Lerner takes the FIFTH

[Anonymous]

Nice

[Anonymous]

10-1 she did it because it's turning into a witchhunt-- Holder said they would prosecute anyone who gave false info to Congress.

In these circumstances, basically you have the choice of trying to clear your name, while being raked over the coals by a bunch of politicians trying to score points and running the risk that any mis-statements you make will turn into a criminal prosecution (which in turn will at best bankrupt you and at worst leave you bankrupt and jailed), or taking the fifth.

Maybe you are so confident that you never would make any mistakes in recounting events that happened over the last 5 years that you would testify, but any lawyer would tell her to take the fifth.

[Anonymous]

Sleaze.

[Anonymous]

Why does taking the 5th to protect yourself from self-incrimination make someone a sleaze. Sorry, but it is your Constitutional right!

If I were in a situation where I might say something that could inadvertantly incriminate me, I would take the 5th too. Then again, my father was a criminal defense lawyer who would never give any quarter to the prosecution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:10-1 she did it because it's turning into a witchhunt-- Holder said they would prosecute anyone who gave false info to Congress.

In these circumstances, basically you have the choice of trying to clear your name, while being raked over the coals by a bunch of politicians trying to score points and running the risk that any mis-statements you make will turn into a criminal prosecution (which in turn will at best bankrupt you and at worst leave you bankrupt and jailed), or taking the fifth.

Maybe you are so confident that you never would make any mistakes in recounting events that happened over the last 5 years that you would testify, but any lawyer would tell her to take the fifth.

And of course she has no false info to give.

There's no witch hunt. There is corruption beyond belief - actually not beyond belief with this gang.

[takoma]

As I understand the Fifth, you can't take it if you are not in danger of prosecution. However, I don't know whether a Congressional committee can agree not to prosecute or DOJ has to do that. If DOJ, then would it be seen as the administration protecting her -- unless they do so at the request of the committee?

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Frankly considering how incompetent Congress has been since the rise of the Tea Party and how partisan and extreme they've gotten, you cannot trust Congress not to twist and contort anything said into an accusation for political purposes. Both sides will use any and every tool at their disposal to skewer the other side and so no one is safe talking to Congress. There is no longer a safe way to talk with a Congressional committee on any hot topic.

I'm not excusing Lerner as I think she was extremely culpable in the scandal, both from the standpoint that she should have done more and that she should have escalated the situation to the attention of leadership, but there is no way that she could ever talk to this Congress. Perhaps a lawyer can advise her in ways to cooperate if not dealing with Congress, but we need to have a major housecleaning of the sitting Congress because the extreme sides and friction from both sides of the aisle is completely counter-productive and Congress has turned into a gridlocked joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Frankly considering how incompetent Congress has been since the rise of the Tea Party and how partisan and extreme they've gotten, you cannot trust Congress not to twist and contort anything said into an accusation for political purposes. Both sides will use any and every tool at their disposal to skewer the other side and so no one is safe talking to Congress. There is no longer a safe way to talk with a Congressional committee on any hot topic.

I'm not excusing Lerner as I think she was extremely culpable in the scandal, both from the standpoint that she should have done more and that she should have escalated the situation to the attention of leadership, but there is no way that she could ever talk to this Congress. Perhaps a lawyer can advise her in ways to cooperate if not dealing with Congress, but we need to have a major housecleaning of the sitting Congress because the extreme sides and friction from both sides of the aisle is completely counter-productive and Congress has turned into a gridlocked joke.

You seem to be saying that oversight of the Administration should be limited to the Senate, for obvious reasons. And the House is only good for witch-hunting.

Seriously, try channeling Chuck Schumer when the last president dismissed a few of his US Attornies and ask yourself why the Commander in Chief doesn't have the right to sack his own political appointees as he chooses.

[Anonymous]

she's testifying in about 3 minutes. She hasn't taken the 5th yet. All she did was say that she would. It's on CSPAN now: http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN3/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sleaze.

YARGLE.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

If she's innocent, why not testify? Why would her testimony be a risky, danger-laden, high-wire act? Her taking the Fifth makes me think she has something to hide.

An honest person who has done nothing wrong would be inclined to answer questions.

She's also making the Obama Administration look even worse. The Tea Party will pounce on her refusal to testify.

[Anonymous]

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.

Our Founding Fathers created the Fifth Amendment for a reason and it wasn't to protect the guilty.

Those who speak so fondly of the First and Second and the genius of our Founders ought to think hard about that.