• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

IRS official Lois Lerner to take the Fifth

add ranking member cummings to the list of doubters

Representative Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the panel, criticized Shulman for not alerting Congress to the practice after testifying in March 2012 without mentioning it. He said it would have been "common sense" to "come back, even if it were a phone call or a letter."

IRS official refuses to answer questions at scandal hearing | Reuters

the 9-termer from baltimore is probably a racist

wapo today: a special prosecutor is inevitable, better sooner than later

link above
 
former commissioner douglas shulman, who testified yesterday that he didn't tell congress what he knew because he was operating under only "a partial set of facts," despite his having "adamantly denied" any tea party targeting in sworn testimony last year...

today, former commissioner douglas shulman was forced to admit that he visited the white house, the logs show, 118 times

and you never shared with your correspondents at any of those meetings that the irs, according to its own internal review, independent of tigta, was guilty of "significant bias" against obama's most hi profile enemies?

despite the fact that the outrage was all over the news, despite the fact that you were getting grilled at the time in congress?

that's hard to believe, mr shulman, just what were you talking about at the white house 118 times?

shulman's answer:

Video: Shulman's reason for W.H. visits: Easter Egg Roll - POLITICO.com

"i have no memory..."

"it wouldn't be appropriate..."

hardly a denial, mr shulman

in other words, tell it to the prosecutor
 
Last edited:
hey prof what is the crime?

Unfortunately we just don't know...yet. But according to the AG:

Essentially, there are three types of laws that might conceivably have been broken, as Attorney General Eric Holder acknowledged in his testimony before a House committee Wednesday:

1) Civil rights laws that protect people from being discriminated against by the government

2) The Hatch Act, which prevents civil servants from engaging in partisan political activity

3) Perjury laws, which prevent people from lying to Congress
Criminal Liability Of IRS Workers In Targeting Scandal Unclear

What we DO know is that the IRS missed their filing date:

Chairman Camp and Ranking Member Levin gave the IRS a deadline of Tuesday, May 21 to comply with their committee’s demand for the information and records.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/irs...ly-congressional-demand-all-communications-wh

Wondering if they will have to pay a late fee...as they impose on the public...and Obama is outraged...rrriiiigggghhhhtttt.
 
Last edited:
politico asks

Did the IRS just blame the victim?

Former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman dropped this bit of advice during his testimony: targeted conservative groups could have just not applied for tax-exempt status at all.

All they had to do, Shulman told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, was act like they were already a 501(c)(4) and then file their tax return that way.

“There’s no need to go through the application process,” Shulman said in an exchange with Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.). “You can start up operations as a 501(c)(4) and file your return at the end of the year.”

In fact, Shulman said, there was no evidence that any organizations had to shut down their operations because of the lengthy investigations.

The inspector general’s office, however, has reported that 28 of the groups gave up and withdrew their applications because the process was taking so long.

And the news that they didn’t really have to apply isn’t likely to give much relief to the groups that got the extra scrutiny.

“I would remind him that it is well within our rights to take advantage of any and all tax statuses, and to choose to be ‘official’ is not wrong,” Toby Marie Walker of the Waco Tea Party said in an email. “Is he trying to shift the blame to the victims of the IRS targeting? If we did not ‘need’ to apply, then why did IRS not just send us a letter stating that?”

IRS scandal hearing: Best moments - David Nather - POLITICO.com

congressman lynch:

Dem: There Will be Special Prosecutor and 'Hell to Pay' If IRS Keeps Stonewalling | CNS News

wapo:

WaPo: A special prosecutor in the IRS matter is inevitable
 
politico calls it attitude

as in, shulman is a "serial smirker"

Over and over Wednesday, committee members asked Shulman why he didn’t correct his March 2012 testimony that there was “no targeting.” His story was always the same: He learned there was a list of search terms but didn’t know everything about how it was being used, so he left the job to the inspector general.

therefore, since his knowledge base, he says, was just a "partial set of facts," he was able to testify in 2012 "there's absolutely no targeting," only "normal back and forth"

“I didn’t know who was on the list, how it was being used, whether there were liberal groups as well as conservative groups,” Shulman said in an exchange with Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the top Democrat on the committee. “At that point, I didn’t have a full set of facts to come back to Congress with.”

