Lois Lerner held in contempt, Prosecution a possibility

[Jack V Savage]

The IRS politically targets Tea Party groups, in essence auditing the Tea Party out of participation in the 2012 election. One could really make the argument for a stolen Presidential election due to the fact that the opposition to the President was audited out of participation.

Honestly, Farmer, I know you're not going to accept this from me, but you are really confused about what is A) alleged, and B) actually happened (that is, your understanding of the issue that Republicans are taking isn't correct, and they have already been shown to have been wrong on what their actual issue is). I really recommend that you look this up. You'll feel a lot better at the end, unless your accusations of tribalism are just projection on your part.

What supporters of the House action are really supporting here is using gov't power to personally attack political enemies who have done nothing wrong. It's shocking, really.

 

[shootermcgavin7]

It's amazing how quickly the GOP spun this into "the IRS is targeting Tea Party groups" and took advantage of the average American's inability to understand statistical draws.

For example, if 100 political groups tried to cheat the system by declaring themselves a non-political religious group, what percentage do you think would be right-leaning groups? If the IRS targeted every single one of these groups, yahoos get to shout from the rooftops that the IRS is "targeting the right"......because that is primarily who is using this specific loophole to cheat the system.

In other words, if the IRS goes after everyone who illegally exploits this loophole, and those groups are primarily right wing.............it doesn't mean that the IRS is targeting the right, rather that right wing groups are more likely to try to cheat the political tax rules.


As an aside....the entire loophole is nonsense when you have preachers across the south discussing politics day in and day out, but that's another story for another day.

 

[Jack V Savage]

It's amazing how quickly the GOP spun this into "the IRS is targeting Tea Party groups" and took advantage of the average American's inability to understand statistical draws.

What's worse--though I don't know how common this is--is that some ignorant people have jumped from "the IRS is targeting Tea Party groups" to "the IRS effectively prevented right-wing nutters from participating in the 2012 election, thus making it illegitimate"!

 

[ralphc1]

The IRS would be derelict in it's duty if they didn't scrutinize the financial activities of those who promote not paying taxes.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Ah, so pleading the 5th means you're automatically guilty or have something to hide.

Obviously, it means 'I'm not going to implicate myself by answering that question truthfully.'

Or 'I may be guilty of breaking the law, but I'm not going to help you prosecute me by answering your questions.'

 

[MASShole]

Obviously, it means 'I'm not going to implicate myself by answering that question truthfully.'

Or 'I may be guilty of breaking the law, but I'm not going to help you prosecute me by answering your questions.'

No, not obviously. Pleading the 5th doesn't automatically mean you will implicate yourself, or that you're guilty and don't want to help the case against you.

It means that you don't have to be a witness against yourself. Whether or not a crime is committed is irrelevant to being immune against being a witness against yourself.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

No, not obviously. Pleading the 5th doesn't automatically mean you will implicate yourself, or that you're guilty and don't want to help the case against you.

It means that you don't have to be a witness against yourself. Whether or not a crime is committed is irrelevant to being immune against being a witness against yourself.

Ok, I'll bite, what realistic explanation could there be that she'd have the position of power she has, and she'd be innocent of wrong doing, and her lawyers recommend she plead the 5th?

And, I'll admit, there's not the certainty of guilt, given the information we know about the case. Could you admit the likelihood that she's hiding something that would indicate her guilt?

Either way, it's not 100%. But I'd bet there's a 95% chance she's guilty of something after all the facts are revealed.

 

[MASShole]

I am not speculating as to a percentage of her possibly being guilty. I was merely commenting on the use of pleading the 5th, and the fact that it doesn't mean "I'm guilty but not telling you."

Nowhere else in this thread have I speculated on her presumed innocence or guilt. I have commented on her rights, and the application of said rights.

 

[OldGoat]

Ideally you'd suffer no repercussions from invoking your right to be silent at any time. Unless of course, a powerful mob demands a head.

 

[Calmete]

"An inspector general's office report found no political motives behind the targeting, but many Republicans in Congress believe otherwise."

i am pretty sick of all these fake scandals.

