Video: Lois Lerner takes the Fifth again as Issa cuts off Cummings’s mic

posted at 10:41 am on March 5, 2014 by Allahpundit

Via the Daily Caller, the exciting — I mean it! — conclusion to this weekend’s mystery about whether Lerner was thinking of testifying after all. Answer: Nope. She refused again, which I guess settles the question of whether she inadvertently waived her Fifth Amendment privilege last year by delivering an opening statement before Issa’s committee before suddenly clamming up. At the time, Issa thought that statement constituted a waiver; so did Alan Dershowitz. Maybe the committee decided it wasn’t worth their time litigating the issue. Riddle me this, though: Why don’t they just agree to grant her immunity for her testimony? Her lawyer’s asked for it before, and her testimony’s certainly more valuable than seeing her go to prison, especially given the ignominy she’s already suffered for her role in the IRS scandal. Maybe Issa and the GOP are worried that conservatives will be angry with them if they let Lerner walk. That’s a small price to pay, though, if she has incriminating info on others up the chain.

Instead, he chose to punish Cummings by ending the hearing in frustration before the guy had a chance to ask his question. Cue the excitement.

Update: Issa on why he cut Cummings’s mic: “He was actually slandering me at the moment that the mics did go off by claiming that this had not been a real investigation.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

If the media didn’t talk about it, how would you know about it?

What are these facts? What crime was committed?

Boehner will not risk the majority to cater to Teahadi fantasies.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM

…which I guess settles the question of whether she inadvertently waived her Fifth Amendment privilege last year by delivering an opening statement before Issa’s committee before suddenly clamming up. At the time, Issa thought that statement constituted a waiver; so did Alan Dershowitz. Maybe the committee decided it wasn’t worth their time litigating the issue.

No, it didn’t settle anything. Her situation was left hanging at the last hearing. Since then the committee decided she waived her right to invoke the privilege by making exculpatory and factual allegations before she attempted to invoke it. They needed to bring her back and settle it before they could move to hold her in contempt. (Of course, in the meantime, Lerner’s idiot lawyer was muddying the water by negotiating for her testimony. Until that news got out, and wiser heads apparently advised him that it was suicide for her to testify.) Now that they have an unequivocal assertion of the privilege in the face of the committee’s finding that she had waived it they can move to hold her in contempt.

They don’t want to immunize her because they may still be able to force her testimony without having to do so. Why give her immunity if a federal judge may well order her to testify or go to jail?

novaculus on March 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM

Why is the Obama regime stonewalling the investigations into it’s criminal activities?

DinaRehn on March 5, 2014 at 12:08 PM

I don’t think Cumming ówned’Issa here.
But I do think he revealed him.
For those who say Cumming just wanted to ‘rant’ – even if true, why doesn’t he get a few minutes to do so after Issa had 20?
A rhetorical question – we all know the answer to that.
I agree that this was theater – but it was good theater.
And as silly a spat as it was, Cumming looks better and more principled than Issa. That’s how the majority of folks will see it. (I understand, not here.)
Issa’s pettiness cost him any political advantage he might have come out of this latest show with.

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Dear Lucy, after Lerner gave her refusal to testify, any question from the moron Cummings is meaningless, and he made it obvious that he was not asking a question but only going off on an insane rant.

slickwillie2001 on March 5, 2014 at 12:09 PM

None of you know the first thing about the Constitution, do you?

The Fifth Amendment says “No person… shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.” That has no exception for inept Teahadis who pretend to be prosecutors who are really, really sure that the black guy is guilty of some crime, somehow, someway.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

“racism, straight up”. lois lerner should run for POSUS as the first black tranny. And you would vote for her.

VegasRick on March 5, 2014 at 12:09 PM

The Fifth Amendment says “No person… shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.” That has no exception for inept Teahadis who pretend to be prosecutors who are really, really sure that the black guy is guilty of some crime, somehow, someway.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

You’re the first one to bring Cummings’ race into this discussion. Totally predictable.

Now please tell us why someone who broke no laws would plead the 5th twice. What is she hiding?

Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 12:10 PM

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

There you are Verbs. How many troop deaths are important? 1? 264? 1000?

Oh, by the way. These hearings have rules. Can you tell us what they are?

oldroy on March 5, 2014 at 12:10 PM

Why don’t they just agree to grant her immunity for her testimony?

Because she’s protecting someone. If she gets immunity and then testifies that she’s the one who gave the orders, then NO ONE is held responsible.

Caiwyn on March 5, 2014 at 12:10 PM

Any scheme suggested in these threads to deal with Lerner, ultimately ends up on Eric Holder’s desk, which means nothing happens.

slickwillie2001 on March 5, 2014 at 12:04 PM

This is the same Eric Holder, you’ll recall, who made the entire investigation of John Corzine disappear down the memory hole after Corzine made 1.5 billion dollars disappear from MF Global.

