Lerner takes the FIFTH

[Anonymous]

People who work for the government who refuse to answer questions from the representatives of the people about their work for the government during the investigation of potential criminal activity are obviously guilty of something.

[Anonymous]

She's getting called back up since she made a statement of innocence first... She waived her right and is now subject to jail if she invokes the 5th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think the larger issue here is that a government official is willfully withholding information, basically for fear that it could incriminate herself. She has that right, but at the end of the day, good deeds and innocent favors aren't typically used to bring criminal charges.

Her taking the fifth, while her right in my opinion translates into "I'm probably guilty of something here, I just don't want to get myself into more trouble..." It just doesn't look good that she's IRS management.

It is another Republican witch hunt. A Witch Hunt! Everyone should take the 5th when those nasty Republicans start to ask any questions. Thank goodness she got to read her prepared statement though before taking the 5th. It clearly proved that she was innocent of any wrong doing.

Given the GOPs previous cynical use of the perjury trap, and the highly politicized nature of the proceedings, I don't blame her at all. This is a fishing expedition. Fuck em.

Could you give some examples of the "perjury trap"? It's funny that you think this is highly politicized, one can say the same thing about the agency under fire, what with their specific targeting of those of a supposed political nature. But let's not politicize this....

Of course they were reviewing political groups that were applying for 501(c)(4) status. That's their f-ing job. It's what the law requires of them.

You are intentionally ignorant if you think that is the issue here. The issue is that the IRS did not behave impartially with respect to political affiliation. Conservative groups were singled out.

But you know that. It makes the Administration look bad and it is therefore hard for you to deal with, but you already know what the issue is. Why put any effort into convincing a bunch of strangers on a message board of something you know is false?

Horse poop. Groups with obvious political agendas were singled out. The GOP has elevated the case of one group (in this case GOP activists operating under the moniker "Tea Party") while ignoring countless others. Again, the IRS was doing exactly what it was supposed to be doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People who work for the government who refuse to answer questions from the representatives of the people about their work for the government during the investigation of potential criminal activity are obviously guilty of something.

If government workers (in this case a non-political career employee of the IRS) are subject to criminal penalties in a partisan witch hunt, they absolutely should take the fifth. No point whatsoever in testifying. Of course, she also must go, but as a personal decision it's a no-brainer. Partisan tantrums aside.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think the larger issue here is that a government official is willfully withholding information, basically for fear that it could incriminate herself. She has that right, but at the end of the day, good deeds and innocent favors aren't typically used to bring criminal charges.

Her taking the fifth, while her right in my opinion translates into "I'm probably guilty of something here, I just don't want to get myself into more trouble..." It just doesn't look good that she's IRS management.

It is another Republican witch hunt. A Witch Hunt! Everyone should take the 5th when those nasty Republicans start to ask any questions. Thank goodness she got to read her prepared statement though before taking the 5th. It clearly proved that she was innocent of any wrong doing.

Given the GOPs previous cynical use of the perjury trap, and the highly politicized nature of the proceedings, I don't blame her at all. This is a fishing expedition. Fuck em.

Could you give some examples of the "perjury trap"? It's funny that you think this is highly politicized, one can say the same thing about the agency under fire, what with their specific targeting of those of a supposed political nature. But let's not politicize this....

Of course they were reviewing political groups that were applying for 501(c)(4) status. That's their f-ing job. It's what the law requires of them.

You are intentionally ignorant if you think that is the issue here. The issue is that the IRS did not behave impartially with respect to political affiliation. Conservative groups were singled out.

But you know that. It makes the Administration look bad and it is therefore hard for you to deal with, but you already know what the issue is. Why put any effort into convincing a bunch of strangers on a message board of something you know is false?

Horse poop. Groups with obvious political agendas were singled out. The GOP has elevated the case of one group (in this case GOP activists operating under the moniker "Tea Party") while ignoring countless others. Again, the IRS was doing exactly what it was supposed to be doing.

I hate to throw a bucket of reality on such a nice rant, but there are other groups that were targeted. Of the roughly 300 firms whose applications were targeted or delayed, roughly one-third of them were conservative and had names like “tea party” or “patriot.” So, no. Basically 1/3 are conservative groups.

[Anonymous]

Quick, someone (any of you lame partisan hacks) from this forum needs to inform President Obama that this is all a Republican Witch Hunt and that the IRS did not act inappropriately. The IRS was just doing their job.

