• 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!

Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contempt"

Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

TheNextEra said:
And until that is decided, this is going to go nowhere. How about they actually get a ruling on THAT part, before the Republicans look even more silly with this "arresting" business.

It's clear there hasn't been a consensus on whether she actually waived her 5th amendment rights because there are "legal experts" that have said she hasn't waived them and there are those that have said she has. Without that being decided by courts, the GOP are just spinning their wheels.
Click to expand...


No, that's not how it works. Congress can hold her in contempt for as long as they wish and can indeed arrest and jail her.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress
 
Last edited:
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

clownboy said:
No, that's not how it works. Congress can hold her in contempt for as long as they wish and can indeed arrest and jail her.
Click to expand...

Well, there is the authorization for indefinite detention without trial now. They could claim she was a terrorist.

She took the fifth, meaning that testimony would tend to incriminate her. What else do we need to know that the IRS was guilty of targeting individuals?

So, fire her and hire someone with the understanding that they're to clean up the mess. If they don't, fire them.

Isn't that what would happen if the CEO of a private company were to be in a similar position? Of course, he'd get a golden parachute, as that's how CEOs are treated, but that's another issue.
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

Paschendale said:
And many more legal experts would say that's complete nonsense. What someone does outside of a trial or hearing has no bearing on their rights inside the trial or hearing. The fifth amendment does not require you to say nothing ever on a subject. It protects you from being compelled to give testimony against yourself. It very much does give you the right to remain silent by refusing to answer questions and then give whatever statements you like to whomever you like. If it's not properly introduced and subject to cross examination, I can't imagine it holding any sway in any proceeding. In a proper courtroom, as opposed to congress, the statement would be very hard to get in anyway, but it wouldn't negate fifth amendment rights.



I am. If you were, it wouldn't strike you that way.
Click to expand...

So, is your position that the only way to force her to answer is to give her broad immunity?
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

Paschendale said:
And many more legal experts would say that's complete nonsense. What someone does outside of a trial or hearing has no bearing on their rights inside the trial or hearing. The fifth amendment does not require you to say nothing ever on a subject. It protects you from being compelled to give testimony against yourself. It very much does give you the right to remain silent by refusing to answer questions and then give whatever statements you like to whomever you like. If it's not properly introduced and subject to cross examination, I can't imagine it holding any sway in any proceeding. In a proper courtroom, as opposed to congress, the statement would be very hard to get in anyway, but it wouldn't negate fifth amendment rights.
Click to expand...

Except that Lerner did both assert her fifth amendment and give a statement during a Congressional hearing.
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

Dittohead not! said:
Well, there is the authorization for indefinite detention without trial now. They could claim she was a terrorist.

She took the fifth, meaning that testimony would tend to incriminate her. What else do we need to know that the IRS was guilty of targeting individuals?

So, fire her and hire someone with the understanding that they're to clean up the mess. If they don't, fire them.

Isn't that what would happen if the CEO of a private company were to be in a similar position? Of course, he'd get a golden parachute, as that's how CEOs are treated, but that's another issue.
Click to expand...


What if the CEO broke the law ? What if the CEO was E-mailing other CEO's so they could conspire against a group of people because they refused to buy their products ??

Fire Lois Lerner ? No, indict her and put her in prison for the rest of her natural life.
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

Fenton said:
What if the CEO broke the law ? What if the CEO was E-mailing other CEO's so they could conspire against a group of people because they refused to buy their products ??

Fire Lois Lerner ? No, indict her and put her in prison for the rest of her natural life.
Click to expand...

CEOs break the law and get away with it all the time, and no one has proven that Lois Lerner committed any crimes. The innocent until proven guilty part of the Bill of Rights is still intact.


at least for now.
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

Dittohead not! said:
CEOs break the law and get away with it all the time, and no one has proven that Lois Lerner committed any crimes. The innocent until proven guilty part of the Bill of Rights is still intact.


at least for now.
Click to expand...

Wait, so that's your way of defining down Lerner's actions here ?

People break the law all the time and get away with it ?

And did you know, NO WHERE in our Constitution does it say You're innocent until proven guilty ".