If there is a more corrupt organization on the planet than the U.S. Department of Justice (okay, well, other than the Revolutionary Guards, the Chinese Communist Party, and Kim Jong-Un’s immediate family), let me know.

victor82 on March 5, 2014 at 12:11 PM

That has no exception for inept Teahadis who pretend to be prosecutors who are really, really sure that the black guy is guilty of some crime, somehow, someway.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

.
There’s only a few million “black guys” in the U.S.

Which one are you referring to ?

listens2glenn on March 5, 2014 at 12:11 PM

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

we shall see….

cmsinaz on March 5, 2014 at 12:12 PM

Republicans are so gutless

John the Libertarian on March 5, 2014 at 12:12 PM

Boehner will not risk the majority to cater to Teahadi fantasies.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM

You need to stop comparing people you disagree with to Islamic terrorists. It’s neither clever nor cool.

kcewa on March 5, 2014 at 12:13 PM

There is a difference here – Obama actually used his IRS on his political enemies.

DinaRehn on March 5, 2014 at 11:46 AM

The second article of impeachment against Nixon and passed by the House Judiciary Committee was all about the abuses of power by Nixon and his Administration around the IRS, FBI, DoJ, Secret Service, and the CIA.

Article 2

Using the powers of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposed of these agencies.

This conduct has included one or more of the following:

He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavoured to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposed not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be intitiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.

Based on what we know so far from the IRS scandal from materials turned over and the testimony of the IRS IG, the above verbiage from 1974 fits today vs Obama and his Administration.

Athos on March 5, 2014 at 11:57 AM

Of course, the big difference is that since Obama part of the protected class of the national socialist left his comrades let him off.

DinaRehn on March 5, 2014 at 12:14 PM

Boehner will not risk the majority to cater to Teahadi fantasies.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM

Real jihadis will one day cut your head off. They hate your kind.

Schadenfreude on March 5, 2014 at 12:15 PM

The real racists are the leftists.

Schadenfreude on March 5, 2014 at 12:15 PM

If there is evidence charge her and send the beligerent b to jail. There are rules/laws against misuse by the IRS. Enforce them.

The real investigation should be the rules the IRS are using to target people and/or groups and how they are being applied. If they actually want to stop the targeting then go for the roots of how it’s being done.

TerryW on March 5, 2014 at 12:16 PM

The Fifth Amendment says “No person… shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.” That has no exception for inept Teahadis who pretend to be prosecutors who are really, really sure that the black guy is guilty of some crime, somehow, someway.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

What crime was committed?

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM

If there is no crime, why would it be a criminal case?

Proof read you little wad.

MontanaMmmm on March 5, 2014 at 12:16 PM

Real jihadis will one day cut your head off. They hate your kind.

Schadenfreude on March 5, 2014 at 12:15 PM

And I used to be the type of person that would defend the “brianj” types if needed. Not anymore, I would just stand back and watch.

VegasRick on March 5, 2014 at 12:17 PM

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

There you are Verbs. How many troop deaths are important? 1? 264? 1000?

Oh, by the way. These hearings have rules. Can you tell us what they are?

oldroy on March 5, 2014 at 12:10 PM

OT –
This is because I questioned the line ‘more troop deaths under Bush than Obama’? Man, the grief because I didn’t let a b.s. line pass by. I didn’t bring it up – someone else did, and I challenged the silly math.
As for your silly question, find another strawman.

(I won’t respond on this again in this thread.)

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:17 PM

Any scheme suggested in these threads to deal with Lerner, ultimately ends up on Eric Holder’s desk, which means nothing happens.

slickwillie2001 on March 5, 2014 at 12:04 PM

Not entirely so. The House can put her on trial for contempt in the House. Its punishment powers are limited to jail time in the House pokey until this session of Congress expires, but that’s not nothing.

And because DOJ and the IRS (Lerner) are both part of the Executive branch, the House may also refer the matter directly to a Federal court.

de rigueur on March 5, 2014 at 12:17 PM

And as silly a spat as it was, Cumming looks better and more principled than Issa. That’s how the majority of folks will see it. (I understand, not here.)
Issa’s pettiness cost him any political advantage he might have come out of this latest show with.

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

You made me think about how many of the folks will even hear or care about this other than political types? 5% of the population tops and I bet half of those don’t even vote.

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 12:17 PM

None of you know the first thing about the Constitution, do you?

The Fifth Amendment says “No person… shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.”

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

You do realize that doesn’t make her any less a criminal don’t you? Lots of criminals avoid prison by lying and stonewalling, just look at the Clintons. I realize being a lying dirty crook is a badge of honor for you libtards. Just look at you, you’re shaping up to be quite the little liar and purveyor of injustice.
Eric Holder? Is that you?

