no charges in IRS investigation?

[B-Man]

Some poor posters here just insist on embarrassing themselves over and over............

 

 

From a rather famous Harvard Law professor, and apparently a "secret" right-winger..............lol

 

 

Alan Dershowitz voices his opinion of IRS employee's Fifth ...

 

In Dershowitz’s legal opinion, her brief statement of innocence has opened a “legal Pandora's Box. You can't simply make statements about a subject and then plead the Fifth in response to questions about the very same subject. Once you open the door to an area of inquiry, you have waived your Fifth Amendment right; you've waived your self-incrimination right on that subject matter."

 

The renowned Harvard Professor added the legal opinion that making such a proclamation could be considered malpractice on the part of her attorney. However, she could later say she had overruled the advice she received.

[Doc]

I get that some are Democrats and are very loyal to their team, but to look objectively at the whole IRS story objectively and still believe that there was no coordinated political effort to target conservative groups is to be in total denial of reality.

 

Every once in a while you have to be big enough to admit when your "team" sucks. The "team" in control of the White House and the Senate is really sucking on many issues.

Hey, even Dubya had his supporters near the end of his term.

[B-Man]

IRS SCANDAL UPDATE: Republicans Step Up Probe into IRS Targeting Scandal.

House committees continued their probe this week into the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) targeting scandal in which conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status were subjected to extra scrutiny.

 

Cleta Mitchell, an attorney who represents the Texas-based group True the Vote, told a House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee Thursday that the IRS targeting is very “real”

 

“The IRS, at the direction of some political elites in Washington – not in Cincinnati, but Washington – took what had been for decades a process of reviewing applications for exempt status that for a 501©(4) organization could be expected to take three to four weeks,” Mitchell said. “And they converted that process into one that took three to four years and, in some cases, is still not over.”

 

True the Vote filed its application for tax-exempt status in 2010 and did not receive it until after the group sued the IRS.

 

Mitchell said the first time she became aware of the targeting was in October 2009 when she filed an application for another group, and did not hear from the IRS until June 2010. She said when the IRS got back to them it was not Cincinnati, but the Washington office.

 

“That group did one thing. It lobbied against Obamacare in the fall of 2009, in the spring of 2010, something that a 501©(4) organization is permitted to spend 100 percent of its program expenditures doing. We did not get the tax-exempt status for that organization until July of 2013,” Mitchell said.

 

In a Sunday interview with Fox News, President Obama said the IRS targeting controversy was a result of “bone-headed decisions” in the agency’s Cincinnati office and did not involve “a smidgen of corruption.”

 

 

Yeah, that’s basically a straight-up lie.

[Koko78]

Yeah, that’s basically a straight-up lie.

 

Obama would never lie about something so serious as blatant corruption and the targeting of political enemies. Or transparency. Or signature legislation. Or foreign policy. Or the murder of an Ambassador. Or...

 

If you like your clean government, you can keep your clean government. Period.

[IDBillzFan]

Some poor posters here just insist on embarrassing themselves over and over............

 

Unlike progressives, I'm no fan of bad behavior justifying bad behavior, but I wouldn't mind making a bag of popcorn and watching progressives if the next Republican president were to take away Media Matters non-profit status.

 

I'm certain they would suddenly have a change or heart about the IRS targeting conservative groups.

[Nanker]

Remind me again please why Richard Nixon was going to be impeached?

B.O. wants to be compared to him, evidently.

[OCinBuffalo]

Ya ya, more "I bet" and "there will be" nonsense.

 

Who are the victims here? How were they injured?

Watch this, in full, because it answers both your questions in full: http://www.realclear...ntimidated.html

 

That's what a real American looks like. There's no leftist caricature here. She shames those who would espouse one, by merely existing. That woman honestly inspires me, all my usual PPP crap aside. I couldn't be more proud to be from the same country as her, because she is so real, and has so much integrity and class. I'm sure I could learn a lot from her.

 

Did you learn anything? Did you learn who the TEA party really is? She's who the TEA party really is.

 

She refuses to be a victim. You cherish victimhood, and are trying to instantiate it everywhere you can. She's heroic. You're pathetic.

On the upside, the news coming out everyday...from job numbers to economic downturn to Obamacare failures...is so consistently bad for this WH and progressives in general, that it has has essentially knob-gobblers like you to do nothing more than hang around the IRS thread referring to right wing echo chambers.