Was solyndra fake too?

 

[Kingz]

Good. She said a whole piece in defense of herself and then plead the 5th when it was time to face questions. It's ridiculous it has taken this long for her to be held in contempt when she should've been held in contempt at that exact moment.

 

[Blood Python]

The IRS politically targets Tea Party groups, in essence auditing the Tea Party out of participation in the 2012 election. One could really make the argument for a stolen Presidential election due to the fact that the opposition to the President was audited out of participation.

The idea of "nothing to see here folks, no controversy at all" is just pure partisan hackery. Only those obsessed with protecting the reputation of the administration would even try to make such an argument.

In only one other area dose one see individuals take such a single minded obsession with one side or another: Sports

People who support the Democrats in such a way view them (either consciously or unconsciously) as their political "tribe". Any attack on the "tribe" they see as a personal attack upon themselves. That is why you get such vitriol and anger out of the talking heads that defend the modern Democratic party.

Before any of these little angry talking heads reply with "Republicans do it too" (you were ready to type that before you even finished reading my post, I know you folks better than you know yourselves lol) keep in mind that is was not the Republicans that likely STOLE an election in 2012.

good post

 

[AgentOrange24]

I thought it was just some local people who done it?

Oops.

"Phony scandal."

 

[GearSolidMetal]

I am not speculating as to a percentage of her possibly being guilty. I was merely commenting on the use of pleading the 5th, and the fact that it doesn't mean "I'm guilty but not telling you."

Nowhere else in this thread have I speculated on her presumed innocence or guilt. I have commented on her rights, and the application of said rights.

Yes, I know you haven't speculated on her presumed innocence or guilt. I'm asking you to. Simply stating that pleading the 5th isn't admitting a crime all the time, may be true, but be honest, most of the time they're guilty as hell of something.

 

[MASShole]

Yes, I know you haven't speculated on her presumed innocence or guilt. I'm asking you to. Simply stating that pleading the 5th isn't admitting a crime all the time, may be true, but be honest, most of the time they're guilty as hell of something.

I'm not going to do so. I haven't fully read into the details to give a good answer.

 

[Thunderflash500]

these same republicans can't even admit the president was born in america.

The president should prove it, then they would admit it.

 

[elmo_1968]

Is it possible her employer advised/instructed her to take the fifth? I believe federal agencies sometimes advise/instruct employees on testifying.

Obviously it would be illegal to advise them to lie under oath, but taking the fifth is not lying under oath.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

because she knows it's a witch hunt and the gop will wreck her life for political gain?

So opening yourself to a contempt charge is a better option?

Truth of the matter is that she's relying on the DOJ to let her skate; and they will, so long as it doesn't hurt the dems politically.

The real issue for her is that it may become politically disadvantageous to protect her and the party will force Holder to prosecute her.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

What supporters of the House action are really supporting here is using gov't power to personally attack political enemies who have done nothing wrong. It's shocking, really.

In August 2010, the Determinations Unit distributed the first formal BOLO listing. The criteria in the BOLO listing were Tea Party organizations applying for I.R.C.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

It's amazing how quickly the GOP spun this into "the IRS is targeting Tea Party groups" and took advantage of the average American's inability to understand statistical draws.

For example, if 100 political groups tried to cheat the system by declaring themselves a non-political religious group, what percentage do you think would be right-leaning groups? If the IRS targeted every single one of these groups, yahoos get to shout from the rooftops that the IRS is "targeting the right"......because that is primarily who is using this specific loophole to cheat the system.

In other words, if the IRS goes after everyone who illegally exploits this loophole, and those groups are primarily right wing.............it doesn't mean that the IRS is targeting the right, rather that right wing groups are more likely to try to cheat the political tax rules.


As an aside....the entire loophole is nonsense when you have preachers across the south discussing politics day in and day out, but that's another story for another day.

This had nothing to do with a religious tax exemption, they were claiming 501(c) status.

BTW- you may be happy or unhappy to know that these left leaning groups have that same tax status:

Americans United for Change

The Ruckus Society - part of occupy movement

Women