President Barack Obama said Wednesday that he was "angry" at IRS officials who inappropriately targeted conservative groups for scrutiny, announcing that his administration had sought and accepted Steven Miller resignation as interim commissioner of the IRS.
"I've reviewed the Treasury Department watchdog's report, and the misconduct that it uncovered was inexcusable," Obama said in a statement at the White House. "It's inexcusable, and Americans are right to be angry about it, and I'm angry about it."

quote]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Quick, someone (any of you lame partisan hacks) from this forum needs to inform President Obama that this is all a Republican Witch Hunt and that the IRS did not act inappropriately. The IRS was just doing their job.

I'm angry about it too, but I realize the problem was bureaucratic incompetence. The witch hunt part is making this a out politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She's getting called back up since she made a statement of innocence first... She waived her right and is now subject to jail if she invokes the 5th.

No, that's Darrell Issa's assertion. Darrell Issa is hardly the arbiter here. Shame on him. He shouldn't trample on the Constitution while harassing government workers for doing their jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about the individuals who were repeatedly audited and harrassed? That cool too?

what people? I haven't heard anything along those lines come up (the only complaint about auditing I heard was PETA said they were targeted under the Bush Administration but who knows if there's anything to that).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about the individuals who were repeatedly audited and harrassed? That cool too?

what people? I haven't heard anything along those lines come up (the only complaint about auditing I heard was PETA said they were targeted under the Bush Administration but who knows if there's anything to that).

Then you aren't listening. Not only have I heard media folk complain about being personally audited, but there have been many businesses and individuals who have now come forward to tell their story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's getting called back up since she made a statement of innocence first... She waived her right and is now subject to jail if she invokes the 5th.

No, that's Darrell Issa's assertion. Darrell Issa is hardly the arbiter here. Shame on him. He shouldn't trample on the Constitution while harassing government workers for doing their jobs.

I think you omitted some key points. Perhaps you would consider a statement similar to this one: "He shouldn't trample on the Constitution while harassing government workers for doing their jobs competently and without bias towards any particular groups."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's getting called back up since she made a statement of innocence first... She waived her right and is now subject to jail if she invokes the 5th.

No, that's Darrell Issa's assertion. Darrell Issa is hardly the arbiter here. Shame on him. He shouldn't trample on the Constitution while harassing government workers for doing their jobs.

I think you omitted some key points. Perhaps you would consider a statement similar to this one: "He shouldn't trample on the Constitution while harassing government workers for doing their jobs competently and without bias towards any particular groups."

Except there is no evidence that the IRS had bias against the Tea Party. Even Russell George has said that.

The IRS never said it "targeted" anyone. It said it received a large quantity of flawed applications from groups sharing a same name and grouped them accordingly.

Let's not forget that tax-exempt groups are not allowed to be partisan. Let's similarly not forget that tea party groups are inherently political and also behaved in a partisan fashion, trying to elect candidates to office.

That's a no-no if you want tax-exempt status.

[Anonymous]

If there was no there there...then why the changing timelines? Why the calculated roll out of this information. (the question was originally planted to finally get this out). Why have WH staff basically conceded they wanted to keep POTUS shielded from this. Shielded from what? A good news item? Me thinks not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's getting called back up since she made a statement of innocence first... She waived her right and is now subject to jail if she invokes the 5th.

No, that's Darrell Issa's assertion. Darrell Issa is hardly the arbiter here. Shame on him. He shouldn't trample on the Constitution while harassing government workers for doing their jobs.

I think you omitted some key points. Perhaps you would consider a statement similar to this one: "He shouldn't trample on the Constitution while harassing government workers for doing their jobs competently and without bias towards any particular groups."

Except there is no evidence that the IRS had bias against the Tea Party. Even Russell George has said that.

The IRS never said it "targeted" anyone. It said it received a large quantity of flawed applications from groups sharing a same name and grouped them accordingly.

Let's not forget that tax-exempt groups are not allowed to be partisan. Let's similarly not forget that tea party groups are inherently political and also behaved in a partisan fashion, trying to elect candidates to office.

That's a no-no if you want tax-exempt status.

I hope you're not suggesting that Obama is angry for no reason? Of course, the IRS has never said it "targeted" anyone!

[Anonymous]

The IRS already apologized for targeting conservative groups after getting caught by the inspector general. Liberals live in a world of make believe. This issue is massive . Everybody fears a letter from the IRS . Unless the information is open and easily accessed, this issue will dominate the next year and more.