The great IRS/Tea party scandle fizzles

[Foxfyre]

Spin spin spin spin..

you lefties are in full blown panic mode!

Love it.

Other than your obvious political bias, do you have probative evidence of intent on the part of any IRA employee? If so name them.

If not, you've provided more evidence to convince the reader you're a partisan hack who has nothing substantive to offer.

They will be named. Handing confidential information to ANYBODY outside of the IRS is a felony. Very soon some of those low level twits are going to start singing because they won't want to go to the grey bar Hilton by themselves.

That is not a partisan position either....the behavior that was done is criminal in the extreme...for you to not acknowledge that shows YOU to be the partisan hack you have shown yourself to be over and over again.

Yes, even Democrats and other leftwingers, except for the most partisan of numbnuts who will excuse ANYTHING if their guys are in charge, are angry and condemning of an over reaching IRS. So this time we aren't seeing the strong defense or excuse of the wrong doers from the Democrats on the panels.

The only reason this may not go anywhere is if it reaches too close to the Presidency in which case people will likely be ordered to back off and stand down. The problem the President has though is that the media is still on edge and angry about the administration inappropriately going after THEM. And they may or may not be willing to cooperate with a coverup on the IRS thing because of that.

 

[Foxfyre]

As an afterthought to my previous post, maybe there is something to the old saw that if you give a crook enough rope, he'll hang himself?

 

[HomeInspect]

Taking the fifth =\= fizzle

Just saying

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Funny.. in an opening statement saying.." I did nothing wrong and should be here".... then taking the 5th. Isn't taking the 5th a right given so you don't incriminate yourself. If she did nothing wrong, how could she incriminate herself?

 

[FA_Q2]

Barry always knows about the good stuff though and rushes to the nearest microphone to take personal credit for it. It was 'his idea' or 'he ordered it' or 'he asked (whomever) to look into it, etc. etc. etc. He never EVER doesn't know about that stuff. But he was oblivious to Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Fast & Furious, whistle blowers, problems at Benghazi, investigation of media personnel, most especially James Rosen, FEC and IRS antics, etc. etc. etc. until the media reported it and everybody knew.

At the very least he must be psychic in knowing what to know and what not to know well in advance.

And yes, Lois took the Fifth but may have made a fatal error in her tactical plan. She started out with a statement that she had been advised by Counsel to take the Fifth but continued with a very self serving statement that she had done nothing wrong. The committee members were pretty sure that she couldn't make a self serving statement and then take the Fifth re that statement. They are consulting counsel and we should know probably later today.

Bull. You can take the fifth at any time. There is no permanently waving a right because you make a statement and such shows a complete miscarriage of the right in the first place. Please, PLEASE tell me that you are not with Rabbi on this and believe that claiming the fifth is a sign of guilt. The absolute damage that state of mind has against the concept of rights is terrible.

Of course everyone takes the 5th when testifying. NOT.

Anyone that is even remotely connected with the office or crime and has half a brain does. If you were INNOCENT but you were part of the system in place that allowed this to happen you would be a moron to not take the fifth.

I did post an extremely good video explaining exactly why an innocent person should claim the fifth whenever the government tries to connect them with a crime.

Gotta love someone who declares that they haven't done ANYTHING wrong and then immediately take the 5th!

Lerner lied to Congress previously. She needs to be brought up on charges for that.

Yes, you have to love the fact that we have freedom to do so and exercising that freedom IN NO WAY LEADS TO GUILT. That’s how the freedom to remain silent works or you have no freedom at all.

If she did lie though, I would be willing to bet she will (and should) face charges for that.

 

[Clementine]

The scandal won't fizzle just because no one is talking. It makes it far worse when an effort to conceal the truth is being made. All we get from anyone in the IRS or the administration is denial and silence. Taking the 5th is rarely a sign of innocence. With an operation as big as the IRS targeting conservative groups, there are a lot of people who know something. And not just little peons working for the IRS. This reeks of Chicago style politics.

Why does the left think that denial and ignoring something will make it go away? I guess they hope that the whole country has a short memory and things will be forgotten.

