Lois Lerner - deja vu

[ivwshane]

You conveniently forgot to mention she also violated the Constitutional rights of many Americans.

Lol, and what rights would those be?

 

[Incorruptible]

Lol, and what rights would those be?

Their free speech rights but continue to defend your piece of shit lerner.

 

[Pens1566]

Their free speech rights but continue to defend your piece of shit lerner.

You have no idea what free speech means and have demonstrated your ignorance repeatedly. Forgive us if we don't take you seriously on the subject.

 

[Incorruptible]

You have no idea what free speech means and have demonstrated your ignorance repeatedly. Forgive us if we don't take you seriously on the subject.

So you defend lerner?

 

[Pens1566]

So you defend lerner?

At least you concede you don't get free speech ...

From nonsense like you spew on here, yes I do think she should be defended. It's under investigation and every "gotcha" that has come out has gone from a mountain to a molehill.

Now is when in your script you should call me a leftist btw.

 

[ivwshane]

Their free speech rights but continue to defend your piece of shit lerner.

So she stopped them from exercising their right to free speech? How exactly? What is it that she did, specifically, that prevented organizations from exercising their right?

 

[Incorruptible]

So she stopped them from exercising their right to free speech? How exactly? What is it that she did, specifically, that prevented organizations from exercising their right?

She targeted them.

 

[ivwshane]

She targeted them.

That's not an answer. Try putting even less effort into your next reply.

 

[Incorruptible]

That's not an answer.

Yes it is. Even obama acknowledged what happened with the IRS. Why are you defending them?

 

[ivwshane]

It's like talking to a brick wall, only a brick wall is more interesting.

So incorruptible, did this targeting prevent these groups from exercising their free speech? If yes then how exactly did it prevent them? Were they chained up and not allowed outside? Were they arrested whenever they tried speaking? Was their money seized and put on hold?

 

[HomerJS]

Yes it is. Even obama acknowledged what happened with the IRS. Why are you defending them?

It happened across the board. Not to target specific groups but because of the workload and the vague way Treasury interpreted the original 501-c4 law. Primarily vs exclusively

 

[Incorruptible]

It happened across the board. Not to target specific groups but because of the workload and the vague way Treasury interpreted the original 501-c4 law. Primarily vs exclusively

No it didn't you hack. It's amazing how you defend your precious obama.

They targeted much more Tea Party groups than progressive groups.

 

[thraashman]

No it didn't you hack. It's amazing how you defend your precious obama.

They targeted much more Tea Party groups than progressive groups.

And Tea Party groups applied for tax exempt status at a much higher rate than progressive groups. In addition words like "progress" are going to be used by groups whose primary goal is not political far more often than words like "tea party".

I suggest you look up Bob Jones University v. The United States to see why revocation of tax exempt status is not an attack on free speech.

 

[boomerang]

BTW - The House does not have the authority to arrest people. You know that ole' separation of powers thingy

Don't be so sure about that.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/exami...-go-to-jail-in-contempt-clash/article/2546356

 

[fskimospy]

Don't be so sure about that.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/exami...-go-to-jail-in-contempt-clash/article/2546356

The house sergeant at arms only has the ability to arrest someone if they want to be arrested. It's not like he would be difficult to avoid, haha.

 

[Jhhnn]

The house sergeant at arms only has the ability to arrest someone if they want to be arrested. It's not like he would be difficult to avoid, haha.

I wonder when was the last time that happened, if ever.

1935, from the article.

Oh, and expect a certain slant from a right wing rag like the Examiner-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Examiner

It's one of many Anschutz mouthpieces.

 

[werepossum]

Don't be so sure about that.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/exami...-go-to-jail-in-contempt-clash/article/2546356

The House absolutely has the authority to arrest Lerner and imprison her until the end of the current Congress. However, I do not believe they have grounds. The current director, certainly; he has refused to cooperate and provide subpoenaed documents in a timely fashion, thereby preventing Congress from exercising its Constitutional responsibility. Lerner however has always shown up, but asserted her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Being on administrative leave if not dismissed, I suspect that all she can do is testify, and if it seems likely to her that her testimony will tend to incriminate her in criminal acts (regardless of whether she has actually committed criminal acts, which seems likely to me but cannot be assumed as fact) then she has an absolute right to refuse to answer. Much as I would like to see her prosecuted and jailed if guilty, to allow Congress to imprison her for contempt simply because she asserted her Fifth Amendment privilege is a monstrously bad idea. The only way that works is if she is offered total immunity, in which case she pulls a North, falls on her sword, takes full responsibility, and then lives a life of rich private sector employment amongst the grateful proggies. Issa will not take that because there is no political pay-off, just a rogue employee acting to give her own private political views the force of law. (Which may well be what actually happened, who knows?)

 

[Fern]

I think it's at least questionable that Lerner can claim the 5th.

