Top IRS official will invoke the Fifth Amendment in congressional hearing

  • Thread starter Thread starter Torrent v.3
  • Start date Start date
T

Torrent v.3

Guest
Top IRS official will invoke the Fifth Amendment in congressional hearing about tea party targeting program


The Los Angeles Times reported Tuesday afternoon that Lois Lerner, who heads up the Internal Revenue Service's tax-exempt division, plans to invoke the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in a hearing Wednesday before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Affairs.
The Fifth Amendment provides that U.S. citizens may not be compelled to offer testimony if telling the truth would incriminate them.
Lerner's defense lawyer, William W. Taylor III, wrote to the committee on Tuesday that his client would refuse to answer questions related to what she knew about the extra levels of scrutiny applied to conservative nonprofit organizations that applied for tax-exempt status beginning in 2010.



She also will decline to say why she didn’t disclose what she knew to Congress, according to the LA Times.
Lerner 'has not committed any crime or made any misrepresentation,' Taylor's letter read, 'but under the circumstances she has no choice but to take this course.'
He is asking the oversight committee to excuse Lerner from testifying, claiming that calling her in a congressional hearing would 'have no purpose other than to embarrass or burden her' since members would not expect her to answer questions.


Ahmad Ali, a committee spokesman, told MailOnline that 'Ms. Lerner remains under subpoena from Chairman Issa to appear at tomorrow's hearing - the Committee has a Constitutional obligation to conduct oversight.'
'Chairman [Darrel] Issa remains hopeful that she will ultimately decide to testify tomorrow about her knowledge of outrageous IRS targeting of Americans for their political beliefs.'
The IRS applied special criteria to conservative organizations seeking tax-exempt status, putting them on a 'Be On The Lookout' (BOLO) list, based on the groups' names and political philosophies.
President Barack Obama has said he was unaware of the program until May 10, when excerpts of an IRS Inspector General Report on the practice were leaked to reporters.


But Jay Carney, the president's chief spokesman, confirmed Monday that senior White House staff, including White House Counsel Kathy Ruemmler and Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, knew about the IRS's habits as early as April 24, and chose not to tell Obama.
The Inspector General report found that Lerner and other IRS were notified in or before June 2011 that some staff in the agency's Cincinnati, Ohio office were using 'tea party,' 'patriots' and other key words to add applicants to the BOLO list.
Once on that list, the groups were subjected to additional auditing of their financial practices, their membership and their political activities.

Despite knowing about the program, Lerner and other senior IRS staffers withheld the information from Congress despite receiving several requests from House committees whose members heard from constituents that their tea party groups' tax-exempt approvals were taking as long as two years to be resolved.
The House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee was among those that specifically asked the IRS whether it was inspecting tea party groups more closely than other applicants, including those on the political left.


Read the rest at:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2328696/Lois-Lerner-Top-IRS-official-invoke-Fifth-Amendment-congressional-hearing-tea-party-targeting-program.html
 
Focus, people, focus: the 5th amendment is as important to our constitution as is the 1st, 2nd, etc.  I am a big proponent of 2nd amendment and other "rights", so I must be a big proponent of 5th amendment rights as well. 

Furthermore, if I were ever in position to be scrutinized by the government with possible criminal penalties involved, you better believe I would invoke the 5th.  As I told my sons and I tell anyone in possible trouble with the law, guilty or not, "you have the right to remain silent"  USE IT!!

It is absolutely the job of the accuser to provide evidence of your crime.  If they can't do it by themselves they cannot and should not be able to rely on your help to do so.  It is also a Biblical principle for the accuser to provide evidence.

I got no issue with her taking the 5th.  I would do it myself if I were in her circumstances with what little I know from the case. 
 
My only problem with her taking the 5th is that she is a government employee.  I would think that as a government employee she would be required to answer to her employers for her stewardship even if it incriminates her.
 
When she first testified she answered questions, and so technically she was still under oath-she had to answer the questions. Am I correct? Or just crazy myself! :)
 
Anchor said:
Focus, people, focus: the 5th amendment is as important to our constitution as is the 1st, 2nd, etc.  I am a big proponent of 2nd amendment and other "rights", so I must be a big proponent of 5th amendment rights as well.

Isn't it ironic that she invokes the 5th amendment for herself while violating the 1st amendment for the rest of us?

Great irony... not sure of all the legal ramifications since she has already testified (as kaba notes).
 
She has the right not to incriminate herself.  I am not sure if the matter before congress was fact-finding about an organization or personally legal.  She absolutely does not have the right to withhold public information or stonewall a legitimate investigation of an organization of which she is in charge.  That is contempt of congress, and she should be held liable. 

But that won't happen.  A year from now this will all be forgotten and the mindless hoard will once again vote in a bunch of sorry-@$$ elites to pass out freebies in exchange for liberty and continue ruining a perfectly good country. 
 
Anchor said:
She has the right not to incriminate herself.  I am not sure if the matter before congress was fact-finding about an organization or personally legal.  She absolutely does not have the right to withhold public information or stonewall a legitimate investigation of an organization of which she is in charge.  That is contempt of congress, and she should be held liable. 

But that won't happen.  A year from now this will all be forgotten and the mindless hoard will once again vote in a bunch of sorry-@$$ elites to pass out freebies in exchange for liberty and continue ruining a perfectly good country.
That is true, but I believe that she gave up that right when she began to testify as to her innocence. 
 
Am I the only one who has thought about her taking the 5th from the following angle:  She is being threatened by those in power to shut her mouth or else....

Thoughts?
 
BandGuy said:
Am I the only one who has thought about her taking the 5th from the following angle:  She is being threatened by those in power to shut her mouth or else....

Thoughts?

That makes sense.
 
Back
Top