See, this is what bothers me a little. gatormans have been clinging to all sorts of lies, for so long, I'm not sure where they go from here. In a sense, it may be better for all if they are allowed to keep 1 or 2 of them. You know, to have something "cool" to say at Starbucks. A security blanket of sorts.

 

If all their lies come crashing down at the same time, we may have problems with these people. They are psychologically committed to these lies. Not sure I want so many people having all their delusions ripped from them all at the same time.

Unlike progressives, I'm no fan of bad behavior justifying bad behavior, but I wouldn't mind making a bag of popcorn and watching progressives if the next Republican president were to take away Media Matters non-profit status.

 

I'm certain they would suddenly have a change or heart about the IRS targeting conservative groups.

And this is the other sides of things: if you carry that logic forward, what's to stop a Republican POTUS from doing, anything?

 

He's got a precedent, set by Obama, that says he can nullify law, and issue fiats at will. He's got 4 years, and overreach is a problem. Who or what is to stop him? Maybe I'm just being paranoid. But, you put this and the above together? That's trouble.

[DC Tom]

I'm certain they would suddenly have a change or heart about the IRS targeting conservative groups.

 

No they wouldn't. They'd just make up some mendacious excuse about why it's different.

[B-Man]

It's come to this:

 

Dems Trying To Blame IRS Inspector General For Targeting Scandal.

 

“The Obama administration has well documented problems with assertive inspector generals, so this kind of push back is to be expected from Hill Democrats. It’s an attempt to smear the IRS inspector general and only shows how desperate the Democrats have become. It’s a hail mary pass that is going to fall incomplete in the end zone.”

 

.

[Tiberius]

Some poor posters here just insist on embarrassing themselves over and over............

From a rather famous Harvard Law professor, and apparently a "secret" right-winger..............lol

Alan Dershowitz voices his opinion of IRS employee's Fifth ...

In Dershowitz’s legal opinion, her brief statement of innocence has opened a “legal Pandora's Box. You can't simply make statements about a subject and then plead the Fifth in response to questions about the very same subject. Once you open the door to an area of inquiry, you have your self-incrimination right on that subject matter."

The renowned Harvard Professor added the legal opinion that making such a proclamation could be considered malpractice on the part of her attorney. However, she could later say she had overruled the advice she received.

 

That's his legal opinion, obviously not everyone agrees with Mr Derschowitz. And if what they did was illegal why didn't they force them to answer questions further? Of that's right, you can't force people to say anything. This is still the united states of America. Dersowitz hates the Obama administration because he hasn't bent over backwards for Isreal, he is hardly an unbiased source

[Tiberius]

It's come to this:

Dems Trying To Blame IRS Inspector General For Targeting Scandal.

 

“The Obama administration has well documented problems with assertive inspector generals, so this kind of push back is to be expected from Hill Democrats. It’s an attempt to smear the IRS inspector general and only shows how desperate the Democrats have become. It’s a hail mary pass that is going to fall incomplete in the end zone.”

 

Why didn't you just post the original story from the Hill instead of filtering through that wacky right wing nut job's site? The Hill shows how this was a right wing hit job, run by right wingers to stir up a fake controversy. Rep Issa was tell the IG what to do?? Ya, that sounds fair! Democrats cut out from meeting while House GOP leaders ran the boondoggle. Wow, that's pretty corrupt. I hope they get that in front of a judge and charge these people

[IDBillzFan]

Why didn't you just post the original story from the Hill instead of filtering through that wacky right wing nut job's site? The Hill shows how this was a right wing hit job, run by right wingers to stir up a fake controversy. Rep Issa was tell the IG what to do?? Ya, that sounds fair! Democrats cut out from meeting while House GOP leaders ran the boondoggle. Wow, that's pretty corrupt. I hope they get that in front of a judge and charge these people

 

You can tell a lot about a person by the incompetence they thrive to embrace.

[DC Tom]

Why didn't you just post the original story from the Hill instead of filtering through that wacky right wing nut job's site? The Hill shows how this was a right wing hit job, run by right wingers to stir up a fake controversy. Rep Issa was tell the IG what to do?? Ya, that sounds fair! Democrats cut out from meeting while House GOP leaders ran the boondoggle. Wow, that's pretty corrupt. I hope they get that in front of a judge and charge these people

 

No, it doesn't.

[3rdnlng]

That's his legal opinion, obviously not everyone agrees with Mr Derschowitz. And if what they did was illegal why didn't they force them to answer questions further? Of that's right, you can't force people to say anything. This is still the united states of America. Dersowitz hates the Obama administration because he hasn't bent over backwards for Isreal, he is hardly an unbiased source

 

Isn't it obvious that she hasn't been charged with Contemp of Congress for a reason. She is in the process of becoming a witness and is negotiating immunity. See where this story might go:

 

http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/did-a-former-white-house-counsel-do-it/

He begins by noting, “Robert Bauer had the motive to direct IRS policy against tea-party groups. He is a longtime opponent of First Amendment freedoms and an advocate of government-speech regulation. He also can’t stand the work the tea party is conducting to monitor and eradicate voter fraud.”

Adams says just two months after Bauer became White House counsel, the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United vs. FEC caused the Obama camp to fear “the decision might cost them the White House. President Obama boorishly (and inaccurately) addressed the decision in the 2010 State of the Union.”

As for the means, “Remember, Bauer served as White House counsel from November 2009 to June 2011, right during the time this IRS shakedown was hatched.”

Adams said that is particularly important because, “[T]he White House counsel enjoys a position of power like few others. They can make things happen with a phone call. One former West Wing staffer told me that ‘any department’s staff who received directions from Bauer would think they were getting directions from the president. The White House counsel has the power to make policy with a phone call.’”

 

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/did-a-former-white-house-counsel-do-it/#yox2V9JGY3MEcCV4.99

[Tiberius]

Oh, that poor "victim" Katherine Englebrech, lol

 

http://www.texasobserver.org/the-queen-of-king-street/

 

 

Love the part where they doctored video to make it look like black people wanted to vote more than once. She's real credible. Reminds me of She Nazi

 

You guys are down to posting pj and WND puke? Really? That's pretty bad

[DC Tom]

You guys are down to posting pj and WND puke? Really? That's pretty bad

 

And the Washington Times. Don't forget the Moonies.

 

Not that you're one to talk, though. The Texas Observer?

[B-Man]

Congressmen Ask Holder If Obama Is Receiving Updates on IRS Probe

 

 

IRS Scandal: Obama Says ‘Not A Smidgen of Corruption,’ Congress And Victims Say ‘Really?’

 

 

 

Questions from Representative Jordan to make a simple but effective point.

 

“Ms. Engelbrecht,” Jordan said, “in the first 20 years of business, did OSHA ever visit your place of business?”

“No sir,” she responded.

“Never once?”

“No sir.”

“After you filed the [tax-exempt application for King Street Patriots], OSHA visited then, right?”

“Yes sir.”

“In the first 20 years of business did the [bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives] ever come to your business?” Jordan continued.

“No sir.”

“And they came a couple times once you filed your application?”

“Yes sir.”

“And in your first 20 years of business, did the IRS ever audit you?”

“No sir.”

“But once you filed your application, they audited you?”

“Many times.”

“And in your first 20 years of business, did the FBI ever visit you?”

“No sir.”

“But once you filed your application, did they visit you?”

“Six times.”

 

Rep. Jordan made his final point: “Congressman Connolly (D) wants us to believes that’s all a coincidence.”

 

Unamused with Jordan’s line of questioning, an agitated Connolly shot back, insisting that he’s merely looking for evidence of the scrutiny being politically motivated.

 

“You can believe it’s all a coincidence,” Jordan said. “I refuse to do so.”

 

http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4483647

[Tiberius]

Congressmen Ask Holder If Obama Is Receiving Updates on IRS Probe

 

IRS Scandal: Obama Says ‘Not A Smidgen of Corruption,’ Congress And Victims Say ‘Really?’

 

http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4483647

 

Were there any doctored photos this time? Can't believe a thing these liars are saying

 

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/right-wing-voter-suppression-effort-caught-using-doctored-photo-video-photos/question-1195001/?page=2&link=ibaf&q=katherine+engelbrecht+doctored+photo

 

 

[4merper4mer]

On a side note, if Clinton were still in office, what do you think he would have done to that woman?

[Koko78]

On a side note, if Clinton were still in office, what do you think he would have done to that woman?

 

Gone through a box of cigars?

[IDBillzFan]

On a side note, if Clinton were still in office, what do you think he would have done to that woman?

 

Before or after getting her number from Tom Sizemore?