I'm not disagreeing with the concept of assumed innocence, just don't twist our founding documents to make your case.
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

Fenton said:
Wait, so that's your way of defining down Lerner's actions here ?

People break the law all the time and get away with it ?

And did you know, NO WHERE in our Constitution does it say You're innocent until proven guilty ".

I'm not disagreeing with the concept of assumed innocence, just don't twist our founding documents to make your case.
Click to expand...
You got me wondering about that. Presumption of innocence is a basic tenant of our system of justice, but just where does it come from? I asked Yahoo answers, and found this:

Which amendment in the bill of rights is innocent until proven guilty?
i'm pretty sure it's the 5th or the 6th, could someone please help me out??

Best Answer

- answered 6 years ago
Theres no amendment that spefically guarantees "innocent until proven guilty" But the 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments basically created presumption of innocence.
Click to expand...

Not that it really matters. She is presumed innocent, as she hasn't been proved guilty of anything.
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

Dittohead not! said:
You got me wondering about that. Presumption of innocence is a basic tenant of our system of justice, but just where does it come from? I asked Yahoo answers, and found this:



Not that it really matters. She is presumed innocent, as she hasn't been proved guilty of anything.
Click to expand...


She's a liar, no proof needed to come to that Conclusion.

First admitting that Conservatives organizations were disproportionately targeted and then doing everything in her power to cover her tracks.

From her 24 consecutive 5th amendment pleas to the destruction of evidence that would have tied her actions to outside Federal agencies.

So much stone walling for a " politically motivated investigation " right ?
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

Fenton said:
She's a liar, no proof needed to come to that Conclusion.
Click to expand...
Proof is never needed for conservative posters as you've just admitted.
The Bill of Rights is only for the real Patriots, right ?
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

NIMBY said:
Proof is never needed for conservative posters as you've just admitted.
The Bill of Rights is only for the real Patriots, right ?
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Did you miss the wiki on contempt of congress? Are you saying the congress doesn't have the constitutional grant to subpoena and hold persons in contempt? That they don't also have the power to arrest? What do you think they have a Sgt At Arms for?
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

clownboy said:
What are you talking about? Did you miss the wiki on contempt of congress? Are you saying the congress doesn't have the constitutional grant to subpoena and hold persons in contempt? That they don't also have the power to arrest? What do you think they have a Sgt At Arms for?
Click to expand...

is lois lerner sitting in congress right now?
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

Unitedwestand13 said:
is lois lerner sitting in congress right now?
Click to expand...

She doesn't have to be. Read up on contempt of congress and get back to us.
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

Dezaad said:
So, is your position that the only way to force her to answer is to give her broad immunity?
Click to expand...

That is one of the few ways to circumvent fifth amendment protections against self-incrimination. Contempt is not one of them.

DB20 said:
Except that Lerner did both assert her fifth amendment and give a statement during a Congressional hearing.
Click to expand...

And since it was a hearing and not a jury trial, I'm sure that congress needs no instruction to ignore the statement. They can happily do so as they please. Why do people seem to think that a statement has anything to do with the protection against self-incrimination? It doesn't. I don't know why people keep bringing it up. As I explained in the post that you quoted but apparently didn't read or didn't understand, they have nothing to do with each other.
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

Fenton said:
She's a liar, no proof needed to come to that Conclusion.

First admitting that Conservatives organizations were disproportionately targeted and then doing everything in her power to cover her tracks.

From her 24 consecutive 5th amendment pleas to the destruction of evidence that would have tied her actions to outside Federal agencies.

So much stone walling for a " politically motivated investigation " right ?
Click to expand...

She's a liar? Well, she did say that her testimony could tend to incriminate her, which was the truth.

I still say, fire her, just as any CEO of a private company would be fired, then move on. What's the point of a contempt of Congress charge other than making political hay?

Oh, and if every liar in Washington were to be thrown in jail, do you realize what DC would be?

A ghost town, that's what.
 
Re: Resolution Directing the House sergeant-at-arms to “Arrest Lois Lerner for Contem

NIMBY said:
Proof is never needed for conservative posters as you've just admitted.
The Bill of Rights is only for the real Patriots, right ?
Click to expand...

Is Fenton talking about sentencing her, or is he just talking about taking her to trial?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom