• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Lois Lerner - deja vu

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Drako said:
Why did she and her attorney agree to testify, and then change their minds? :hmm:
Click to expand...
Somebody put some pressure on her would be my guess. As I linked earlier their story is she received death threats. I'd like to think the White House didn't threaten her with her life, but I bet they did threaten her in some fashion. Enough to scare her off.
 
Give her full immunity and bye bye goes her right under the 5th amendment.

http://guardianlv.com/2014/03/fifth-amendment-rights-vs-immunity-from-prosecution-in-irs-probe/
Lerner offered to give a private deposition rather than appearing before the Committee in public if the Committee granted her immunity from prosecution on charges stemming from her testimony. The Committee’s Republican members rejected that offer on the grounds that she had made a statement during her previous appearance before the Committee, invaliding her Fifth Amendment privileges.
Click to expand...
Dont Talk to Police


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
 
werepossum said:
Lessee, Lerner pleads the Fifth like any run of the mill drug lord over the politically motivated IRS persecution and you feel it's Fox News and Issa who have egg on their faces?

Wow! Some people simply cannot get enough government boot on their necks.
Click to expand...

to be fair, there isn't a morning in his life where Issa doesn't step out of his house with a 3-egg omelet blocking his view.
 
Weird how there isn't a mention of him cutting the mic out on Rep Cummings when he asked questions.

Should anyone be surprised that a car thief and arsonist a tea bagger darling?
 
Drako said:
Understood, but why would they even agree in the first place?
Click to expand...
I'm guessing to make Issa go away for a few days. Beyond that, it could even be a simply misunderstanding. Lerner's "I'll testify" might to her mean "I'll once again show up and plead the Fifth." Or it's entirely possible that she truly just wants to get this over with and attempt to get on with her life, but the White House and the Democrat Party leaned on her sufficiently to cause her to rethink this.

zinfamous said:
to be fair, there isn't a morning in his life where Issa doesn't step out of his house with a 3-egg omelet blocking his view.
Click to expand...
LOL
 
CitizenKain said:
Weird how there isn't a mention of him cutting the mic out on Rep Cummings when he asked questions.

Should anyone be surprised that a car thief and arsonist a tea bagger darling?
Click to expand...
To whom was Cummings asking questions?
Edit: Looks like Issa and Cummings will be on Fox News at 7 this evening to "explain their clash".
 
Last edited:
boomerang said:
To whom was Cummings asking questions?
Edit: Looks like Issa and Cummings will be on Fox News at 7 this evening to "explain their clash".
Click to expand...

It seemed to me that Cummings didn't want to ask any questions. He just wanted to make a speech.

Fern
 
1prophet said:
Give her full immunity and bye bye goes her right under the 5th amendment.

http://guardianlv.com/2014/03/fifth-amendment-rights-vs-immunity-from-prosecution-in-irs-probe/

Dont Talk to Police


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
Click to expand...

I do agree that she should not have been allowed to both make an opening statement and plead the 5th. You shouldn't be able to do so much as respond to questions like "what is your name" if that's your tactic or else your assertion should be null and void. I'm okay giving one mulligan in this case but it shouldn't be allowed to happen again by anyone.
 
Drako said:
Why did she and her attorney agree to testify, and then change their minds? :hmm:
Click to expand...

Cite the actual claim that they agreed to testify rather than simply being forced to appear by Congressional subpoena.

Who said that, and when?

Issa? Just throwing out chunks of red meat for the delusional base.

Feedin' time, boys!
 
Fern said:
It seemed to me that Cummings didn't want to ask any questions. He just wanted to make a speech.

Fern
Click to expand...

And, uhh, so what? This may be the first time that a chairman called a committee to order, gave his own speech in the form of questions he knew wouldn't be answered, then denied fellow committee members the right to say anything at all.

So classy!
 
Jhhnn said:
And, uhh, so what? This may be the first time that a chairman called a committee to order, gave his own speech in the form of questions he knew wouldn't be answered, then denied fellow committee members the right to say anything at all.

So classy!
Click to expand...

Look up parliamentary procedure and you'll probably have a clue as to why Issa was in the right on this one.
 
WackyDan said:
Look up parliamentary procedure and you'll probably have a clue as to why Issa was in the right on this one.
Click to expand...
It's an interesting claim. Please cite a credible source documenting that this is a standard parliamentary procedure for a House hearing.
 
boomerang said:
I'm trying to figure out her motives based on earlier reporting that she intended to testify. Maybe somebody got to her?
Click to expand...
Seems likely Issa was simply lying again to get media attention for his next performance. Lying and self-aggrandizement are his core competencies.
 