“Well, I’m sorry, that’s not good enough,” said Cummings.

so the commish throws his successor, steven miller, obama's appointee, under the runaway bus

Later, Shulman said his then-deputy — Steven Miller, who later became acting IRS commissioner until he was forced to resign — told him the practice had already been stopped.

The responsible deputy told me it was being stopped. I had no reason to believe otherwise,” Shulman said.

IRS scandal hearing: Best moments - David Nather - POLITICO.com

i wonder what mr miller will have to say about that?

so there's no reason to believe otherwise, huh, mr shulman?

how bout the irs' internal review conducted by ms marks which informed you of "substantial bias" in may of 2012?

keep insulting your questioners, mr commissioner

that's the wise approach

ask all the punks at dp

wapo, the national journal, congressmen lynch and cummings, al hunt at bloomberg---they don't know what they're talking about

they probably don't even attend the easter egg roll

say hi to the prosecutor when you see him, it won't be long
 
abc this morning:

Did Lois Lerner botch her Fifth Amendment rights?

After a key agency IRS official today invoked her Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate herself during congressional testimony, Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Darrell Issa said he will review legal precedent in order to determine whether Lois Lerner, the director of Exempt Organizations at the IRS, could be held in contempt of Congress.

Although Lerner, who’s at the center of the controversy, refused to answer questions from members of the committee, she read a brief statement into the record declaring her innocence. Furthermore, at the request of Issa, Lerner authenticated a document containing her written answers for the inspector general’s investigation of the matter.

Those actions prompted members of the committee to question whether Lerner effectively waived her right to invoke the Fifth Amendment.

A Republican committee aide said the application of the Fifth Amendment has nothing to do with House or committee rules, but rather is a constitutional question. The aide said courts have interpreted that the Fifth must be asserted in the absolute, not partially.

Sources also believe Lerner’s decision to read a statement into the record while invoking the Fifth may have been unprecedented for congressional testimony.

One constitutional expert noted that generally people who claim the Fifth in hearings give no statement and it would be “unusual” to give a statement and still claim the Fifth.

Most witnesses claiming the Fifth will not tempt fate by answering any questions,” said Michael Gerhardt, a University of North Carolina constitutional law professor who specializes in the relationship between Congress and the executive branch. “I suppose the witness might argue he or she is claiming the Fifth for limited purposes but then needs to have someone spell out the relevant scope.”

Did Lois Lerner Botch Fifth Amendment Rights? - ABC News
 
Yeah, more coolaid. You don't happen to know what moveon.org's tax status is do you?
It's a 501 c(4). You really need to visit the video in my post.
 
you can only plead the fifth to keep from incriminating yourself in a crime. so she is admitting there was a crime

Taking the 5th in and of itself is not a crime.

Nor can you infer guilt because she chose not to respond to the questions of Congress who are crooks themselves and who most of them should be in jail as well.

The 5th Amendment is one of the most important rights granted by the Constitution.

You cannot take a fundamental principle of the constitution and turn it against a citizen.

I want this thing to be investigated.

I want to know if there was wrong doing and if there is wrong doing on her part... then she should be prosecuted.

I just wanna show all of you so called "constitutionalists" how full of crap you truly are.

Inferring that silence in and of itself is admission of guilt.
 
Taking the 5th in and of itself is not a crime.

Nor can you infer guilt because she chose not to respond to the questions of Congress who are crooks themselves and who most of them should be in jail as well.

The 5th Amendment is one of the most important rights granted by the Constitution.

You cannot take a fundamental principle of the constitution and turn it against a citizen.

I want this thing to be investigated.

I want to know if there was wrong doing and if there is wrong doing on her part... then she should be prosecuted.

I just wanna show all of you so called "constitutionalists" how full of crap you truly are.

Inferring that silence in and of itself is admission of guilt.

A jury can't infer guilt, but I can.
B
Also, pleading the 5th doesn't make her untouchable.

The biggest error on her part, was her opening statement, right before she took the 5th.
 
A jury can't infer guilt, but I can.
B
Also, pleading the 5th doesn't make her untouchable.

The biggest error on her part, was her opening statement, right before she took the 5th.

I think the majority of Americans will think she is guilty of something or has something important to hide by her taking the fifth. I am not a lawyer, so I do not understand how an opening statement could stop someone from taking the 5th. I will just sit back and stay tuned in to see how all this works out.
 
Back
Top Bottom