Patterico's Pontifications

5/22/2013

Point, Counterpoint

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 4:12 pm



96 Responses to “Point, Counterpoint”

  1. skank has no sense of honor whatsoever –

    the fascist persecution of her fellow americans what she helped facilitate has thoroughly compromised the relationship between citizens and their government

    she owes people every bit of explanation she can provide, even if it means turning on our fascist and deeply corrupt food stamp whore president

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  2. Float… float on, Ms. Lerner…

    Colonel Haiku (455265)

  3. So with her atty allowing that opening statement that may have at least partially voided her ability to plead the fifth, is that boutique law firm with unusually close ties to the White House there to help her– or help her get thrown under the bus?

    elissa (cb940d)

  4. I would say the latter, unless they are going for reversable error on appeal.

    narciso (3fec35)

  5. What Gowdy said sounded good to me, but it’s apparently wrong.

    At an inquiry, where appearance is mandatory as opposed to a trial where a defendant taking the stand is optional, taking the fifth selectively is done all the time. Or that’s what Hot Air says citing New York magazine Which, come to think of it, doesn’t make any sense that the Congress Critters wouldn’t know this.

    First, unlike in a trial, where she could choose to take the stand or not, Lerner had no choice but to appear before the committee. Second, in a trial there would be a justifiable concern about compromising a judge or jury by providing them with “selective, partial presentation of the facts.” But Congress is merely pursuing information as part of an investigation, not making a definitive ruling on Lerner’s guilt or innocence.

    “When somebody is in this situation,” says Duane, a Harvard Law graduate whose 2008 lecture on invoking the Fifth Amendment with police has been viewed on YouTube nearly 2.5 million times, “when they are involuntarily summoned before grand jury or before legislative body, it is well settled that they have a right to make a ‘selective invocation,’ as it’s called, with respect to questions that they think might raise a meaningful risk of incriminating themselves.”

    In fact, Duane says, “even if Ms. Lerner had given answers to a few questions — five, ten, twenty questions — before she decided, ‘That’s where I draw the line, I’m not answering any more questions,’ she would be able to do that as well.” Such uses of selective invocation “happen all the time.”

    Anyone have the straight dope?

    Former Conservative (105295)

  6. Issa had no clue.
    Who did he blow to get to where he is?

    mg (31009b)

  7. She walked into a perjury trap. She asserted her innocence under oath and DID NOT put that part under the fifth. When the inevitable underling whistle blower comes out, she will go to jail for perjury. She should have STFU but they are so arrogant.

    RICO here we come ! She bet her pension there.

    Mike K (dc6ffe)

  8. Issa is tough as nails and has been the target of lots of harassment. He is rich and immune to the threats. He has already been there.

    Mike K (dc6ffe)

  9. What I remember about Issa is that he broke into tears when Schwarzenegger announced that he would run for governor after Issa had engineered Gray Davis’s recall.

    Former Conservative, I believe what you quote in your comment is the straight dope.

    nk (875f57)

  10. This seems to the most recent state Precedent

    http://law.justia.com/cases/indiana/court-of-appeals/1999/06309904-msm.html

    narciso (3fec35)

  11. She did walk into a perjury trap but she was not caught in it and walked back out. She is entitled to her opinion of her innocence.

    I very much doubt that Taylor did not know exactly how it would play out before he let her walk in there. There had to be, had to be, conversations between him and the committee’s counsel and very likely Issa.

    nk (875f57)

  12. Hate to burst bubbles here, but nobody gets convicted of perjury just because they say the words “I did nothing wrong,” and then it’s later proved that they did do something wrong.

    Icy (d259a5)

  13. “She did walk into a perjury trap but she was not caught in it and walked back out. She is entitled to her opinion of her innocence.”

    Yeah, I was about to say something along those lines. If she had asserted she did or didn’t do a specific thing she didn’t or did do, that would be different.

    Former Conservative (105295)

  14. lol Icy, yes.

    Former Conservative (105295)

  15. That’s interesting, narciso. And yet I think it’s different when it’s required testimony at a committee. At least that’s what the info I posted above said.