 

[regent]

The best answer in these hearings is to use Reagan's classic "I don't remember" used about 124 times in the Iran-Contra thing.

 

[Oldstyle]

Gee, Regent...I think the Obama Administration went by that record about two weeks ago. NOBODY in this Administration seems to know anything about anything. By the time they get done trying to stonewall all these scandals they are going to have "I don't remember" numbers that will dwarf anything Ronnie and his crew ever produced.

 

[Oldstyle]

Barry always knows about the good stuff though and rushes to the nearest microphone to take personal credit for it. It was 'his idea' or 'he ordered it' or 'he asked (whomever) to look into it, etc. etc. etc. He never EVER doesn't know about that stuff. But he was oblivious to Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Fast & Furious, whistle blowers, problems at Benghazi, investigation of media personnel, most especially James Rosen, FEC and IRS antics, etc. etc. etc. until the media reported it and everybody knew.

At the very least he must be psychic in knowing what to know and what not to know well in advance.

And yes, Lois took the Fifth but may have made a fatal error in her tactical plan. She started out with a statement that she had been advised by Counsel to take the Fifth but continued with a very self serving statement that she had done nothing wrong. The committee members were pretty sure that she couldn't make a self serving statement and then take the Fifth re that statement. They are consulting counsel and we should know probably later today.

Bull. You can take the fifth at any time. There is no permanently waving a right because you make a statement and such shows a complete miscarriage of the right in the first place. Please, PLEASE tell me that you are not with Rabbi on this and believe that claiming the fifth is a sign of guilt. The absolute damage that state of mind has against the concept of rights is terrible.

Of course everyone takes the 5th when testifying. NOT.

Anyone that is even remotely connected with the office or crime and has half a brain does. If you were INNOCENT but you were part of the system in place that allowed this to happen you would be a moron to not take the fifth.

I did post an extremely good video explaining exactly why an innocent person should claim the fifth whenever the government tries to connect them with a crime.

Gotta love someone who declares that they haven't done ANYTHING wrong and then immediately take the 5th!

Lerner lied to Congress previously. She needs to be brought up on charges for that.

Yes, you have to love the fact that we have freedom to do so and exercising that freedom IN NO WAY LEADS TO GUILT. That’s how the freedom to remain silent works or you have no freedom at all.

If she did lie though, I would be willing to bet she will (and should) face charges for that.

I'm going to go with the legal experts that have stated that Lerner does indeed have the right to invoke her 5th amendment rights to not answer questions even after she has made statements. What she can't do however is make a statement about a topic and THEN declare that she is taking the 5th on that same subject. Once she breaches a topic it's fair game for cross examination. She retains her constitutional rights to take the 5th on anything she hasn't already brought up but she's abdicated the right to do so on things that she herself has volunteered. You can't have it both ways.

 

[westwall]

Barry always knows about the good stuff though and rushes to the nearest microphone to take personal credit for it. It was 'his idea' or 'he ordered it' or 'he asked (whomever) to look into it, etc. etc. etc. He never EVER doesn't know about that stuff. But he was oblivious to Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Fast & Furious, whistle blowers, problems at Benghazi, investigation of media personnel, most especially James Rosen, FEC and IRS antics, etc. etc. etc. until the media reported it and everybody knew.

At the very least he must be psychic in knowing what to know and what not to know well in advance.

And yes, Lois took the Fifth but may have made a fatal error in her tactical plan. She started out with a statement that she had been advised by Counsel to take the Fifth but continued with a very self serving statement that she had done nothing wrong. The committee members were pretty sure that she couldn't make a self serving statement and then take the Fifth re that statement. They are consulting counsel and we should know probably later today.

Bull. You can take the fifth at any time. There is no permanently waving a right because you make a statement and such shows a complete miscarriage of the right in the first place. Please, PLEASE tell me that you are not with Rabbi on this and believe that claiming the fifth is a sign of guilt. The absolute damage that state of mind has against the concept of rights is terrible.

Anyone that is even remotely connected with the office or crime and has half a brain does. If you were INNOCENT but you were part of the system in place that allowed this to happen you would be a moron to not take the fifth.

