Lois Lerner is guilty of treason, she attempted and succeeded in some cases to use the IRS as a weapon to go after anyone that disagreed with her king Hussein Obama. Seeing the absolute wrecking ball that the Obama administration has been, I believe she and others in the IRS would be put on trial for treason if this were a just nation.

Well said. Thanks.

Yup. You see, even though she was a Bush Appointee who has been described as "apolitical" by everyone who knows her, she secretly has this Obama Shrine where she prays over passages of "Dreams of my Father" and says, "What is thy Bidding, my Master".

Instead of just being a dedicated official trying to deal with reams of fraud allowed by an awful court decision.

 

[paperview]

Looks like Issa's little blow up last week may have some ramifications for Issa's plan to hold Lerner in Contempt.

The hasty way he adjourned the meeting, not allowing Cummings to offer a proffer to the lawyer (which, as I remarked earlier was Cumming intention of asking to speak -- when Issa cut his microphone) and the correct procedure needed to be used when a witness takes the Fifth and Contempt charges pending was something Issa ("I have an in IQ of a little over a 100") didn't bother to concern himself with.

"Cummings, citing opinions from two legal experts and “Supreme Court case law,” said Republicans cannot pursue contempt charges against Lerner because of how the committee’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), abruptly adjourned a hearing with the former official last week."

Cummings says Issa killed chances for Lois Lerner contempt proceedings

The lawyers who wrote the opinion have some cred: Morton Rosenberg, was formerly with the Congressional Research Service, and Stan Brand, b formerly the House of Representatives General Counsel -- and they both say Issa dropped the ball on this one.

Here's the letter sent to Boehner: http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/uploads/2014-03-12%20EEC%20to%20Speaker%20Boehner.pdf


Issa “failed to take the basic — but Constitutionally required — steps necessary to hold [Lerner] in contempt."

Of course Issa's folks reject the legalities presented. Boehner hasn't commented, and it's a new ride and another wicked twist in the How Inept Is Issa Saga.

Really doesn't matter.

Even if Issa holds her in contempt?

So what. Congress doesn't have the power to do anything to a private citizen.

Issa's basically beating a dead flat horse at this point.

Contempt Of Congress is a CRIMINAL OFFENSE dumbass. And YES she can go to JAIL over it.

Josh Bolten and Harriet E. Miers were held in Contempt.

What happened to them?

 

[bripat9643]

Lois Lerner is guilty of treason, she attempted and succeeded in some cases to use the IRS as a weapon to go after anyone that disagreed with her king Hussein Obama. Seeing the absolute wrecking ball that the Obama administration has been, I believe she and others in the IRS would be put on trial for treason if this were a just nation.

Well said. Thanks.

Yup. You see, even though she was a Bush Appointee who has been described as "apolitical" by everyone who knows her, she secretly has this Obama Shrine where she prays over passages of "Dreams of my Father" and says, "What is thy Bidding, my Master".

Instead of just being a dedicated official trying to deal with reams of fraud allowed by an awful court decision.

She's not an appointee, numskull. Her record shows that she is highly political as does her marriage to a major Democrat doner.

 

[JoeB131]

I'd be more impressed with your argument if you could spell "donor".

 

[paperview]

ICYMI:

More Experts Now Agree That Issa Botched Contempt

Washington, D.C. (Mar. 13, 2014)—Yesterday, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, sent a letter to House Speaker John Boehner transmitting an independent legal analysis from two of the nation’s preeminent experts in Constitutional law and congressional contempt proceedings concluding that Committee Chairman Darrell Issa compromised any House contempt action against Lois Lerner when he rushed to adjourn the Committee’s hearing last Wednesday.
The analysis was authored by Morton Rosenberg, who served for 35 years as a Specialist in American Public Law at the Congressional Research Service (CRS), and was joined by Stan Brand, who served as House Counsel from 1976 to 1983 and “fully subscribes” to Mr. Rosenberg’s legal analysis and conclusions.
Since these experts provided their analysis, additional legal experts have come forward to agree with their conclusions and have identified defects in Issa’s contempt proceedings:

Joshua Levy, a partner in the firm of Cunningham and Levy and an Adjunct Professor of Law at the Georgetown University Law Center who teaches Congressional Investigations, said:

“Contempt cannot be born from a game of gotcha. Supreme Court precedents that helped put an end to the McCarthy era ruled that Congress cannot initiate contempt proceedings without first giving the witness due process. For example, Congress cannot hold a witness in contempt without directing her to answer the questions being asked, overruling her objections and informing her, in clear terms, that her refusal to answer the questions will result in contempt. None of that occurred here.”

