Lois Lerner to take the 5th. Again.

[BlindBoo]

Transcript..................

IRS?s Lerner Testimony: ?I Did Not Break Any Laws? - Washington Wire - WSJ

U decide.

 

[paperview]

The only time anyone invokes the 5th Amendment is when testifying before Congress. For a criminal trial it isn't necessary. Defendants seldom testify in court.

Holy shit. What a huge pile of Idiocy this post is. Man oh man.

What in the holy freak defense do you think criminal trial defendants use when they do not testify????

People "claim the 5th" every day in America. It can start as early as a cop stop.

They don't literally stand up in court in and announce they are taking the Fifth Amendment. In fact, the judge will ask them if they want to waive their Fifth Amendment rights if they decide to testify.

Nothing pleases the readers more than when you produce evidence of your intellectual impotence.

It helps them decide who to -- an who not to -- take seriously.

Let's start with this: Where do you think "You have the right to remain silent" / Miranda comes from??

You do not literally have to say "I plead the 5th" -- to '''plead the 5th."

But that is exactly what they are doing. Exercising their 5th Amendment rights.

That this has to be explained to you is stunning -- but then again, this is coming from a guy who uses a toddler giving the finger as his avatar saying absurdities like: "The only time anyone invokes the 5th Amendment is when testifying before Congress.

 

[Dot Com]

looks like paperview is right and the rabbi, quelle surprise!!! is wrong

Lois Lerner attorney denies Issa claim that client will testify Wednesday

Lerner’s attorney, William Taylor, told The Post on Monday that he and his client had reached “no such agreement” with the committee. He also said the hearing appeared to be aimed at vilifying Lerner.

looks like he was trying to scare her into returning to the committee w/o having any agreement from her counsel. A dog & pony show/shiny object to keep the likes of the rabbi & bripat mesmerized by this non-issue. :yawn:

 

[Little-Acorn]

By testifying that you broke no laws you've left yourself open to questioning as to whether or not that statement is factual or not. That's the way our system works!

And if the answers to THOSE questions might incriminate you, then you can refuse under the 5th amendment to answer them.

And THAT's the way our system works.

The 5th amendment is very plain. You can refuse to answer ANY question, at any time, if the answer might incriminate you. The 5th doesn't make any exception for "what you said 5 minutes ago".

Sorry. I don't like it any more than you do.

But I'd like it even less if the 5th DIDN'T say exactly what it says.

 

[Oldstyle]

Transcript..................

IRS?s Lerner Testimony: ?I Did Not Break Any Laws? - Washington Wire - WSJ

U decide.

I think Lerner stepped out of bounds with this statement...

"I have not done anything wrong. I have not broken any laws, I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations, and I have not provided false information to this or any other congressional committee."

You can't make that declarative statement and then refuse to be questioned on whether or not you HAVE broken laws...whether you HAVE violated IRS rules and regulations and whether you HAVE provided false information to Congressional committees.

 

[Dot Com]

Holy shit. What a huge pile of Idiocy this post is. Man oh man.

What in the holy freak defense do you think criminal trial defendants use when they do not testify????

People "claim the 5th" every day in America. It can start as early as a cop stop.

They don't literally stand up in court in and announce they are taking the Fifth Amendment. In fact, the judge will ask them if they want to waive their Fifth Amendment rights if they decide to testify.

Nothing pleases the readers more than when you produce evidence of your intellectual impotence.

It helps them decide who to -- an who not to -- take seriously.

Let's start with this: Where do you think "You have the right to remain silent" / Miranda comes from??

You do not literally have to say "I plead the 5th" -- to '''plead the 5th."

But that is exactly what they are doing. Exercising their 5th Amendment rights.

That this has to be explained to you is stunning -- but then again, this is coming from a guy who uses a toddler giving the finger as his avatar saying absurdities like: "The only time anyone invokes the 5th Amendment is when testifying before Congress.

theres a reason I have him on ignore- his drama avie and hack posts

as to the OP, yeah the rabbi swung & missed just like Issa. Should do a simple google search before posting next time

 

[The Rabbi]

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?"