[B-Man]

• Washington Post: Unions, Trade Associations Worried About Possible IRS Rule Changes
  

 

 

 

Akron Beacon Journal: All Da King's Men: Not a Smidgen of Corruption?

 

 

 

The GOP Should Use the Power of the Purse: The way to cure the rogue behavior of Obama’s agencies is not to pay for it.

 

 

.

[Tiberius]

 

The GOP Should Use the Power of the Purse: The way to cure the rogue behavior of Obama’s agencies is not to pay for it.

 

 

.

Ha ha, Wesley Snipes is out there saying, why now???

[3rdnlng]

Equal rights for all:

 

http://scrappleface.com/2014/02/10/holder-gays-deserve-equal-treatment-from-irs-nsa/

 

(2014-02-10) — Attorney General Eric Holder announced today that from now on the Justice Department will make sure that the federal government treats homosexual couples the same as heterosexuals, ensuring equally-vigorous IRS scrutiny for their political groups, generous NSA eavesdropping on personal communications, and proactive government exclusion of their viewpoints from the public schools.

“I’ve grown concerned recently that gay people are not receiving the kind of attention they should from the federal government,” said Holder. “We don’t know for a fact that government policy excludes gay people, but the seriousness of the allegation is sufficient to merit additional funding and staffing to ensure that both civil rights and civil constraints are equally applicable to all.”

[Doc]

Be careful what you wish for...

[DC Tom]

Be careful what you wish for...

 

Which just gave me a thought:

 

Gay men are being forced to purchase maternity coverage.

[3rdnlng]

Which just gave me a thought:

 

Gay men are being forced to purchase maternity coverage.

 

So is my 85 year old mother.

[DC Tom]

So is my 85 year old mother.

 

Your mother probably didn't support the ACA like the gay rights' lobby did.

[keepthefaith]

Which just gave me a thought:

 

Gay men are being forced to purchase maternity coverage.

 

Yeah but is surrogate coverage provided? That's probably more costly than a more traditional birth.

[B-Man]

Chicago Sun-Times: Signs say IRS targeted tea party.

 

 

Watchdog to IRS: Quit killing conservatives with paperwork.

 

 

: Congressional Investigation: Treasury, IRS, HHS Conspired To Create An Unauthorized, Half-Trillion Dollar Entitlement.

[DC Tom]

Chicago Sun-Times: Signs say IRS targeted tea party.

 

"Signs say?" What the !@#$ is that? Someone investigate that with a Magic 8-Ball?

[Azalin]

"Signs say?" What the !@#$ is that? Someone investigate that with a Magic 8-Ball?

TEA leaves.

[OCinBuffalo]

TEA leaves.

Nice.

 

There's the real story, which is that this investigation is only ~50% over, and there's a long way to go.

 

Then there's the real, real story which is, the TEA party has already raised $7 million for 2014, more than the Rs, and Ds, largely by using the IRS story. That's the immediate impact, and regardless of how the investigation goes, the PR/political damage is already done.

 

So, the gatorman's of the world should ask themselves: wouldn't they have rather had simple, straightforward answers to this question, have those responsible for the policy(which is not anyone in Cincy)fall on their swords, Obama escapes but gets censured, etc....whatever, deal with it and end it, rather than leaving it open for so long that it defeats them in 2014, and again in 2016?

 

I have no idea why Obama et al have chosen this approach. This means they lose both ways. The only way this makes sense? IF the investigation IS going to run into something big, and they know it, so they are just delaying it as long as possible.

 

I've always been curious as to why this, Benghazi, the WH reporter phone tapping/leaks story all came out at the same time. I don't believe that's a coincidence, not even a little bit. I think they sent them all out at the same time, because they knew they would all break soon, in an effort to overload the media, and never thought they would be hearing about them a full year later.

Edited February 11, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[B-Man]

No need to even pretend anymore:

 

Vulnerable Dems want IRS to step up

 

Senate Democrats facing tough elections this year want the Internal Revenue Service to play a more aggressive role in regulating outside groups expected to spend millions of dollars on their races.

 

In the wake of the IRS targeting scandal, the Democrats are publicly prodding the agency instead of lobbying them directly.