I did post an extremely good video explaining exactly why an innocent person should claim the fifth whenever the government tries to connect them with a crime.

Gotta love someone who declares that they haven't done ANYTHING wrong and then immediately take the 5th!

Lerner lied to Congress previously. She needs to be brought up on charges for that.

Yes, you have to love the fact that we have freedom to do so and exercising that freedom IN NO WAY LEADS TO GUILT. That’s how the freedom to remain silent works or you have no freedom at all.

If she did lie though, I would be willing to bet she will (and should) face charges for that.

I'm going to go with the legal experts that have stated that Lerner does indeed have the right to invoke her 5th amendment rights to not answer questions even after she has made statements. What she can't do however is make a statement about a topic and THEN declare that she is taking the 5th on that same subject. Once she breaches a topic it's fair game for cross examination. She retains her constitutional rights to take the 5th on anything she hasn't already brought up but she's abdicated the right to do so on things that she herself has volunteered. You can't have it both ways.

Yes indeed. She thought she was so much smarter than the members of Congress that she really put her foot in it. She's doomed now.

 

[bripat9643]

Taking the fifth =\= fizzle

Just saying

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Funny.. in an opening statement saying.." I did nothing wrong and should be here".... then taking the 5th. Isn't taking the 5th a right given so you don't incriminate yourself. If she did nothing wrong, how could she incriminate herself?

Any government official who takes the 5th when asked to testify about their jobs should be fired on the spot.

 

[Socio]

Taking the fifth =\= fizzle

Just saying

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Funny.. in an opening statement saying.." I did nothing wrong and should be here".... then taking the 5th. Isn't taking the 5th a right given so you don't incriminate yourself. If she did nothing wrong, how could she incriminate herself?

Any government official who takes the 5th when asked to testify about their jobs should be fired on the spot.

But does not terminating her also relinquish her from being compelled to testify?

 

[Foxfyre]

Barry always knows about the good stuff though and rushes to the nearest microphone to take personal credit for it. It was 'his idea' or 'he ordered it' or 'he asked (whomever) to look into it, etc. etc. etc. He never EVER doesn't know about that stuff. But he was oblivious to Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Fast & Furious, whistle blowers, problems at Benghazi, investigation of media personnel, most especially James Rosen, FEC and IRS antics, etc. etc. etc. until the media reported it and everybody knew.

At the very least he must be psychic in knowing what to know and what not to know well in advance.

And yes, Lois took the Fifth but may have made a fatal error in her tactical plan. She started out with a statement that she had been advised by Counsel to take the Fifth but continued with a very self serving statement that she had done nothing wrong. The committee members were pretty sure that she couldn't make a self serving statement and then take the Fifth re that statement. They are consulting counsel and we should know probably later today.

Bull. You can take the fifth at any time. There is no permanently waving a right because you make a statement and such shows a complete miscarriage of the right in the first place. Please, PLEASE tell me that you are not with Rabbi on this and believe that claiming the fifth is a sign of guilt. The absolute damage that state of mind has against the concept of rights is terrible.

Of course everyone takes the 5th when testifying. NOT.

Anyone that is even remotely connected with the office or crime and has half a brain does. If you were INNOCENT but you were part of the system in place that allowed this to happen you would be a moron to not take the fifth.

I did post an extremely good video explaining exactly why an innocent person should claim the fifth whenever the government tries to connect them with a crime.

Gotta love someone who declares that they haven't done ANYTHING wrong and then immediately take the 5th!

Lerner lied to Congress previously. She needs to be brought up on charges for that.

Yes, you have to love the fact that we have freedom to do so and exercising that freedom IN NO WAY LEADS TO GUILT. That’s how the freedom to remain silent works or you have no freedom at all.

If she did lie though, I would be willing to bet she will (and should) face charges for that.

Taking the Fifth of course is a constitutional right as is the right to defend oneself against accusations, real or false. Nobody is saying that it is not. But surely you don't think we should not wonder about public servants entrusted with the people's money and well being who takes the Fifth? That there is something to hide? Something that would look really bad? There is ammunition that can be used?