    Former Conservative (105295)

  16. FWIW, According to Politico she stunned Issa and the committee with her defiant and unexpected opening statement rather than simply invoking her intention to take the fifth as her attorney had informed them the day before she would.

    elissa (cb940d)

  17. she is not a good american that’s for sure

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  18. elissa, could that explain why the committee, or Gowdy and now Issa, blustered about forcing her testify when they probably can’t?

    Former Conservative (105295)

  19. Either the Democrats are playing offense and playing it well, or Lerner saw she was being thrown under the bus and decided not to take it without a fight. My guess is the former.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  20. Circus time – more “legs” for this story.

    Alan Dershowitz take can be read here:

    http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/lerner-irs-held-contempt/2013/05/22/id/505922

    So, evidently, she’ll get another day on Capital Hill. Since the WH has played most of the cards in the deck, the only big one left is the War on Women.

    cedarhill (e872d5)

  21. FWIW, I’m not sure it matters what the law is as much as the PR value for both sides. I think Lerner “won” by being able to claim she did nothing wrong in her statement, only to immediately claim her Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate herself. Her statement muddied the water enough that the average person would tune out the fact she plead the Fifth.

    But I also think Lerner’s tactic gave Issa an excuse to bring her back and force her to invoke the Fifth again, probably with more questions, which could be a win for him, too. Answering 20-30 relevant questions by pleading the Fifth may be harder for the public tune out.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  22. Also, I think this would have been a clear waiver if it happened in a court. Maybe there are different rules for Congressional testimony but I haven’t researched that, so I can’t say.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  23. Chairman Issa wasn’t ready for Elijah Cummings’ request for unanimous consent to include written responses from the IRS to the committee’s questions in the official record. Although Cummings had received the responses and wanted them in the record, Issa and the majority members had not received them.

    Issa was off balance right from the start.

    ropelight (167d4e)

  24. The thing about people who are dishonest is that they are dishonest.

    Who knows. maybe if she is told she forfeited her opportunity to plead the fifth so answer questions or go to jail, she will then accuse her lawyer of giving inadequate counsel.

    Is she still at the IRS? She should be fired if she can’t answer questions concerning her job. Of course, others have said this already.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  25. Okay, I admit this is a bizarre theory but sometimes tin-foil theories can be fun.

    We know Lerner announced yesterday (or maybe 2 days ago) that she was pleading the Fifth. After that, the White House may have promoted a story through the JournoList reporters that Lerner should be the target and she has to go.

    Is it possible Lerner decided she wants an excuse to testify because she doesn’t want to be the scapegoat? But she knows she can’t simply change her mind about testifying because it could appear she was blaming others out of spite to protect herself, instead of because her story is true. In other words, might she want to put herself in the position of being forced to testify?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  26. FWIW I really, really think that my last comment is bunk. I think Lerner wanted to protect her reputation by giving an opening statement that said she did nothing wrong, hoping it might divert people from the fact she plead the Fifth. Perhaps her attorney talked about the risks but knew he had a legal argument that she could do it, so she did.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  27. I respectfully disagree, DRJ. It would be as absolute as you make it sound in a criminal case where the defendant voluntarily takes the stand on his own behalf. But for instances where the witness is compelled to testify, the Fifth Amendment of necessity is selective. “Mr. nk did you witness the auto accident?” “Yes.” “What were you doing at the time?” “I was robbing the bank across the street”. ? No, I don’t think I should say that. One question where the Fifth does not apply, one where it does.

    nk (875f57)

  28. I type slow. My 29 was to your 24, DRJ.

    nk (875f57)

  29. “Also, I think this would have been a clear waiver if it happened in a court. Maybe there are different rules for Congressional testimony but I haven’t researched that, so I can’t say.”

    “When somebody is in this situation,” says Duane, a Harvard Law graduate whose 2008 lecture on invoking the Fifth Amendment with police has been viewed on YouTube nearly 2.5 million times, “when they are involuntarily summoned before grand jury or before legislative body, it is well settled that they have a right to make a ‘selective invocation,’ as it’s called, with respect to questions that they think might raise a meaningful risk of incriminating themselves.”

