Mike Lester by Mike Lester

Mike Lester

Comments (20) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. LoveGoComics

    LoveGoComics said, over 1 year ago

    Hope and change.

  2. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, over 1 year ago

    I thought it was Republicans violating the Constitution by denying her constitutional rights to take the 5th.

  3. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, over 1 year ago

    Maybe she should offer to testify, but only if it’s not under oath. That was a strategy that worked during those pesky 9/11 hearings, so there’s legal precedent.

  4. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 1 year ago

    Certainly she has the right to not testify in such a way as to incriminate herself. Once she “opens the door” however, the congress has every right to query further and compel the answer. Have you never watched court TV……hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

  5. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8

    “I thought it was Republicans violating the Constitution by denying her constitutional rights to take the 5th.”

    That argument is still on going. Some think that she waived her fifth rights by answering questions in her initial testimony. Others believe she kept that right in later testimony. Lawyers on both sides are now citing legal precedents arguing both directions (maintaining or waiving). Throw politicians into the mix and a synergy occurs that may result in Lerner’s 5th Amendment rights hanging in abeyance for eternity (well…maybe not quite that long).

  6. Zuhlamon

    Zuhlamon GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    Benghazi!

  7. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, over 1 year ago

    Maybe she should use the Alberto Gonzalez approach. “I don’t remember. I don’t recall. I was not aware. I am not sure I remember.”

    That worked well, too, and again shows legal precedent. He faced no penalties. Evidently, in the eyes of many, it’s better to look clueless than to plead the fifth. Stupid is more acceptable than complicit.

  8. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 1 year ago

    @I Play One On TV

    “Maybe she should use the Alberto Gonzalez approach.”

    The only person that I can remember that didn’t use that approach was Oliver North. Most memorable to me was when he was asked about destroying evidence and he told them that, paraphrased, “No, I shredded it before there was an investigation and it became evidence.”

  9. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, over 1 year ago

    Every statement needs not be supported by a link. Sometimes you can just use your own brain.

  10. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, over 1 year ago

    @Harleyquinn

    “……She made an opening statement. She got to say her piece……”
    .
    Any defendant appearing in court has the opportunity to plead guilty or not guilty. Then, if pleading “not guilty”, the defendant has the constitutional right to take the 5th.
    .
    That is the procedure Lerner followed. She made a statement that she was innocent of any wrong-doing, then pleaded the 5th. Same principle, but in a congressional hearing, thus slightly different wording.

  11. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8

    The problem, Gypsy, was that she made a statement. She shouldn’t have if she clearly wanted to not waive her rights. Clearly is the operant word here. Now it’s a legal mess.

  12. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, over 1 year ago

    @mikefive

    In a legal mess, odds are that the defendant wins, or as you said earlier, “hang in abeyance for eternity.”

  13. snarky39

    snarky39 said, over 1 year ago

    I’m trying to understand what wrongdoing Lerner could possibly implicate herself in since we all know there wasn’t anything wrong in the way right wing organizations were scrutinized by the IRS whilst under her management. Or am I missing something here?

  14. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, over 1 year ago

    @snarky39

    Just a guess, but I wonder if some of her internal directions were less than artful. What might be direct or even blunt internal discussions between colleagues might not look so good when viewed and reinterpreted/misinterpreted by the other side.

  15. 4my10851cs

    4my10851cs said, over 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8

    she opened her mouth and made statements that now prevent here from taking the 5th

  16. Load the rest of the comments (5).