 

 

Read more: http://thehill.com/h...p#ixzz2tD10qrIB

 

 

 

 

 

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R., Mich.) said Tuesday that the committee’s investigation of the Internal Revenue Service found that 100 percent of the tax-exempt groups that were flagged and targeted with an audit were right-leaning.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

 

“We now know that the IRS targeted not only right-leaning applicants, but also right-leaning groups that were already operating as 501©(4)s,” Mr. Camp said in a statement. “At Washington, DC’s direction, dozens of groups operating as 501©(4)s were flagged for IRS surveillance, including monitoring of the groups’ activities, websites and any other publicly available information. Of these groups, 83% were right-leaning. And of the groups the IRS selected for audit, 100 percent were right-leaning.”

 

House Republicans have been investigating the IRS, after the agency admitted last spring that it had singled out conservative groups for special scrutiny when they applied for tax-exempt status.

 

 

 

 

.

Edited February 14, 2014 by B-Man

[B-Man]

IRS Scandals

by Veronique de Rugy

 

I have a piece up at the Washington Examiner arguing that the IRS’s systematic targeting of nonprofit organizations applying for tax-exempt status simply on the basis of their names or assumed political leanings is only one of the questionable moves the agency has made.

Taxpayers who have to put up with a complicated tax code are receiving increasingly worse services from the tax agency. Its customer service representatives are answering fewer “customer” calls and keeping callers on hold for longer periods. Instead of trying to jack up the quality of its services, the IRS decided to stop answering the harder, more time-consuming questions.

 

But it doesn’t stop there. The IRS also decided that in this context it would be a great idea to try to squeeze the competition and make it harder for taxpayers to get tax advices from small tax-prep companies by imposing onerous (and unnecessary) education and licensing requirements. Tim Carney has a good piece explaining how the IRS move would benefit the big companies like H&R Block.

The great news is that didn’t work:

Thankfully, as Reason Magazine’s

Katherine Mangu-Ward

explains

, “The libertarian legal outfit Institute for Justice helped mom-and-pop tax prep firms challenge the new regs.”

In this case, the good guys won. News arrived a few days ago that the “D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the IRS had no legal authority to impose a nationwide licensing scheme on tax-return preparers.” For now, you can at least seek prompt, affordable, tax assistance from private firms while the IRS gets its customer service act together. However, this victory is merely one small riposte against the IRS’ disturbing broader power grab

.

 

But it gets much worse than that. Michael Cannon at the Cato Institute is fighting to prevent the IRS and Treasury from illegally rewriting the healthcare law:

Cannon reports that the IRS and Treasury Department have rolled out possibly illegal taxes for the payment of Obamacare’s premium subsidies in states that declined to establish their own exchange.

As written, the ACA only directs the IRS to impose specific taxes and pay premium subsidies in state-established exchanges. Yet, as Cannon writes: “Nevertheless, agency officials agreed, again with apparent unanimity, to impose those taxes and dispense those subsidies in states with federal exchanges, the undisputed plain meaning of the PPACA notwithstanding.”

 

This action isn’t just potentially illegal, it could have serious financial consequences for the country. As Cannon explains, “Treasury, IRS, and HHS officials simply rewrote the law to create a new, unauthorized entitlement program whose cost ‘may exceed $500 billion dollars over 10 years.’ (My own estimate puts the 10-year cost closer to $700 billion

 

.

[OCinBuffalo]

IRS Scandals

by Veronique de Rugy

 

I have a piece up at the Washington Examiner arguing that the IRS’s systematic targeting of nonprofit organizations applying for tax-exempt status simply on the basis of their names or assumed political leanings is only one of the questionable moves the agency has made.

Taxpayers who have to put up with a complicated tax code are receiving increasingly worse services from the tax agency. Its customer service representatives are answering fewer “customer” calls and keeping callers on hold for longer periods. Instead of trying to jack up the quality of its services, the IRS decided to stop answering the harder, more time-consuming questions.

 

But it doesn’t stop there. The IRS also decided that in this context it would be a great idea to try to squeeze the competition and make it harder for taxpayers to get tax advices from small tax-prep companies by imposing onerous (and unnecessary) education and licensing requirements. Tim Carney has a good piece explaining how the IRS move would benefit the big companies like H&R Block.

The great news is that didn’t work:

Thankfully, as Reason Magazine’s

Katherine Mangu-Ward

explains

, “The libertarian legal outfit Institute for Justice helped mom-and-pop tax prep firms challenge the new regs.”