    I agree with nk. Seems clear.

    Former Conservative (105295)

  30. Who knows. maybe if she is told she forfeited her opportunity to plead the fifth so answer questions or go to jail, she will then accuse her lawyer of giving inadequate counsel.

    And all that will get her is a cause of action for malpractice, and no more. Not relief from her legal consequences.

    nk (875f57)

  31. Feets posted an interesting link to NPR over on the Journlist thread that also pertains to this discussion. There seem to be conflicting narratives at play around Lois and her troubles.

    elissa (cb940d)

  32. “Issa had no clue.
    Who did he blow to get to where he is?”

    mg – You are a parody commenter, correct?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  33. she needs to shut up about this fifth amendment nonsense and tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may instead of behaving like a cowardly fascist government employee

    she would feel better about herself i think

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  34. Mr. mg is staunch Mr. daley

    unlike this Lerner hooch he is a friend of liberty and a good american

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  35. You forget who you’re dealing with, pikachu.

    narciso (3fec35)

  36. “Mr. nk did you witness the auto accident?” “Yes.” “What were you doing at the time?” “I was robbing the bank across the street”.

    Thinking about it, the first question deserves Fifth Amendment protection too. It places me at the scene of a crime, even though the crime is not in the least the issue in the proceeding in which I’m testifying.

    This is fun. Where’s Leviticus?

    nk (875f57)

  37. she needs to shut up about this fifth amendment nonsense and tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may instead of behaving like a cowardly fascist government employee

    she would feel better about herself i think

    happyfeet, yesterday I said:

    “Fine, Beldar. I understand that.”

    “But she has a responsibility to the people for the truth. It speaks volumes about her character if she chooses your course of action.”

    “Her attorney doesn’t own her, Steve57. Integrity is an option … which she is eschewing.”

    “You would think answering Congress’s questions would be her job or something.”

    So I get your point. Ain’t gonna happen. She ain’t you nor I.

    Former Conservative (105295)

  38. still it bears mentioning Mr. Former Conservative I think because her comportment is dishonorable on the face of it – and in quite the same way as so many others involved in this fiasco

    and our media, they won’t even toy with this idea

    cause of they are likewise dishonorable too

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  39. +1 happyfeet

    Former Conservative (105295)

  40. You can tell that this law firm representing her is tied to the White House by the incompetent work they do.

    SPQR (768505)

  41. 34-daleyrocks, just a sad effort of describing a questionable servant of the people.

    mg (31009b)

  42. The absolutely last thing that will be believed in this fiasco, SPQR, is that William Taylor III is incompetent.

    nk (875f57)

  43. But I also think Lerner’s tactic gave Issa an excuse to bring her back and force her to invoke the Fifth again, probably with more questions, which could be a win for him, too. Answering 20-30 relevant questions by pleading the Fifth may be harder for the public tune out.

    DRJ, I think that might be a worthwhile strategy for the GOP committee members. Bring her back, and ask her some questions that are already a matter of record:

    “Ms. Lerner, when did you become aware of the targeting of Tea Party groups?”

    and see if she answers. If she invokes the Fifth at every question, even the Obama-deluded media will have to report on her complete unwillingness to cooperate, and acknowledge that it makes her look like she has something to hide. On the other hand, if she is willing to provide answers to the basic questions, then start building up to the more interesting questions:

    “Ms. Lerner, did you specifically ask Celia Roady to publicly ask you about this matter at the May 9 panel meeting that both of you attended?”

    and see if she is willing to answer this level of question or take the Fifth. If she continues to play along, then go for the heart of the matter:

    “Ms. Lerner, did you ever tell anyone at the White House about the targeting of conservative groups prior to May 9?”

    and so on. Let’s see how guilty she is willing to look in front of the cameras.

