Best
136 Comments
Post
  • #9
    !
    and yet the masses feed on it like bee's to honey, as the bee keeper continue's his control over the hive, almost amusing, except it continues to affect us all in such a negative way...
  • #47
    !
    @RollinPapers but all these people do when confronted with the real questions is deny knowledge or lie. Too much is taken at their word. Bring in the prosecutors! Accountability must be had.
  • #48
    !
    @RollinPapers Partisan congressional hearings are not where you find out what you want to know. This is worthy of a special prosecutor and let the chips fall where they may. Congressional hearings are grandstanding, spends the taxpayers money at astounding rate per hour and accomplish nothing.
  • R Load more replies

  • #43
    !
    The 14% who said no to this question? WOW! Get off the computer because you might be late for your meeting with your case worker. Why don't you just mail in your vote for Hillary right now & get it over with because you sure could care less how corrupt Obama's administration is.
  • #67
    !
    @Slowmo He's slippery, more so than Bill Clinton. Which is why the Clinton's have held a thinly veiled jealous and contempt for him while riding him to power. Do I think he'll be impeached? No. He has too many pawns ready to fall on the sword for him, including much of the media. However, one just needs to think outside of the box in order to get some justice, call it reparations for the 4 deaths in Benghazi.
  • R Load more replies

  • #5
    !
    Regardless of prior statements she has made, she still has a right to invoke her 5th Amendment right against self incrimination. I have questioned many suspects of crimes, the minute they say they are invoking their 5th Amendment right all questioning stops and they get an attorney. Thats what the constitution and bill of rights is all about.
  • #28
    !
    @Knightkore
    Normal people do that everyday in our legal system. Spent 40 years in this field and we may not agree with they system, but it is the system we have. I have seen persons that should have had a long prison term, given immunity if they would supply information on someone more important to law enforcement.
  • #10
    !
    Issa wins the grandstanding idiot of the year award. Now he want to violate a well established constitutional right. The man is as abrasive as finger nails on a blackboard
  • #20
    !
    @martydotcom Nah, she waived the right.....the IRS would play nitpicking when auditing you or any of us. Sometimes the devil is in the details.....
  • #33
    !
    @martydotcom

    .If you actually saw the Hearing you would see that Committee DEMOCRATS were every bit as furious with her as ISSA. But, I know that would get in the way of the lame and inaccurate narrative you are attempting to spin. Whats the matter. Afraid IRS will come after you if you don't schill for Obama? That is a legitimate fear.
  • R Load more replies

  • #27
    !
    Yeah but what's the difference in getting up there and pleading the 5th or getting up there and just denying wrong doing or acting like you don't know what happened. It seems that's all they have to do; act like they didnt know or lie. The problem is its all taken at their word for the most part. I've seen no one get taken down. It's BS.
  • #51
    !
    Bring in the prosecutors! Put your damn egos aside and bring in guys who don't play. How hard is it to pin someone who's already admitted wrongdoing??? Laughable!
  • #90
    !
    @Slowmo Pleading the 5th protects her in the future from having to recall, with pinpoint accuracy, statements made today.

    Lawyers have a way of sometimes making the BEST witness look like a monkey on the stand by luring the witness into second guessing their own conclusions in their statements.

    They look for ANYTHING that deviates from the witness' original statement and POUNCE.

    But if there isn't a record of her making a statement, then there isn't an opportunity for the lawyer to catch her in a lie.
  • #101
    !
    Things like this just reinforce if not amplify the fact that our goverments are too big and completely out of our control.
  • #18
    !
    She waived her 5th Amendment rights when she testified that she didn't do anything wrong, didn't break any laws, blah, blah, blah.

    If she refuses, lock her up in some hell-hole and put her in the general population.

    If Obama cared at all about the lives that were lost because no one answered the 3am phone call he would put the thumbscrews on these people. But he gave her a promotion and put her in charge of Obamacare enforcement where her skills at lying and willingness to attack the presidents foes will be useful.

    Notice that the alleged party of compassion and caring thinks that investigating the deaths of four Americans is a waste of time. They chastise the investigators for wanting the truth...Ain't nobody got time for that.
  • #16
    !
    The 5th amendment protects from criminal self incrimination. It does not give protect you from answering questions you object to or find embarrassing. It only prevent you from having to answer a question that the answer would lead to incriminate you in a crime.