The question is whether you have. And whether you have any idea what you're talking about.

 

[Oldstyle]

By testifying that you broke no laws you've left yourself open to questioning as to whether or not that statement is factual or not. That's the way our system works!

And if the answers to THOSE questions might incriminate you, then you can refuse under the 5th amendment to answer them.

And THAT's the way our system works.

The 5th amendment is very plain. You can refuse to answer ANY question, at any time, if the answer might incriminate you. The 5th doesn't make any exception for "what you said 5 minutes ago".

Sorry. I don't like it any more than you do.

But I'd like it even less if the 5th DIDN'T say exactly what it says.

So what you're claiming is that I can testify in a criminal case that I was at my home on the night of Sept. 10th and no where near a bank that was robbed and which I'm a suspect...and then when cross examined on that very same point...invoke my 5th Amendment rights? I beg to disagree with you!!!

 

[The Rabbi]

Ah...I found it.

Pubbies claim she did...and Issa made an Ass outa hisself.

She never waived her 5th Amendment rights.



Lerner's attorney says she won't testify, Issa wrong - POLITICO.com

The car burglar burgles again.

wow.

I thought you were better than that.

FYI.......your info is convoluted.

Had enough of this childish back on forth on this topic.

The fact that ANYONE is NOT interested in what she knows is troubling.

There's that sensitivity again. I thought you were better than that.

I merely pointed out what you claim is wrong.

She did not waive her 5th Amendment rights.

Some people falsely saying she did does not make it so.

I linked to her lawyer, and to the jibber from the idiot Issa who made a false claim yesterday.

I'd like to hear from her. Why doesn't Issa offer her immunity?

So we are supposed to believe her paid lawyer, who has an obvious interest here?
My aren't you trusting?

 

[The Rabbi]

looks like paperview is right and the rabbi, quelle surprise!!! is wrong

Lois Lerner attorney denies Issa claim that client will testify Wednesday

Lerner’s attorney, William Taylor, told The Post on Monday that he and his client had reached “no such agreement” with the committee. He also said the hearing appeared to be aimed at vilifying Lerner.

looks like he was trying to scare her into returning to the committee w/o having any agreement from her counsel. A dog & pony show/shiny object to keep the likes of the rabbi & bripat mesmerized by this non-issue. :yawn:

Where was I wrong, dunce? The thread title says she will take the 5th.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Is is just me, or when you see this woman's name do you think for just for a moment that she dates this guy?

 

[paperview]

wow.

I thought you were better than that.

FYI.......your info is convoluted.

Had enough of this childish back on forth on this topic.

The fact that ANYONE is NOT interested in what she knows is troubling.

There's that sensitivity again. I thought you were better than that.

I merely pointed out what you claim is wrong.

She did not waive her 5th Amendment rights.

Some people falsely saying she did does not make it so.

I linked to her lawyer, and to the jibber from the idiot Issa who made a false claim yesterday.

I'd like to hear from her. Why doesn't Issa offer her immunity?

So we are supposed to believe her paid lawyer, who has an obvious interest here?
My aren't you trusting?

And you dive into the shmegma of Issa, who you think ...what? has no partisan interest ??

You quack us up.

 

[paperview]

Transcript..................

IRS?s Lerner Testimony: ?I Did Not Break Any Laws? - Washington Wire - WSJ

U decide.

I think Lerner stepped out of bounds with this statement...

"I have not done anything wrong. I have not broken any laws, I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations, and I have not provided false information to this or any other congressional committee."

You can't make that declarative statement and then refuse to be questioned on whether or not you HAVE broken laws...whether you HAVE violated IRS rules and regulations and whether you HAVE provided false information to Congressional committees.

I think....


You have been fed bullshit by Foxstainia.