Buttercup on March 5, 2014 at 12:18 PM

henry waxman used this committee very effectively while issa has not
-same msdnc hack who reported on the cotton/pryor race on morning joe this am….

no bias there….

cmsinaz on March 5, 2014 at 12:18 PM

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:17 PM

Why is the Obama regime stonewalling the investigations into it’s criminal activities?

DinaRehn on March 5, 2014 at 12:18 PM

OT –
This is because I questioned the line ‘more troop deaths under Bush than Obama’? Man, the grief because I didn’t let a b.s. line pass by. I didn’t bring it up – someone else did, and I challenged the silly math.
As for your silly question, find another strawman.

(I won’t respond on this again in this thread.)

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:17 PM

Yea. Just wanted to remind you that you didn’t answer the question and left as per usual.

The committee has rules. Can you go over them for us?

oldroy on March 5, 2014 at 12:19 PM

What are these facts? What crime was committed?

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM

You’re the one claiming no crime was committed. Can you prove your claim?

Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 12:19 PM

OT: Debo’s done: 6 Dems voted against cloture motion

Heitkamp, Manchin, Walsh, Pryor, Casey, Donnelly

blammm on March 5, 2014 at 12:20 PM

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

There you are Verbs. How many troop deaths are important? 1? 264? 1000?

Oh, by the way. These hearings have rules. Can you tell us what they are?

oldroy on March 5, 2014 at 12:10 PM
OT –
This is because I questioned the line ‘more troop deaths under Bush than Obama’? Man, the grief because I didn’t let a b.s. line pass by. I didn’t bring it up – someone else did, and I challenged the silly math.
As for your silly question, find another strawman.

(I won’t respond on this again in this thread.)

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:17 PM

I wlll answer. All casualties of war are equally important to me and each death should never be used to gain political advantage.

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 12:21 PM

h/t to Power Line for this timeline. Link to the pdf at the bottom, and it’s fully footnoted.

• Jan. 27, 2010: President Obama criticizes Citizens United in his State of the Union address and asks Congress to “correct” the decision.

• Feb. 11, 2010: Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) says he will introduce legislation known as the Disclose Act to place new restrictions on some political activity by corporations and force more public disclosure of contributions to 501(c)(4) organizations. Mr. Schumer says the bill is intended to “embarrass companies” out of exercising the rights recognized in Citizens United. “The deterrent effect should not be underestimated,” he said.

• Soon after, in March 2010, Mr. Obama publicly criticizes conservative 501(c)(4) organizations engaging in politics. In his Aug. 21 radio address, he warns Americans about “shadowy groups with harmless sounding names” and a “corporate takeover of our democracy.”

• Sept. 28, 2010: Mr. Obama publicly accuses conservative 501(c)(4) organizations of “posing as not-for-profit, social welfare and trade groups.” Max Baucus, then chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, asks the IRS to investigate 501(c)(4)s, specifically citing Americans for Job Security, an advocacy group that says its role is to “put forth a pro-growth, pro-jobs message to the American people.”

• Oct. 11, 2010: Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.) asks the IRS to investigate the conservative 501(c)(4) Crossroads GPS and “other organizations.”

• April 2011: White House officials confirm that Mr. Obama is considering an executive order that would require all government contractors to disclose their donations to politically active organizations as part of their bids for government work. The proposal is later dropped amid opposition across the political spectrum.

• Feb. 16, 2012: Seven Democratic senators— Michael Bennet (Colo.), Al Franken (Minn.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.), Mr. Schumer, Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.), Tom Udall (N.M.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.)—write to the IRS asking for an investigation of conservative 501(c)(4) organizations.

• March 12, 2012: The same seven Democrats write another letter asking for further investigation of conservative 501(c)(4)s, claiming abuse of their tax status.

• July 27, 2012: Sen. Carl Levin (D., Mich.) writes one of several letters to then-IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman seeking a probe of nine conservative groups, plus two liberal and one centrist organization. In 2013 testimony to the HouseOversight and Government Reform Committee, former IRS Acting Commissioner Steven Miller describes Sen. Levin as complaining “bitterly” to the IRS and demanding investigations.

• Aug. 31, 2012: In another letter to the IRS, Sen. Levin calls its failure to investigate and prosecute targeted organizations “unacceptable.”

• Dec. 14, 2012: The liberal media outlet ProPublica receives Crossroads GPS’s 2010 application for tax-exempt status from the IRS. Because the group’s tax-exempt status had not been recognized, the application was confidential. ProPublica publishes the full application. It later reports that it received nine confidential pending applications from IRS agents, six of which it published. None of the applications was from a left-leaning organization.