    JVW (23867e)

  44. 36-Mr. happyfeet- same to you, sir.

    mg (31009b)

  45. nk:

    It would be as absolute as you make it sound in a criminal case where the defendant voluntarily takes the stand on his own behalf.

    That’s what I was referring to. In that instance, I think it would clearly be a waiver. I understand and agree it’s not the same as this situation, and I defer to your experience in the case of compelled testimony.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  46. nk,

    It is fun to think about. Earlier, I was thinking about cases where defendants voluntarily testify but let’s take the more analogous situation where a defendant is compelled to testify.

    Can a defendant testify in court that she didn’t do something, and then refuse to answer questions about what she did by pleading the Fifth? Wouldn’t that be a waiver?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  47. thanks nk at response at #32
    thanks narciso for the Volokh link

    I guess a lot of smart and knowledgable people have some dissagreement

    I guess she wanted to get in a definitive “I’m innocent of wrongdoing, including of any of the charges some of you people here have claimed” and then plead the 5th, kind of an extended “I plead innocent”; but then she pushes the issue a bit when she says, “In addition, members of this committee have accused me of providing false information when I responded to questions about the IRS processing of applications for tax exemption.
    I have not done anything wrong. I have not broken any laws. I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations, and I have not provided false information to this or any other congressional committee.

    That is certainly on the edge of directly addressing specific issues of fact.
    I have seen her actions characterized as “defiant”.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  48. This is wild. And very interesting. From my cursory review of the internet this evening well known lawyers are all over the map with respect to Lerner’s potential vulnerability after her statement that immediately preceded her application of the fifth amendment –and what Issa’s future options are.

    Here’s Volokh for instance:

    http://www.volokh.com/2013/05/22/can-a-congressional-witness-deny-guilt-and-then-plead-the-fifth/

    “The tricky part is how to characterize Lerner’s testimony before she invoked the Fifth Amendment. On one hand, if you say that Lerner merely expressed her view that she is innocent but did not actually testify as to any facts, then you could say she did not waive her rights with her statement. Questioning would not be about the details of facts she already testified to, but rather would require her testimony on a subject she declined to testify about. On the other hand, if you say that Lerner’s reciting the allegations and then denying them effectively testified about the allegations, then you could say that she did testify and did waive her rights. From that perspective, she already testified about “the subject” by saying that she did not violate any IRS rules or submit false testimony, and further questioning would be about the details of why she thinks that.”

    elissa (628348)

  49. McCarthy doesn’t take kindly to this whole exercise;

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/349110/fifth-obama-andrew-c-mccarthy

    she misled from the first instance of this case, why do we expect she would do anything different.

    narciso (3fec35)

  50. nk, I believe that he is.

    SPQR (768505)

  51. Trey Gowdy on the committee is a former federal prosecutor. I should think he would be a resource to Issa on these matters–not as the committee’s official counsel, but at least in dealing with unexpected things real time as they come up during the hearing.

    elissa (628348)

  52. Well, at least my questions from last night were not completely stupid.

    If Ms. Lerner continues to take the fifth tomorrow, it would indicate that she knows things that her betters have told her not to say.

    She is the current scapegoat to deflect from the President. She has to know it by now.

    She is being hanged out to dry just as Kathryn Ruemmler, thanks to the White House meeting yesterday with the Journolist guys. I emphasize guys.

    Talk about a war on women, I think that the Dems have it perfected.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  53. Can a defendant testify in court that she didn’t do something, and then refuse to answer questions about what she did by pleading the Fifth? Wouldn’t that be a waiver?

    That would be a waiver and a judge would not allow a defendant to even take the stand if he was so advised beforehand. Our Governor Blagojevich is said to have attempted that — to testify on one of the charges and take the Fifth on the others. It made him look bad in the end because his lawyers had told the jury that he would testify in the opening statement.

    nk (875f57)

  54. Thanks again narciso for andy mcCarthy’s thoughts

    I’m inclined to think that since Issa is not an experienced courtroom lawyer, nor prone to dishonesty and weaselness, he was caught off guard by this head fake.

