Lois Lerner To Testify Without Immunity Weds. 3-5-14 (IRS Scandal)

Who knows. She will either make a deal or take off, I would think.

There seems to be this big hang-up on whether or not conservative groups were unfairly targeted by the IRS. It's got both "sides" buzzing and that is what the national attention is focused on. But as is the norm, while everyone is focused on the right hand, nobody recognizes what the left hand is doing...

INFORMATION LAUNDERING. If there really is a scandal here, this is what it is.

Citizens United was a potentially game changing ruling by the SCOTUS a few years ago. Any google search of "IRS scandal" will yield countless articles from every source under the sun and the majority of those articles will reference this ruling as part of the story. But the funny part is that NONE of those articles actually take the time to digest what's sitting right in front of their faces. How does the DNC counteract the financial support given to the RNC by corporate America? Simple. They expose that corporate sponsorship by counter ads and through media pundits. Citizens United changed that by allowing 501c4 non-profits to engage in the political process WITHOUT revealing their donors. Big problem if you're running for Representative of a district and your opponent is getting support from several different 501c4s and those 501c4s are getting a bunch of corporate support for ads and other activity to benefit "their guy".

It really is unfair to Democrats and they knew the implications of this ruling the instant it went down. Remember the 2010 State of the Union Address when Obama ripped the, seated front and center, Supreme Court? This was the ruling that he ripped them for. The game changed as a result of this ruling. Because there was now a pipeline for corporate America(and really any entity in the world, right, left, or anywhere in between) to donate to the political process with anonymity, the strategy of "exposing the funding" was rendered moot.(at least as 501c4s were concerned)

This brings us to the process of becoming a 501c4. Anyone that wants to file this way can but they have to fill out an application and get approval. What is being focused on so intensively right now is the way that those applications were handled. Many applicants are claiming they were subjected to undue delays, required to provide excessive amounts of detailed information, and a number of other "discriminatory" charges. It is my belief that the truth is dangling right in front of everyone's face and it just isn't registering. All information about donors is contained right in those applications.(Remember the testimony of some groups that they were subjected to questing that was unfairly detailed?) Many of those applications had not yet been approved but the applicants were free to operate as 501c4s until they were denied. So, if there's some group out there like "citizens for liberty"(fictitious example) running adds against same sex marriage there isn't a damn thing "the other side" can do about it. They might SUSPECT that the funding for those adds is coming from some large "right wing" source but because the group running the add is a 501c4, OR HAS APPLIED as a 501c4, they can't get conformation from the IRS about the funding source.(unless someone at the IRS leaks it to them)

Before Citizens United, 501c4s had to provide a separate list of donors for political activity. Citizens United changed that. I believe a strategy was taken by "those sympathetic to the cause" to provide the information that was legally available before Citizens United to "those who sought it". That information could then be taken and spread out in a variety of different ways on the internet until it gained enough traction that mainstream media outlets would pick it up. What came from an illegal "leak" is suddenly laundered. INFORMATION LAUNDERING. You could ALMOST say that this was justified because this information was freely available prior to the Citizens United ruling. But justified or not, under the eyes of the law IT IS ILLEGAL.

THIS is the ballgame on the IRS scandal.

She'd rather go to jail than be an American.

How about the USA implement consumption taxation like every other nation in the world and get rid of all of this bullshit?

That would be great, IMO.

But first I'd like to see this scandal get busted wide open. When you look at this thing in context, from the day of the Citizens United ruling and the Presidents reaction to it, you can't tell me that this wasn't an orchestrated strategy to negate it's effects on the 2012 election.

It would take many years of legal proceedings and her lose at every turn for her to ever end up in jail for contempt.
Its not as easy as the chairman says.
Most legal experts are saying she has not given up her right to immunity and a court would recognize that immediately.

I don't know Davvi for certain. I looked up those Lerners that started all of those stores, would have been 2 generations back - 2 brothers. Can't find out much with so little information. (One of those brothers was married 8 times - can you imagine?)

Anyway.

Regarding her testimony? Will it be held out 'in private'? I have seen nothing on the c-span schedule, for example, for March.

Just wondering how many of you are aware that the only chance of her getting jail time is for contempt of congress. You see, congress can get her locked up for that. But, Eric Holder is the one who has to charge Lerner for the IRS scandal.

Now she could have been charged by him already, but hasn't been. Considering that this scandal likely goes all the way up to the WH, and this entire admin is corrupt as heck, what are the chances that she will be charged?

The final option is a long and drawn out federal court case. Depressing, isn't this? Now you see why this has been taking so long in congress.

When is this testimony scheduled for tomorrow?

Never checked since why bother. She is asking for an extra week since 9 months wasn't enough. And Gowdy said that he wouldn't turn her down. :(


She is very worried about death threats if she testifies. I say lock her up in protective custody then.

OIC.

Wasn't looking but bumped into this... March 5th at 9:30am

Did ya get my message that I can't reply to emails?

She claimed the 5th in front of Issa but Trey Gowdy of S.Carolina called her out on it.
and said prior to her from the room stated (short paraphrase) her 5th didn't apply, and "she out to stay here & asnwer our question". it's a video clip you'll find it, it's not too difficult. Gowdy is a pretty cool guy & muy inteligente

She started her testimony, then pleaded the 5th.

Most countries with a consumption tax also have an income tax. France, Japan, Germany, the UK, most of them.

They're not mutually exclusive.

A witness may have a reasonable fear of prosecution and yet be innocent of any wrongdoing. The 5th amendment serves to protect the innocent who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances.

And these are pretty ambiguous circumstances.

Knuckle under to Issa's inquisition?

She was called as a witness, not a defendant. As a defendant, she can refuse to testify and waives her 5th amdnement rights upon beginning her testimony.

As a witness, she can pick and choose:

Sounds to me like Issa is trying to strong arm her. And she's not cooperating.

Her and her attorney are trying to strong arm Issa for immunity. Why? Because she is innocent, right?

Anyways, the impressions seems to be that she wants an extra week to push harder for immunity.

Regardless of what happens, last year a record was set for people not filing their tax returns. I'm willing to bet that this year beats last... especially with that obamacare crap added in.

Got booted the other day for calling Issa a liar
and saying that Lerner would plead the 5th and
not be jailed.
I was right and whoever kicked me was WRONG!!!!