• April 9, 2013: Sen. Whitehouse convenes the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism to examine nonprofits. He alleges that nonprofits are violating federal law by making false statements about their political activities and donors and using shell companies to donate to super PACs to hide donors’ identities. He berates Patricia Haynes, then-deputy chief of Criminal Investigation at the IRS, for not prosecuting conservative nonprofits.

• May 10, 2013: Sen. Levin announces that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations will hold hearings on “the IRS’s failure to enforce the law requiring that tax-exempt 501(c)(4)s be engaged exclusively in social welfare activities, not partisan politics.” Three days later he postpones the hearings when Lois Lerner (then-director of the IRS Exempt Organizations Division) reveals that the IRS had been targeting and delaying the applications of conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status.

• Nov. 29, 2013: The IRS proposes new rules redefining “political activity” to include activities such as voter-registration drives and the production of nonpartisan legislative scorecards to restrict what the agency deems as excessive spending on campaigns by tax-exempt 501(c)(4) groups. Even many liberal nonprofits argue that the rule goes too far in limiting their political activity—but the main target appears to be the conservative 501(c)(4)s that have so irritated Democrats.

• Feb. 13, 2014: The Hill newspaper reports that “Senate Democrats facing tough elections this year want the Internal Revenue Service to play a more aggressive role in regulating outside groups expected to spend millions of dollars on their races.”

Footnoted Link (27 pages)

Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 12:22 PM

If the media didn’t talk about it, how would you know about it?

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM

Hahahhahahhahahhahahahha. Oh that’s rich.

Buttercup on March 5, 2014 at 12:22 PM

Verbie? The committee has rules. Can you go over them for us? Or are you going to leave again?

Got a conference to go into?

oldroy on March 5, 2014 at 12:22 PM

What side are you going to be on, Brian’ ?

listens2glenn on March 5, 2014 at 11:56 AM

Well, since lil brian doesn’t know – or believe – history; he doesn’t know that useful idiots are usually the first bunch the regime puts “up against the wall”. He actually believes that the regime is his friend and will protect him.
And, he probably believes that the military and police forces will all follow orders from the regime…which means that patriots will be “outgunned”.

But then, lil brian doesn’t seem like such a smart person or much of a thinker.

Solaratov on March 5, 2014 at 12:24 PM

Man, Issa and his defenders are stupid. I’m not sure which question is more ridiculous- the one claiming that Issa’s committee isn’t investigating a criminal proceeding and then want to charge Lerner with a crime (contempt of Congress), or the one claiming that it’s up to Lerner to prove that she didn’t commit a crime.

Issa got outsmarted and outplayed by Lerner and Cummings. He needs to give it up.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:24 PM

Bring Lerner back in for nothing other than to let Cummings be the lead story on the 6:30pm evening news. Brilliant.

Issa is such the idiot.

If Lerner is ever granted immunity she will all by herself take full and singular credit.

Again making Issa look like an idiot.

Carnac on March 5, 2014 at 12:24 PM

I wlll answer. All casualties of war are equally important to me and each death should never be used to gain political advantage.

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 12:21 PM

Verbie says the matter is closed and off topic…just trying to see if he or she can clarify the committee rules so we can make some peace between Cummings and Issa.

oldroy on March 5, 2014 at 12:24 PM

Shutting off Cumming’s microphone just demonstrates once more the lack of confidence of the modern GOP. Small men unequal to their time.

rrpjr on March 5, 2014 at 12:25 PM

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:17 PM
Why is the Obama regime stonewalling the investigations into it’s criminal activities?

DinaRehn on March 5, 2014 at 12:18 PM

To surpess information and keep it out of the public’s eye. National security does not seem to be in play this time aroud.

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 12:25 PM

OT: Debo’s done: 6 Dems voted against cloture motion

Heitkamp, Manchin, Walsh, Pryor, Casey, Donnelly

blammm on March 5, 2014 at 12:20 PM

That’s good news.

Jeff Weimer on March 5, 2014 at 12:26 PM

Lois Lerner E-mail: “Tea Party Matter Very Dangerous”…
Via Greta
http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/550x327xBh-SgQMCYAAzC6m-550×327.png.pagespeed.ic.A9ouePNBGY.png
http://weaselzippers.us/178275-lerner-email/

DinaRehn on March 5, 2014 at 12:09 PM

.
Wish I could get a ‘higher resolution’ of that.

I saved your link as an image file, tried increasing the size (3000 X 1784 pixels), the DPI, then “sharpen”.

The larger print is legible enough, but I WANT that “fine print” … dammit !

listens2glenn on March 5, 2014 at 12:26 PM

Verbie? The committee has rules. Can you go over them for us? Or are you going to leave again?