I think back to the Iran Contra hearings and Oliver North's testimony. He KNEW he was gulty of previously lying to Congress though he believed he had full justification and moral imperative to do so, but there is no way he was going to admit that before Congress without having full immunity. The immunity was granted and he testified honestly. Othewise he no doubt would have taken the Fifth, but he would have realized that in so doing, guilt would be assumed.

I would not have faulted Lois Lerner for asking for immunity in return for her testimony. But she did not request that so far as I know. I'm sorry but I do find great fault with a public servant responsible for the public trust who refuses to allow oversight of that trust. And yes, it does make her look quite guilty.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Barry always knows about the good stuff though and rushes to the nearest microphone to take personal credit for it. It was 'his idea' or 'he ordered it' or 'he asked (whomever) to look into it, etc. etc. etc. He never EVER doesn't know about that stuff. But he was oblivious to Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Fast & Furious, whistle blowers, problems at Benghazi, investigation of media personnel, most especially James Rosen, FEC and IRS antics, etc. etc. etc. until the media reported it and everybody knew.

At the very least he must be psychic in knowing what to know and what not to know well in advance.

And yes, Lois took the Fifth but may have made a fatal error in her tactical plan. She started out with a statement that she had been advised by Counsel to take the Fifth but continued with a very self serving statement that she had done nothing wrong. The committee members were pretty sure that she couldn't make a self serving statement and then take the Fifth re that statement. They are consulting counsel and we should know probably later today.

Bull. You can take the fifth at any time. There is no permanently waving a right because you make a statement and such shows a complete miscarriage of the right in the first place. Please, PLEASE tell me that you are not with Rabbi on this and believe that claiming the fifth is a sign of guilt. The absolute damage that state of mind has against the concept of rights is terrible.

Anyone that is even remotely connected with the office or crime and has half a brain does. If you were INNOCENT but you were part of the system in place that allowed this to happen you would be a moron to not take the fifth.

I did post an extremely good video explaining exactly why an innocent person should claim the fifth whenever the government tries to connect them with a crime.

Gotta love someone who declares that they haven't done ANYTHING wrong and then immediately take the 5th!

Lerner lied to Congress previously. She needs to be brought up on charges for that.

Yes, you have to love the fact that we have freedom to do so and exercising that freedom IN NO WAY LEADS TO GUILT. That’s how the freedom to remain silent works or you have no freedom at all.

If she did lie though, I would be willing to bet she will (and should) face charges for that.

Taking the Fifth of course is a constitutional right as is the right to defend oneself against accusations, real or false. Nobody is saying that it is not. But surely you don't think we should not wonder about public servants entrusted with the people's money and well being who takes the Fifth? That there is something to hide? Something that would look really bad? There is ammunition that can be used?

I think back to the Iran Contra hearings and Oliver North's testimony. He KNEW he was gulty of previously lying to Congress though he believed he had full justification and moral imperative to do so, but there is no way he was going to admit that before Congress without having full immunity. The immunity was granted and he testified honestly. Othewise he no doubt would have taken the Fifth, but he would have realized that in so doing, guilt would be assumed.

I would not have faulted Lois Lerner for asking for immunity in return for her testimony. But she did not request that so far as I know. I'm sorry but I do find great fault with a public servant responsible for the public trust who refuses to allow oversight of that trust. And yes, it does make her look quite guilty.

here is the thing

she is an employee of the people

it is her job to report whatever she is asked to report on

if she can not do that

then she needs to be fired

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The great IRS/Tea party scandle fizzles

* * * *


Roll Up! Roll Up! The I.R.S. Non-Scandal Moves to Capitol Hill : The New Yorker

For a "fizzled scandal" Mr. Wishful thinking delusional liberal, it sure seems to be growing in magnitude.

So much for you wishful thinking.

And It is NOT a "non scandal."

It is a HUGE scandal and it is a major problem that damn well better get fully investigated and then addressed.