    Ms. Lerner has testified under oath that she has committed no crime or performed any illegal actions. So, either she is telling the truth and the 5th doesn't apply because the truth cannot incriminate you in a crime if you haven't committed one. In this case she must submit to questioning. Or, she committed perjury and lied to congress. In this case they will probably at a minimum make her publicly recant her "I'm not a crook" monologue. Even if she isn't brought up on charges for lying to congress, having to recant, under oath, her testimony asserting her innocence, before pleading the 5th repeatedly, will be devastating to the public's opinion of her innocence. This will throw fuel to the fire. Break out the popcorn.
  • #25
    !
    She can invoke the 5th at any time, regardless of previous statements. It has to be assumed that answering questions on a specific issue could lead to prosecution on another issue entirely, either related or unrelated to the issue at hand.
  • #30
    !
    @Denizen_Kate
    Yes she can, but if she is claiming her testimony would incriminate her, it calls into question her previous sworn testimony. She swore under oath that she had committed no crime. She then claims, by taking the 5th, that her testimony might incriminate her in a crime. She can't have it both ways. Either she must testify or recant her previous testimony.
  • #44
    !
    Regardless of the crime, she has a right to invoke her 5th Amendment Right agains self incrimination. She may have lied in prior testimony, or done other things that were illegal. She can stop any questioning at any time and it does not incriminate her as far as legal proceedings are concerned. It may seem wrong, but it is a constitutionally protected right. If we depriver her of her rights, maybe you or I may be next to have our rights violated.
  • #59
    !
    @Bill2E
    I agree, she can invoke at any time, but her previous statement of innocence cannot stand. Otherwise she is refusing to answer for a reason other than self incrimination, and that falls outside the scope of the 5th amendment.
  • #63
    !
    @Crackbass
    And if she lied in her previous statement then she can, how do you determine that if she invokes the 5th? You cannot, but you can assume she lied, she does not have to admit she lied, that would incriminate her. She is acting on advice of her attorney and not answering questions. If you violate her right, yours will be the next to be violated.
  • R Load more replies

  • #8
    !
    If she wanted to use her Fifth Amendment right, she needed to do it in the very beginning...Before she answered any questions.

    Lerner made a mistake , Now she will be forced to answer these questions or face contempt

    Maybe some jail-time will change her radical views
  • #22
    !
    If you do not know the law, please don't post comments implying knowledge you obviously do not have. She can invoke the 5th at any time. Issa is a moron.
  • #26
    !
    @Denizen_Kate no he isn't. He knew what he was doing. She waived her right this morning. Gowdy figured it out and called her on it. Issa said he was going to check and see. He must have and found out she has waived her right to invoke the fifth.
  • R Load more replies

  • #119
    !
    She made a statement and then invoked the 5th Amendment. This was an attempt on her part to avoid being cross-examined. That is an abuse of the 5th Amendment.
  • #61
    !
    Taking the fifth is an admonition of guilt. It is meant to protect Obama. He is within a hair's breath of impeachment for Benghazi. She is trying to stop him from going over the cliff with this scandal. Obama is CHAOS. As far as Lerner goes, the word that comes to mind is PIG.
  • #50
    !
    Oy vey! So now she will have to get the bagel out of her mouth and rat on fellow tribe members Steven Miller and Doug Shulman!? Yikes! Quite a conundrum for a Democrat. With apologies to Wm. Shakespeare:

    "To lie, or not to lie, that is the question
    Whether 'tis Nobler in the mind to suffer
    The Slings and Arrows of Darrell Issa,
    Or to take Arms against a Sea of Tea Party extremists..."
  • #45
    !
    I have no doubt that down the road this woman will be looking at serious criminal charges. A high government official invokes the 5th amendment to avoid questions by an oversight committee in Congress. Only in Obama's world do criminals get away with crimes.
  • #49
    !
    Not just Obama, we saw similar things happen when Nixon was about to be impeached. We may not like it, but it is the law and court decisions have upheld her right to remain silent. I'm sure this will spark lots of other questions by the Congresspersons investigating or having hearings on this matter. Hang on the ride is about to start and we will never have a budget passed.
  • #129
    !
    Thank God he is willing to stand up for the American people.
    Imagine being left in the hands of nothing more than Obama and Holder. We all saw how that worked out during the two plus years Obama's people were using the IRS as a weapon against Americans whose ONLY crime was disagreeing with the Orwellian mobsters.
  • #131
    !
    @DARSB

    Our Govt used as a Weapon against groups who would legally support Obama opponents?
    Very Stalinesque. Very Third Reich. "harm or injury?" you be the judge.
  • #133
    !
    @BossTweed So you don't know of any harm, either. That's why this isn't much of a scandal - except to wannbe martyrs.
  • #38
    !
    I knew she had crossed the line by making an opening arguement then pleading the fifth. Too assert your rights to the fifth all you say is I take the fifth. Nothing else.
  • #19
    !
    It's only the beginning of justice though. Not one bankster of any significant level has been jailed for their crimes to the degree warranted.
  • #12
    !
    Like it or not, people can invoke their 5th Am. right any time they want to in an official process, not just when the investigative officer wants it.
  • #3
    !
    Now it gets complicated. It is a legal matter that she gave a statement first, she could be given immunity. That would be fair, Issa wouldn't have anything without her blowing the whistle.
  • #76
    !
    Her right to plead the 5th is not waived because she made an opening statement.
    It's especially not waived because some ambitious politician says so.
    She could plead the 5th on a question by question basis if she chooses.
  • #82
    !
    @Hillofbeans
    It's not a matter of bothering with it, it's a matter of Constitutional law and the many precedents that have gone before.

    In general, we frown on lynching any more.
  • R Load more replies

  • R Load more comments...
Post