 

[The Rabbi]

There's that sensitivity again. I thought you were better than that.

I merely pointed out what you claim is wrong.

She did not waive her 5th Amendment rights.

Some people falsely saying she did does not make it so.

I linked to her lawyer, and to the jibber from the idiot Issa who made a false claim yesterday.

I'd like to hear from her. Why doesn't Issa offer her immunity?

So we are supposed to believe her paid lawyer, who has an obvious interest here?
My aren't you trusting?

And you dive into the shmegma of Issa, who you think ...what? has no partisan interest ??

You quack us up.

Thanks for admitting your proof is the opinion of her own attorney, who is paid to say such things.
You're dismissed.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Never say this kind of thing ever BTW:

"I have not done anything wrong. I have not broken any laws, I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations, and I have not provided false information to this or any other congressional committee."

If they prove even one of those to be untrue you look guilty as hell, and it could be as simple as you borrowed a pen or took an extra coffee break.

 

[paperview]

So we are supposed to believe her paid lawyer, who has an obvious interest here?
My aren't you trusting?

And you dive into the shmegma of Issa, who you think ...what? has no partisan interest ??

You quack us up.

Thanks for admitting your proof is the opinion of her own attorney, who is paid to say such things.
You're dismissed.

1. It was claimed she waived her 5th Amendment rights.

2. That was proven wrong. It was merely pulicans trying to score points with no legal proof.

3. What else do you need to know?

 

[The Rabbi]

There's that sensitivity again. I thought you were better than that.

I merely pointed out what you claim is wrong.

She did not waive her 5th Amendment rights.

Some people falsely saying she did does not make it so.

I linked to her lawyer, and to the jibber from the idiot Issa who made a false claim yesterday.

I'd like to hear from her. Why doesn't Issa offer her immunity?

So we are supposed to believe her paid lawyer, who has an obvious interest here?
My aren't you trusting?

And you dive into the shmegma of Issa, who you think ...what? has no partisan interest ??

You quack us up.

You're so fucking stupid and lazy. That's the problem.

At trial, the Fifth Amendment gives a criminal defendant the right not to testify. This means that the prosecutor, the judge, and even the defendant’s own lawyer cannot force the defendant to take the witness stand against his or her will. However, a defendant who does choose to testify cannot choose to answer some questions but not others. Once the defendant takes the witness stand, this particular Fifth Amendment right is considered waived throughout the trial. - See more at: Fifth Amendment Right Against Self-Incrimination - FindLaw

Now, does a Congressional committee operate on the same rules as a court of law? I dont know. Did she choose to testify? It would seem so since she appeared. She took the witness stand, which implies waving the right. I think Issa is on strong grounds here.
If you have something to support your view, not her attorney's word for it, then post it. Otherwise admit she cannot invoke the 5th and go on.

 

[The Rabbi]

And you dive into the shmegma of Issa, who you think ...what? has no partisan interest ??

You quack us up.

Thanks for admitting your proof is the opinion of her own attorney, who is paid to say such things.
You're dismissed.

1. It was claimed she waived her 5th Amendment rights.

2. That was proven wrong. It was merely pulicans trying to score points with no legal proof.

3. What else do you need to know?

Where was it proven wrong? A statmeent from her lawyer is not proof. I posted actual proof. Respond to that or STFU.

 

[Little-Acorn]

I think Lerner stepped out of bounds with this statement...

What bounds?

 

[paperview]

Thanks for admitting your proof is the opinion of her own attorney, who is paid to say such things.
You're dismissed.

1. It was claimed she waived her 5th Amendment rights.

2. That was proven wrong. It was merely pulicans trying to score points with no legal proof.

3. What else do you need to know?

Where was it proven wrong? A statmeent from her lawyer is not proof. I posted actual proof. Respond to that or STFU.

You posted PROOF she waived her 5th Amendment rights?

G'head. Sho wit. I musta missed it.