I have seen people can the 5th in testimony, but never seen one make declarations of innocence etc THEN claim the 5th.

I'm hearing the federal court in that district has precedent that if applied says Lerner has effectively waived her 5th amendment rights.

I believe what happens next is up to Boehner, as it also has been.

INAL, but would guess if Boehner gives the OK, the House Repubs will try to get a ruling that Lerner waived her rights under the 5th can compel testimony under threat of jail. If that happens things could get interesting.

Fern

 

[Fern]

Issa 'versus' Cummings is heating up.

Cummings accused of lying in previous committee heearings etc:

Up until this point, Rep. Cummings has denied his staff ever contacted the IRS about True the Vote and their activities during Oversight hearings.

Ms. Mitchell: We want to get to the bottom of how these coincidences happened, and we’re going to try to figure out whether any – if there was any staff of this committee that might have been involved in putting True the Vote on the radar screen of some of these Federal agencies. We don’t know that, but we – we’re going to do everything we can do to try to get to the bottom of how did this all happen.

Mr. Cummings. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Meadows. Yes.

Mr. Cummings. I want to thank the gentleman for his courtesy. What she just said is absolutely incorrect and not true.

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/04...ith-irs-effort-to-target-true-the-vote-111723

http://washingtonexaminer.com/issa-...rs-targeting-of-true-the-vote/article/2547007

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...the-vote-to-democrat-elijah-cummings-n1822247

Documents etc from Cummings office to Lois Lerner: http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/FN-Combined.pdf

Cummings is now defending that contact as appropriate. It might be but he makes himself look bad by lying about it back in February.

Fern

 

[dali71]

Issa 'versus' Cummings is heating up.

Cummings accused of lying in previous committee heearings etc:



http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/04...ith-irs-effort-to-target-true-the-vote-111723

http://washingtonexaminer.com/issa-...rs-targeting-of-true-the-vote/article/2547007

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...the-vote-to-democrat-elijah-cummings-n1822247

Documents etc from Cummings office to Lois Lerner: http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/FN-Combined.pdf

Cummings is now defending that contact as appropriate. It might be but he makes himself look bad by lying about it back in February.

Fern

I'd love to see that shriveled old turd end up in jail.

 

[TerryMathews]

The lie is a problem, even if there is nothing behind it.

 

[Fern]

The lie is a problem, even if there is nothing behind it.

At this point I feel pretty strongly that it IS a problem and IMO a pretty serious one.

The group involved here, True the Vote, that Cummings lied about filed a suit against the IRS. That suit prompted the House Committee investigation. Now if Cummings himself is behind, or some way involved in, the IRS scrutiny causing the lawsuit etc he should not be sitting on the committee. That is a conflict of interest. Cummings cannot be expected to fairly investigate the IRS for something he asked them to do.

I was running an errand a few hours ago and heard Jay Sokolov speaking. He's the attorney for the groups suing the IRS so he's biased. He claimed that, contrary to the committee's investigation rules, Cummings has been in contact with Lerner's attorney without the committee's approval or knowledge. I expect more will come out about this.

My suspicion is that Cummings really really doesn't want Lerner charged and compelled to testify. I think he'd much more like her to proffer testimony or get immunity. Either way it provides an opportunity to get Lerner and whomever else is involved off the hook and kill the whole issue. At worst she has to 'fall on the sword' and looks bad, which will be soon forgotten anyway.

Fern

 

[HomerJS]

No it didn't you hack. It's amazing how you defend your precious obama.

They targeted much more Tea Party groups than progressive groups.

I know you are not capable of rational debate but follow the bouncing ball...

More conservative groups were audited because 85% of the new incoming apps were conservative groups.

What the fuck do you think would have happened????


If Treasury would go back to the original law these groups must be "exclusively" for social welfare no interpretation would be necessary.

BTW - any evidence Obama was behind this or are you just foaming at the mouth?

 

[Fern]

I know you are not capable of rational debate but follow the bouncing ball...

More conservative groups were audited because 85% of the new incoming apps were conservative groups.
-snip-

You can parrot that party line all you want but:

- Lois Lerner already apologized for targeting conservative groups.

- The Inspector General's report confirmed and said it was wrong doing.

- the (illegal) BOLO mentioned conservative names, not liberal ones.

There's been no proof that liberal groups were targeted. Were some audited? Sure, but the 'target squad' was set up and operated in parallel to the regular audit group. To conflate a regular audit with teh otehrs is dishonest.

To my knowledge the IRS hasn't yet released the list of targeted groups. Until they do I don't see how anybody can reasonably claim liberal groups were on it.

Have you seen any liberal groups suing the IRS over these illegal/unfair audits? I haven't. I think that's a clue.

Fern

 

[Jhhnn]

Have you seen any liberal groups suing the IRS over these illegal/unfair audits? I haven't. I think that's a clue.

What audits are you talking about?