In this case, the good guys won. News arrived a few days ago that the “D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the IRS had no legal authority to impose a nationwide licensing scheme on tax-return preparers.” For now, you can at least seek prompt, affordable, tax assistance from private firms while the IRS gets its customer service act together. However, this victory is merely one small riposte against the IRS’ disturbing broader power grab

.

 

But it gets much worse than that. Michael Cannon at the Cato Institute is fighting to prevent the IRS and Treasury from illegally rewriting the healthcare law:

Cannon reports that the IRS and Treasury Department have rolled out possibly illegal taxes for the payment of Obamacare’s premium subsidies in states that declined to establish their own exchange.

As written, the ACA only directs the IRS to impose specific taxes and pay premium subsidies in state-established exchanges. Yet, as Cannon writes: “Nevertheless, agency officials agreed, again with apparent unanimity, to impose those taxes and dispense those subsidies in states with federal exchanges, the undisputed plain meaning of the PPACA notwithstanding.”

 

This action isn’t just potentially illegal, it could have serious financial consequences for the country. As Cannon explains, “Treasury, IRS, and HHS officials simply rewrote the law to create a new, unauthorized entitlement program whose cost ‘may exceed $500 billion dollars over 10 years.’ (My own estimate puts the 10-year cost closer to $700 billion

 

.

The above may finally contain the elusive legal "standing" that has been so difficult to find in all of this. You can't sue the government without standing. Somebody who is forced to pay these taxes in a state with a federal exchange has litterally been illegally harmed by the government, personally.

 

Thus, standing has been achieved.

 

And, any story that curtails this Administration's, or any government entity's ability to sell their influence to the highest campaign contributor, is a good thing.

Edited February 17, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[B-Man]

THE NEW YORK POST: Calling Lois Lerner:

 

 

The American people still need to hear from Lois Lerner

. That’s a point that can’t be made often enough.

 

Remember her? She’s the IRS official who gave a statement before Congress declaring herself innocent of any wrongdoing — and then promptly took the Fifth.

 

Recently, Congress unearthed another IRS e-mail on which she was copied, talking about taking “off-plan” a discussion about how to harass the 501©4 groups the IRS had targeted. Meanwhile, leaks from officials involved in the investigation claim the FBI has not found ­anything criminal.

 

That’s an amazing finding,

given the statement by the American Center for Law and Justice, which represents the IRS targets, that the FBI hadn’t interviewed a single of the center’s 41 ­clients

.

 

Congress has been trying to get to the bottom of things with hearings, but it has not had much help from the administration. That’s partly because the Department of Justice is hiding behind the idea that it can’t do anything that might jeopardize an ongoing criminal investigation.

 

We believe this gets priorities backward.

 

The Constitution does not hold government agencies such as the IRS accountable to the FBI. The Constitution holds the government accountable to the people, acting through their elected representatives in Congress.

 

 

Read the whole thing.

[B-Man]

Unions vs. Democrats: A difference of opinion about IRS suppression of speech.

 

FTA:

The disagreement between Democratic politicians and unions is especially illuminating. Generally speaking, there is a confluence of interest between unions (especially public-sector ones like the SEIU) and Democratic politicians. The unions help elect Democrats, who help maintain and enhance union power, which enables them to help elect Democrats, and so on.

 

Yet confluent interests are not identical ones. Politicians are interested in winning elections; unions are interested in acquiring and maintaining power; and for each, helping the other is a means to an end.

 

In the proposed 501©(4) regulations, the Democrats evidently see an opportunity to help win elections (or at least lose fewer of them) this fall.

 

The unions see a precedent that could pose a long-term threat to their interests.

[3rdnlng]

Lois Lerner recalled to testify before Issa's committee:

 

http://dailycaller.c...-irs-targeting/

 

It would appear that her options all suck.

Edited February 28, 2014 by 3rdnlng

[keepthefaith]

Lois Lerner recalled to testify before Issa's committee:

 

http://dailycaller.c...-irs-targeting/

 

I would appear that her options all suck.

 

I put the chances of her disclosing anything meaningful at about 10%. What are they going to do if her attorney's position is that she has not waived her 5th amendment rights? Even if she talks she may withhold the truth or simply say she cannot recall things. These hearings (including fast and furious, Benghazi, and others) have no teeth because witnesses routinely don't answer truthfully or fully and there is no downside. Nobody gets cuffed in contempt or ever is prosecuted for perjury. That and Issa and the rest don't ask the questions that get to the heart of these matters. They leave opportunity on the table.