 

[FA_Q2]

Taking the Fifth of course is a constitutional right as is the right to defend oneself against accusations, real or false. Nobody is saying that it is not. But surely you don't think we should not wonder about public servants entrusted with the people's money and well being who takes the Fifth? That there is something to hide? Something that would look really bad? There is ammunition that can be used?

Wonder away. There is nothing wrong with that. My problem is not that such does not generate questions. It should. My problem is the assumption of guilt based on the exercise of a natural right. There is ample examples of this in this thread alone, not to mention the plethora of others that where posters offer this of evidence of her guilt. That is not only wrong but smacks rights in the face.

I think back to the Iran Contra hearings and Oliver North's testimony. He KNEW he was gulty of previously lying to Congress though he believed he had full justification and moral imperative to do so, but there is no way he was going to admit that before Congress without having full immunity. The immunity was granted and he testified honestly. Othewise he no doubt would have taken the Fifth, but he would have realized that in so doing, guilt would be assumed.

No, guilt is not assumed. That is not what the right to remain silent entails. It brings questions and requires further investigation but it does not equate guilt.

Guilt, btw, should NEVER be assumed. The idea is INNOCENT until proven guilty. That means that innocence should ALWAYS be assumed. It is evidence and fact that make you guilty. It does not look good for her but that is not because the she pled the fifth. It is because illegal actions were taken under her watch.

I would not have faulted Lois Lerner for asking for immunity in return for her testimony. But she did not request that so far as I know. I'm sorry but I do find great fault with a public servant responsible for the public trust who refuses to allow oversight of that trust. And yes, it does make her look quite guilty.

I would not fault here for that either but such is simply not going to happen unless they think there is a bigger fish to fry here than her. There might not be one so I am not sure that is even on the table. You might find fault in that she does not want to testify but I think that really speaks of ignorance to such proceedings. The people she is dealing with really are not interested in the truth more than they are interested in fingering someone that appears guilty. As I stated before, if I were in her position I would have plead the fifth as well even if I were totally innocent of any wrongdoing. I cannot pass judgment on one that takes the same actions that I would take. I think that the VAST majority of people on this board would do the exact same thing as I. To do differently would be nuts IMHO. When EVERY word that you say is scrutinized ad infanitum, when any memory that you do not remember correctly or misstep can finger you for something that you may not have done, I see no other sane option.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Funny.. in an opening statement saying.." I did nothing wrong and should be here".... then taking the 5th. Isn't taking the 5th a right given so you don't incriminate yourself. If she did nothing wrong, how could she incriminate herself?

Any government official who takes the 5th when asked to testify about their jobs should be fired on the spot.

But does not terminating her also relinquish her from being compelled to testify?

Does quitting your job after you have embezzled money from it relinquish you from having to go to court?

 

[jon_berzerk]

Funny.. in an opening statement saying.." I did nothing wrong and should be here".... then taking the 5th. Isn't taking the 5th a right given so you don't incriminate yourself. If she did nothing wrong, how could she incriminate herself?

Any government official who takes the 5th when asked to testify about their jobs should be fired on the spot.

But does not terminating her also relinquish her from being compelled to testify?

no

 

[Oldstyle]

It's time to subpoena the people directly below Lois Lerner in the IRS chain of command and have them testify under oath as to the who, what and when's of this case. As I said before...this should be treated like an organized crime investigation. Start with the foot soldiers and work your way up to the people who concocted the policies. The higher ups at the IRS are trying to protect their own asses at this point. Time to tighten the screws...

 

[Dot Com]

fizzling is right. No one but teapublicans care about this. The workers were overwhelmed due to the Citizens United ruling and subsequent flood of fake rw *cough* "social education" groups while simultaneously having their budget cut. The did what Republicans, up until this point had no prob with, they profiled. BFD

 

[Meister]

fizzling is right. No one but teapublicans care about this. The workers were overwhelmed due to the Citizens United ruling and subsequent flood of fake rw *cough* "social education" groups while simultaneously having their budget cut. The did what Republicans, up until this point had no prob with, they profiled. BFD

You just keep telling yourself that, Dot. From what I've heard from most of my liberal friends, they too are concerned.