Got a conference to go into?

oldroy on March 5, 2014 at 12:22 PM

For you, I’m in a conference.
It’s on the inanity of juvenile snark.

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:27 PM

OT –
This is because I questioned the line ‘more troop deaths under Bush than Obama’? Man, the grief because I didn’t let a b.s. line pass by. I didn’t bring it up – someone else did, and I challenged the silly math.
As for your silly question, find another strawman.

(I won’t respond on this again in this thread.)

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:17 PM

Don’t worry. This is how you always respond, whimpy.

itsspideyman on March 5, 2014 at 12:28 PM

who are really, really sure that the black guy is guilty of some crime, somehow, someway.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Typical leftoid drone.

It was quite a reach, but lil brian (useless clump of used bumwad that he is) just HAD to find a way to bring race into the discussion.

Not surprising…but so very, very trite and tiresome.

Solaratov on March 5, 2014 at 12:30 PM

listens2glenn on March 5, 2014 at 12:26 PM

Try this.

http://twitchy.com/2014/03/05/no-smidgen-of-corruption-lois-lerner-still-silent-on-damning-tea-party-email-pic/

MontanaMmmm on March 5, 2014 at 12:30 PM

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:17 PM

.
Don’t worry. This is how you always respond, whimpy.

itsspideyman on March 5, 2014 at 12:28 PM

.
Why did you call him that, ‘spidey’ ?

Now I can’t stop thinking about hamburgers . . . . . . . . .

listens2glenn on March 5, 2014 at 12:31 PM

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:24 PM

Didn’t Lerner plead the 5th? Why would someone take the 5th … think it through … does it hurt your head? It’s like you are inventing a fantasy headline and then responding to it.

BoxHead1 on March 5, 2014 at 12:31 PM

Issa got outsmarted and outplayed by Lerner and Cummings. He needs to give it up.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:24 PM

I like tactics as much as the next guy, but I love the truth more. Thus I want to know what Ms. Lerner knows…..that’s all. And if it makes us Liberals look bad, so be it and we should also be the ones demanding the truth and holding those in power accountable. It ain’t about party with me anymore….it’s aobut my childern’s future. Maybe I am late to the game and I will take that blame.

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 12:31 PM

Enough of this, it’s time for an Independent Counsel.

rplat on March 5, 2014 at 12:31 PM

Boehner will not risk the majority to cater to Teahadi fantasies.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM

Boehner can speak for himself:

I believe she has to testify or she should be held in contempt.

Possibly a signal to Issa to bring a resolution of contempt to the House. They did it to Holder, why not to a pissant IRS functionary like Lerner?

If the contempt resolution passes the House, the question then becomes whether to refer it to the judiciary, or bring Lerner up for trial on the charges in the House.

Boehner conceivably gains a super-majority in the next elections if Lerner is brought to the floor of House by the Sergeant-at-Arms and put on trial for contempt, during the course of which proceedings something like the time-line referenced by Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 12:22 PM above is aired before the public.

de rigueur on March 5, 2014 at 12:32 PM

For you, I’m in a conference.
It’s on the inanity of juvenile snark.

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:27 PM

I’m snarky? And juvenile? //////////////// ;-)

OK. Guilty as accused.

I guess I just get tired of you trying to dominate the conversation and never answering the questions put to you.

oldroy on March 5, 2014 at 12:32 PM

Only a complete IDIOT would offer immunity without knowing what she would testify to. No prosecutor whose law degree had dried would ever do that.

If she wanted immunity, her attorney should draw up a proffer, a detailed summary of what she would testify to, including names and details. There would be no point in offering her immunity if she turns out to be the actual mastermind, which can’t be discounted.

THINK about it (take Aleve for the headache later if necessary): she was known as a hyper-partisan manager at FEC who targeted Republicans with glee. She was promoted to IRS, overseeing the tax-exempt section. Of course she would naturally assume she should keep doing what got her there.

THEN, after Citizens’ United and Obama & crew keeps whining about “shadowy” conservatives, if she needed a bright green light, that could be it. Just in time to interfere with the opposition for Obama’s reelection.

Maybe she had direct orders, of course. But it is a real enough chance it was just Lois being Lois that no serious investigator would give her immunity without knowing what she would say, PERIOD.

Adjoran on March 5, 2014 at 12:33 PM

I don’t think Cumming ówned’Issa here.
But I do think he revealed him.
For those who say Cumming just wanted to ‘rant’ – even if true, why doesn’t he get a few minutes to do so after Issa had 20?
A rhetorical question – we all know the answer to that.
I agree that this was theater – but it was good theater.
And as silly a spat as it was, Cumming looks better and more principled than Issa. That’s how the majority of folks will see it. (I understand, not here.)
Issa’s pettiness cost him any political advantage he might have come out of this latest show with.

