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.
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.
“……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.
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?
Why do some take her side? Could it be that they marvel and agree with her targeting conservatives? Now we find that the IRS is holding some tax returns for money owed to them from past relatives.
LoveGoComics about 10 years ago
Hope and change.
Gypsy8 about 10 years ago
I thought it was Republicans violating the Constitution by denying her constitutional rights to take the 5th.
I Play One On TV about 10 years 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.
I Play One On TV about 10 years 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.
Gypsy8 about 10 years ago
Every statement needs not be supported by a link. Sometimes you can just use your own brain.
Gypsy8 about 10 years ago
“……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.
Snarky about 10 years 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?
pirate227 about 10 years ago
And zero applicants were denied.
SABRSteve about 10 years ago
Why do some take her side? Could it be that they marvel and agree with her targeting conservatives? Now we find that the IRS is holding some tax returns for money owed to them from past relatives.