    But i guess there is enough of a question that he has reason to get her up again and make her plead the 5th to a series of questions that do not put her in a good light.

    And, um, she should be fired.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  55. And by “being hanged out to dry” you mean that she’s in line for a cabinet post; am I right?

    Icy (632983)

  56. The Indiana case narciso linked in his Comment 10 seems to be right on the money for a non-party witness. The questions and the potentially incriminating nature of the answer should each be examined separately.

    BTW, I don’t really have a lot of experience with something like this. I did have one particularly sordid case, involving embezzlement, where the embezzlers claimed that they did it to get the money to pay my client who was blackmailing them. The victim attempted to depose my client in the civil suit. We showed up but my client never opened his mouth except to state his name. We objected on the basis of the Fifth, and the Ninth and Fourteenth, on every other question.

    nk (875f57)

  57. “Mr. mg is staunch Mr. daley”

    Mr. Feets – Just like Mr. vanilla dick popsicle lover Mr. Pink, NTTAWWT. I think he’s more of a parody, just like your insouciant misjudgements of people, IMHO. Why would you compare him to Ms. Lerner?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  58. I made this point on a different thread, but in one regard the Dems already have us beat. The topic has switched from the sleazy behavior at the IRS — perhaps abetted by the White House and/or DNC — and is now about somewhat esoteric issues of Constitutional law which most non-lawyers are going to tune-out.

    JVW (23867e)

  59. The facts she presented were the times she was the gal in charge at the IRS special claims office.

    I would have continued questioning her on that.
    Who hired you? Where do they work now? What sort of performance grades did they give her? Was she paid bonus money. Did she hire or do performance marks on other employees at the special claims office?

    And then when she doesn’t answer. Contempt of Congress?

    I tell you what. After that video , I want to give the back of Lois’ head a smack.

    What are the rules on that? If Darrell went over and gave Ms Lerner a nice firm bell ringing on behalf of most of America?

    ?

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  60. JVW, not really. “Fifth Amendment” sinks into the public’s consciousness.

    SPQR (768505)

  61. And by “being hanged out to dry” you mean that she’s in line for a cabinet post; am I right?

    Oh, don’t be so cynical, Icy. There is no cabinet post in the offering. Ms. Lerner will be joining Sandra Fluke on the lecture circuit as they travel to college campuses to tell feminist groups how mean the GOP is to accomplished professional women.

    JVW (23867e)

  62. Then again, Mr. Feets, you know from staunchiness cuz of you set the gold standard and stand watch.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  63. Hope you are right, SPQR, but you have much more faith in the American public than I do.

    JVW (23867e)

  64. JVW, Fluke gets audiences you can count on one hand.

    SPQR (768505)

  65. Well, if the person who gets the most applause wins, it is rep. Gowdy, so that’s good.

    After seeing how the FEC under Lerner was obsessed with questioning about the content of people’s prayers. I’m inclined to think she had to be in the thick of it at the IRS. There can’t be that many people in govt. that try to get people on inappropriate prayer content.
    I imagine there are many folk who look down their noses at people who pray, but I doubt too many make it a matter of questioning.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  66. Mr. daley a parody is just a friend you haven’t had a chance to have a drink with and talk about how sad it is, what’s happened to our little country

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  67. i’m the staunchest one my mom always said of all her kids i was the one she could always count on to stand up for individual liberty and personal freedom plus the constitution

    that may not be an exact quote but pretty close

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  68. But did you eat all your vegetables and say your prayers every night, happyfeet?

    nk (875f57)

  69. “34-daleyrocks, just a sad effort of describing a questionable servant of the people.”

    mg – Yeah, you’ve been trashing him for a while but never bother to explain why you view him as questionable.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  70. “Mr. daley a parody is just a friend you haven’t had a chance to have a drink with and talk about how sad it is”

    Mr. Feets – President Asterisk does that too – changes the common meaning of words to something other than people normally understand them to be. You should check your staunchiness meter is what I’m thinking.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  71. i usually cleaned my plate more than once Mr. nk

    but the prayers I messed up on sometimes cause I’d have my head in a book

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  72. mr. daley if everybody was staunch as me

    it would be glorious

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  73. ==You should check your staunchiness meter is what I’m thinking.==

    Traveling carnival season is coming up. I think there may be a booth for that.

    elissa (628348)

  74. JVW, Fluke gets audiences you can count on one hand.

    Hardly matters. The student radicals who control the student lecture committee still shell out the $25,000 honorarium for the joint appearance and the pliant lefty administrators rubber stamp it.