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Dear Lucy, after Lerner gave her refusal to testify, any question from the moron Cummings is meaningless, and he made it obvious that he was not asking a question but only going off on an insane rant.

slickwillie2001 on March 5, 2014 at 12:09 PM

Since when has it been remarkable for a congressman to go on ‘rant’ during any of Issa’s hearings?

(And how about ‘Verbalucy’- that would make you so clever!)

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:33 PM

BTW, lil brian…

When did Lois Lerner become a “black guy”?

Or are you really that stupid and inept?

Solaratov on March 5, 2014 at 12:33 PM

Why did you call him that, ‘spidey’ ?

Now I can’t stop thinking about hamburgers . . . . . . . . .

listens2glenn on March 5, 2014 at 12:31 PM

Best fast food veggie burgers there.
And I say this as a carnivore.

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:35 PM

traitor

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 11:15 AM

Bmore on March 5, 2014 at 12:35 PM

Issa got outsmarted and outplayed by Lerner and Cummings. He needs to give it up.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:24 PM

Lerner just set herself up for a contempt resolution to be brought by Issa to the floor of the House. The House will be forced to act on it. Which will lead either to trial in the courts, or possibly even in the House itself. Boehner’s choice. Clever girl.

de rigueur on March 5, 2014 at 12:36 PM

OMG Brian J … Teahadis? My god, go back to KOS, or whatever rock you crawled out from under!!

mel23059 on March 5, 2014 at 12:36 PM

Enough of this, it’s time for an Independent Counsel.

rplat on March 5, 2014 at 12:31 PM

Seriously. These hearings are a joke. Lerner was looking at Issa like he was a toll booth attendant. She isn’t scared a bit. And Issa is either slow walking this for the gopE or his ego just can’t give this up. I hope it’s his ego.

BoxHead1 on March 5, 2014 at 12:37 PM

Man, Issa and his defenders are stupid.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:24 PM

Brilliant comeback. Absolutely brilliant.

Yet another illustration of why your Democrat Party lost the college graduate vote in 2012.

A+

Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 12:37 PM

I’m embarrassed that Cummings hails from my state. He’s a lying hack and you can bet that some of this traces right back to his office.

BKeyser on March 5, 2014 at 12:38 PM

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

You are a bigot and a racist. The only one I see on this thread.

Bmore on March 5, 2014 at 12:38 PM

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

You and yours are loosing.

Bmore on March 5, 2014 at 12:39 PM

Verbie? Question? Any answer? Can’t find an advantage by answering?

oldroy on March 5, 2014 at 12:39 PM

losing as well

Bmore on March 5, 2014 at 12:40 PM

Issa got outsmarted and outplayed by Lerner and Cummings. He needs to give it up.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:24 PM

So do you not think conservative groups were targeted by the IRS in order to curb their influence in the 2012 election–and in the upcoming 2014 midterms, as well? You think it’s all a Republican witch hunt, and those accusations are groundless?

I have to ask: how can you think this? There’s plenty of evidence–including the outright persecution of True The Vote’s Catherine Englebrecht and her husband, that the IRS has been hopelessly politicized and is involved in the suppression of groups viewed unfavorably by the White House and the Democratic Party.

It’s one thing to root for your guy and your team. It’s another thing entirely to ignore and even defend blatant malfeasance and criminality. If this was a Republican administration doing the things the Obama White House is doing, I’d be calling for that Republican’s impeachment. You, on the other hand, just spout the party line.

Think for yourself. Reason it out. Act like a free man.

troyriser_gopftw on March 5, 2014 at 12:43 PM

listens2glenn on March 5, 2014 at 12:26 PM

.
Try this.

http://twitchy.com/2014/03/05/no-smidgen-of-corruption-lois-lerner-still-silent-on-damning-tea-party-email-pic/

MontanaMmmm on March 5, 2014 at 12:30 PM

.
Thank you, Montanna’.

It doesn’t capture the entire document, but it has the email message in higher resolution.

listens2glenn on March 5, 2014 at 12:43 PM

I grant that Issa is fumbling the football.I also agree that the smart thing would have been the give this gnome immunity. But with the media on their side, the Dems are virtually invulnerable no matter what issa does or does not do.

SEE NO EVIL
HEAR NO EVIL
SPEAK NO EVIL

and thanks to the Fourth Estate

REPORT NO EVIL

If you told some anti-war protestor,anarchist, druggie, hippie, etc from San Francisco, Seattle or Greenwich Village that they were on the same political side as the IRS and CIA and NSA spies and the FBI, they would call you “crazy”. Yet it’s absolutely true and some of the blame falls on the shoulders of clunks like Issa, Ryan and Romney.