WackyDan said:
Look up parliamentary procedure and you'll probably have a clue as to why Issa was in the right on this one.
Click to expand...

Please. There's a difference between what a committee chairman can get away with & what's "right". Your apologist contention is nearly as shameful as Issa's deeds.
 
Fern said:
It seemed to me that Cummings didn't want to ask any questions. He just wanted to make a speech.

Fern
Click to expand...
I watched the video several times and that was what I saw too. He said he had a question and then immediately launched into a speech.
 
boomerang said:
I watched the video several times and that was what I saw too. He said he had a question and then immediately launched into a speech.
Click to expand...

Ok? And?

Generally, in those hearings both sides are giving equal time to do "ask questions". Most just bloviate with their allotted time. The problem I believe in this hearing is that Issa took his time and then ended the hearing. Who is he to determine what a question is? That's the reason they are just giving equal time to do whatever they choose with.

But, like most of Politics, this is nothing but a show trial at our cost and expense.
 
Last edited:
What is the big deal with this story anyhow? It seems like the IRS was overzealous with their oversight responsibility on both the R and D's. I assume we would want the IRS paying attention to "groups" who get special tax status.

There also seems to be a 2ndary motivation to keep this "controversy" going. To make sure the IRS doesn't have the power to look into some of the shadier Rove and Koch groups. It's like somebody working the refs so the refs, so the refs are too scared to call a foul on their team.

It also seems like most of you guys parroting this information haven't done a lot of research on it or just have a screw lose.

We really do get the government we deserve.

Republican determination to pursue these investigations remains unabated despite the failure, so far, to produce a smoking gun linking the scandal to the White House, and a series of stumbling blocks embarrassing to the Republican Party.

It turns out, for example, that the decisions to put organizations marked by the words “Tea Party,” “patriot” and “9/12 project” on BOLO lists were made while Douglas Shulman was the commissioner of the I.R.S. Shulman was appointed to a five-year term in 2008 by George W. Bush.
In addition, on July 12, Democrats disclosed that organizations with the word “progressive” in the name were also subject to BOLO warnings at the I.R.S.
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/26/opinion/edsall-why-the-irs-scandal-wont-go-away.html?_r=0
 
PokerGuy said:
She needs to be tossed in jail. She's obviously hiding something. If she had told the truth all along there would be no conceivable reason to need to plead the 5th since there would be no conceivable criminal action against her. My guess is that she's protecting the involvement of the higher ups in the party (white house?).
Click to expand...

I don't know anything about this case, but you should probably do some research on the 5th amendment, what it means, why we have it, and why it is dangerous to follow your line of thinking. A little knowledge would go a long way towards making you a better person.
 
Not sure why Admin Allisolm thought these two subjects were the same: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2372052

One is about Issa and Cummings and the whole microphone incident, and this original Post is about Lois Lerner taking the 5th again (everyone knew she would). Two different subjects, oh well...

Anyway, on the post of Issa and Cummings, Issa is not holding a real hearing this is all a big freakin charade for him to push his agendas.

I quote: The first time House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) tried to hear testimony from Lois Lerner, the former head of the IRS’ tax exempt division, she asserted her Fifth Amendment rights, as expected. Today, Issa brought Lerner back, knowing she wouldn’t testify, but wanting to put on a little election-year show for the cameras anyway.

But as the above video makes clear, the interesting development wasn’t Lerner’s decision not to testify, which everyone already knew would happen, but the heated confrontation between Issa and the committee’s ranking member, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.).

For about 15 minutes, Issa, already well aware of the fact that Lerner wouldn’t answer his questions, strutted for the cameras, pushing his favorite talking points about the discredited scandal.

When he was done, Issa decided to abruptly end the hearing. When Cummings sought an opportunity to speak, Issa invited everyone in attendance to leave. When Cummings proceeded anyway, Issa cut off the power to the congressman’s microphone.

“I am a member of the Congress of the United States of America!” Cummings shouted. “I am tired of this.”

After walking out, Issa defended his actions to reporters, saying that Cummings intended to “make a speech.” “He was talking into a mic in an adjourned meeting,” Issa said. “He was actually slandering me at the moment that the mics did go off by claiming that this had not been a real investigation.”

First, lawmakers from both parties making introductory remarks at a hearing (i.e., “a speech&#8221😉 is pretty normal, not something for a committee chairman to prevent.

Second, there’s nothing “slanderous” about calling out Issa’s charade.

And third, Cummings wasn’t “claiming” that this had not been a real investigation”; he was proving it.

No wonder Issa cut his microphone; Cummings was telling the audience what Issa didn’t want people to hear.

Link
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top