Julie Rose O’Sullivan, a former federal prosecutor and law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and current a Professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, said:
“The Supreme Court has spoken—repeatedly—on point. Before a witness may be held in contempt under 18 U.S.C. sec. 192, the government bears the burden of showing ‘criminal intent—in this instance, a deliberate, intentional refusal to answer.’ Quinn v. United States, 349 U.S. 155, 165 (1955). This intent is lacking where the witness is not faced with an order to comply or face the consequences. Thus, the government must show that the Committee ‘clearly apprised [the witness] that the committee demands his answer notwithstanding his objections’ or ‘there can be no conviction under [sec.] 192 for refusal to answer that question.’ Id. at 166. Here, the Committee at no point directed the witness to answer; accordingly, no prosecution will lie. This is a result demanded by common sense as well as the case law. ‘Contempt’ citations are generally reserved for violations of court or congressional orders. One cannot commit contempt without a qualifying ‘order.’”

Samuel W. Buell, a former federal prosecutor and current Professor of Law at Duke University Law School, said:
“[T]he real issue for me is the pointlessness and narrow-mindedness of proceeding in this way. Contempt sanctions exist for the purpose of overcoming recalcitrance to testify. One would rarely if ever see this kind of procedural Javert-ism from a federal prosecutor and, if one did, one would expect it to be condemned by any federal judge before whom such a motion were made.
In federal court practice, contempt is not sought against grand jury witnesses as a kind of gotcha penalty for invocations of the Fifth Amendment privilege that might turn out to contain some arguable formal flaw. Contempt is used to compel witnesses who have asserted the privilege and then continued to refuse to testify after having been granted immunity. Skirmishing over the form of a privilege invocation is a wasteful sideshow. The only question that matters, and that would genuinely interest a judge, is whether the witness is in fact intending to assert the privilege and in fact has a legitimate basis to do so. The only questions of the witness that therefore need asking are the kind of questions (and a sufficient number of them) that will make the record clear that the witness is not going to testify. Usually even that process is not necessary and a representation from the witness’s counsel will do.

Again, contempt sanctions are on the books to serve a simple and necessary function in the operation of legal engines for finding the truth, and not for any other purpose. Any fair and level-headed judge is going to approach the problem from that perspective. Seeking contempt now on this record thus could accomplish nothing but making the Committee look petty and uninterested in getting to the merits of the matter under investigation.”

Robert Muse, a partner at Stein, Mitchell, Muse & Cipollone, LLP, Adjunct Professor of Congressional Investigations at Georgetown Law, and formerly the General Counsel to the Special Senate Committee to Investigate Hurricane Katrina, said:
"Procedures and rules exist to provide justice and fairness. In his rush to judgment, Issa forgot to play by the rules."

Professor Lance Cole of Penn State University’s Dickinson School of Law, said:
“I agree with the analysis and conclusions of Mr. Rosenberg, and the additional comments by Mr. Brand. I also have a broader concern about seeking criminal contempt sanctions against Ms. Lerner. I do not believe criminal contempt proceedings should be utilized in a situation in which a witness is asserting a fundamental constitutional privilege and there is a legitimate, unresolved legal issue concerning whether or not the constitutional privilege has been waived. In that situation initiating a civil subpoena enforcement proceeding to obtain a definitive judicial resolution of the disputed waiver issue, prior to initiating criminal contempt proceedings, would be preferable to seeking criminal contempt sanctions when there is a legitimate issue as to whether the privilege has been waived and that legal issue inevitably will require resolution by the judiciary. Pursuing a criminal contempt prosecution in this situation, when the Committee has available to it the alternatives of either initiating a civil judicial proceeding to resolve the legal dispute on waiver or granting the witness statutory immunity, is unnecessary and could have a chilling effect on the constitutional rights of witnesses in congressional proceedings.”


- See more at: Committee on Oversight & Government Reform : Press Releases : More Experts Now Agree That Issa Botched Contempt​

 

[The Rabbi]

Wow, who knew there was only one side to an issue?