MaiDee on March 5, 2014 at 12:43 PM

Because she’s protecting someone. If she gets immunity and then testifies that she’s the one who gave the orders, then NO ONE is held responsible.

Caiwyn on March 5, 2014 at 12:10 PM

This. Immunity is a sucker’s bet.

The Schaef on March 5, 2014 at 12:43 PM

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM

You are a liar and coward as well.

Bmore on March 5, 2014 at 12:43 PM

MaiDee, all of those people love America in their different ways.

Teahadis don’t. That’s why society is bringing the pain to them.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:44 PM

Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 12:22 PM

The Democrats and the Left forgot one thing…

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

They don’t see us as fellow citizens with rights equal to theirs to challenge their power and ideology…

… we are insects that need to be squashed.

Using the power of the government to silence opposition is an old Chicago tactic that the Political Elite Ruling Class has gleefully adopted ever since Obowma came to town…

These people will not allow dissent, they will not gracefully give up power…

… Control and shoving their ideology down the throats of our children is all that matters.

Such is the tyranny that we live in today…

Seven Percent Solution on March 5, 2014 at 12:44 PM

That has no exception for inept Teahadis who pretend to be prosecutors who are really, really sure that the black guy is guilty of some crime, somehow, someway.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Name names you lying cowardly bigoted racist POS.

Bmore on March 5, 2014 at 12:45 PM

verbaluce on March 5, 2014 at 12:27 PM
.
1) – I’m snarky? And juvenile? //////////////// ;-)

OK. Guilty as accused.

2) – I guess I just get tired of you trying to dominate the conversation and never answering the questions put to you.

oldroy on March 5, 2014 at 12:32 PM

.
We’re all guilty on both counts ‘roy, so you’re in good company.

listens2glenn on March 5, 2014 at 12:46 PM

Teahadis don’t. That’s why society is bringing the pain to them.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:44 PM

“bringing the pain” lololol :)

Are you a professional TV wrestler? WWE?

Why is Lerner taking the 5th? Have you worked that out yet, Hulk Hogan?

BoxHead1 on March 5, 2014 at 12:49 PM

Worth reposting:

…which I guess settles the question of whether she inadvertently waived her Fifth Amendment privilege last year by delivering an opening statement before Issa’s committee before suddenly clamming up. At the time, Issa thought that statement constituted a waiver; so did Alan Dershowitz. Maybe the committee decided it wasn’t worth their time litigating the issue.

No, it didn’t settle anything. Her situation was left hanging at the last hearing. Since then the committee decided she waived her right to invoke the privilege by making exculpatory and factual allegations before she attempted to invoke it. They needed to bring her back and settle it before they could move to hold her in contempt. (Of course, in the meantime, Lerner’s idiot lawyer was muddying the water by negotiating for her testimony. Until that news got out, and wiser heads apparently advised him that it was suicide for her to testify.) Now that they have an unequivocal assertion of the privilege in the face of the committee’s finding that she had waived it they can move to hold her in contempt.

They don’t want to immunize her because they may still be able to force her testimony without having to do so. Why give her immunity if a federal judge may well order her to testify or go to jail?

novaculus on March 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM

Both Issa and Boehner signaled after the hearing today that that is the plan. The House could jail her as well, following passage of a contempt resolution and forcing Lerner to appear before the House to answer the charges. Jail-time would be limited to whatever remained of the congressional session, so a federal court sentence would be much more severe, of course.

de rigueur on March 5, 2014 at 12:49 PM

Most transparent administration in history.

If there is no smidgen of corruption in this scandal..Obama should be demanding that Lerner testify in full.

And Cummings looked like a buffoon. Period. Full. Stop.

HumpBot Salvation on March 5, 2014 at 12:49 PM

MaiDee, all of those people love America in their different ways.

Teahadis don’t. That’s why society is bringing the pain to them.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:44 PM

LOL, holy fukk you’re ignorant.

HumpBot Salvation on March 5, 2014 at 12:51 PM

Bmore on March 5, 2014 at 12:45 PM

I hate it when you hold back, buddy. Tell us how you really feel!

novaculus on March 5, 2014 at 12:51 PM

Think for yourself. Reason it out. Act like a free man.

troyriser_gopftw on March 5, 2014 at 12:43 PM

Impossible.

Freedom scares the crap out of lemmings like lil brianj.

Solaratov on March 5, 2014 at 12:53 PM

Brilliant comeback. Absolutely brilliant.

A+

Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 12:37 PM

Man that hurts as I ain’t even up to the F+ level yet. What’s an old fart like me got to do around here to buy a letter grade or two? Chuckle!

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 12:54 PM

MaiDee, all of those people love America in their different ways.

Teahadis don’t. That’s why society is bringing the pain to them.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:44 PM

Please tell us, in your own simple words, what about America the Tea Party “hates”.

And leave O’bama, and the fact that he’s half-black and was raised by rich whites, out of your reasons.

Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 12:54 PM

novaculus on March 5, 2014 at 12:51 PM

; ) That one is a real twisted piece of work and deserves to be called out for it in no uncertain terms. I do not suffer cowardly lying racist bigots.

Bmore on March 5, 2014 at 12:54 PM

Brilliant comeback. Absolutely brilliant.

A+

Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 12:37 PM

Man that hurts as I ain’t even up to the F+ level yet. What’s an old fart like me got to do around here to buy a letter grade or two? Chuckle!

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 12:54 PM

Patience, Grasshopper!

Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 12:55 PM

Del, the Tea Party hates that we have a working government.

It hates people who smile, and laugh, and love.

It hates the parts of the Bible that don’t say “Thou shalt not.”

It hates those who think people can do good things for other people.

It hates having to take responsibility for its own failures, statements, and attitudes.

And more than anything else on this Earth, it hates that the President is a black man. I don’t follow instructions from Teahadis, and everyone knows this to be true.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:57 PM

MaiDee, all of those people love America in their different ways.

Teahadis don’t. That’s why society is bringing the pain to them.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:44 PM

“Teahadis”, huh?

So, I guess that makes you a demoKKKrat. Right?

Why do you hate America, lil brianj? Is it because you’re a demoKKKrat?

Solaratov on March 5, 2014 at 12:58 PM

de rigueur on March 5, 2014 at 12:49 PM

Yeah, if Congress held her in contempt they could send the Sergeant at Arms to arrest her and bring her to the floor of the House. There the full House could decide to jail her in the Congressional jail (yes, there is such a thing). But they haven’t done anything like that in a long, long time. They are far more likely to seek a federal court order requiring her to testify. If she defies a federal judge, she would certainly go to jail.

novaculus on March 5, 2014 at 12:59 PM

Please tell us, in your own simple words, what about America the Tea Party “hates”.

And leave O’bama, and the fact that he’s half-black and was raised by rich whites, out of your reasons.

Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 12:54 PM

Unreasonable taxes.

Deficits.

Total debt of 17T.

Future unfunded liabilites (Medicare/SSA to name the biggest two).

Harmful regulations.

Loss of liberty.

Just to name a few. Well, this is what my little brain thinks the TPF (Tea Party Folks) dislikes.

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 1:00 PM

Bmore on March 5, 2014 at 12:54 PM

That one is an idiot and a tool of the first order.

novaculus on March 5, 2014 at 1:01 PM

What pettiness?

blink on March 5, 2014 at 12:57 PM

Issa followed committee rules. That’s petty. Apparently he’s supposed to let Cummings spout out anything he wants at any time.

oldroy on March 5, 2014 at 1:01 PM

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:57 PM

thanks for sharing your ignorance, libtard.

HumpBot Salvation on March 5, 2014 at 1:02 PM

Issa did not follow committee rules. He took far more than his share of the allotted time, and then refused to grant Cummings any of his or the Democrats’ allotted time. That’s why he was reduced to shrieking for Cummings’ mike to be cut off- because Cummings humiliated him by making it clear that Issa was overstepping his authority.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 1:02 PM

Teahadis don’t. That’s why society is bringing the pain to them.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:44 PM

Please tell us, in your own simple words, what about America the Tea Party “hates”.

And leave O’bama, and the fact that he’s half-black and was raised by rich whites, out of your reasons.

Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 12:54 PM

And more than anything else on this Earth, it hates that the President is a black man.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:57 PM

Thanks for ignoring my request.

Z-

Simple question for a simple mind: O’bama’s mother was white, and his father was black. Why do you refuse to acknowledge the existence of the woman who gave birth to and then raised him? And why does he do so himself?

And if O’bama’s father was white, and it was his mother who was black, would you still call him a black man?

Take your time.

Del Dolemonte on March 5, 2014 at 1:03 PM

And more than anything else on this Earth, it hates that the President is a black man. I don’t follow instructions from Teahadis, and everyone knows this to be true.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 12:57 PM

Not only is that post an incredible example of projection, but it’s weapons-grade stupid.

Athos on March 5, 2014 at 1:04 PM

Issa did not follow committee rules. He took far more than his share of the allotted time, and then refused to grant Cummings any of his or the Democrats’ allotted time. That’s why he was reduced to shrieking for Cummings’ mike to be cut off- because Cummings humiliated him by making it clear that Issa was overstepping his authority.

BrianJ on March 5, 2014 at 1:02 PM

What was each persons allotted time and what was the allotment for?

oldroy on March 5, 2014 at 1:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5