    JVW (23867e)

  75. You might could even win a teddy bear or sumpin Mr. Feets if the meter confirms you’re really staunch. But I’m a little dubious.

    elissa (628348)

  76. they see me coming they hide the teddy bears all i get anymore is crappy angry birds

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  77. Issa’s past is questionable, from car theft to arson, is he the type of top cop the republican party needs? I say no. Being rich and arrogant should not be a resume enhancer for conservatives.

    mg (31009b)

  78. “Issa’s past is questionable, from car theft to arson, is he the type of top cop the republican party needs? I say no. Being rich and arrogant should not be a resume enhancer for conservatives.

    Comment by mg (31009b)”

    You somehow omitted the links to your evidence. We’ve seen this already last year from Obama and Harry Reid.

    Mike K (dc6ffe)

  79. he was gonna bring the car back after he got back from setting the fire

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  80. As to Lerner being fired, there is section 1203 of the IR code.

    (a) In General.–Subject to subsection (c), the Commissioner of Internal Revenue shall terminate the employment of any employee of the Internal Revenue Service if there is a final administrative or judicial determination that such employee committed any act or omission described under subsection (b) in the performance of the employee’s official duties. Such termination shall be a removal for cause on charges of misconduct.

    The rest is at the link.

    As I recall, she said more than that she was innocent. Ask Martha Stewart about perjury traps.

    Mike K (dc6ffe)

  81. See, she meant to invoke her 4th Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure of her files — but math is hard for her, and so she countsed ones too many.

    Icy (632983)

  82. food stamp is letting this hooch twist in the wind

    food stamp don’t care bout you baby

    and the sooner you understand that the sooner your piggy little fascist eyes is gonna open up and the light of truth will set you free

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  83. who knows babycakes you might could end up winning yourself an angry bird

    you just gotta be staunch and do the right thing

    it’s not too late for you

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  84. atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com, Pamela Geller, May 22, 2013: Did you ever wonder why the FEC (Federal Election Commission) never took any action on all the charges about Obama’s eligibility and foreign campaign donations? Longtime Atlas readers remember the blockbuster stories I broke during the early summer 2008 on illegal contributions, foreign contributions, contributions from Hamas-controlled areas in Gaza, and non-existent donors. I documented it all in my book, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Adminstration’s War on America.

    I submitted everything to the FEC and David Keene, then Chairman of the ACU, but the FEC did nothing despite repeated inquiries.

    While everyone was concentrating on Lois Lerner’s Congressional testimony today, this little pearl went unnoticed… Before Lois Lerner got her current job at the IRS as head of the Tax-Exempt Division, she worked at the FEC as head of the Enforcement Division, where she had a rather contentious track record for targeting conservatives.… [T]here are reports of her politically motivated harassment of conservative groups, according to a May 20 report on “The Weekly Standard.”

    Lerner brought her skulduggery and utter disregard for the law to her new job with the IRS. Another Obama socialist and lawbreaker on the warpath using the full authority and power of the US government to terrorize and bully American citizens. Has any other person so singlehandedly influenced not just one, but two elections? Obama always rewards his lieutenants. Think Jarrett, Axlerod, Emanuel, Holder, ad nauseum.

    The government has been infiltrated by these Socialist Progressives and America haters who stuff themselves at the public trough while avoiding any accountability in their subversion of the law. The Obama years will be remembered most for their imperious lawlessness.

    Lerner got a bonus in the $150K range and has now been appointed to run the enforcement division of Obamacare. You just can’t make this stuff up. Remember, the IRS is armed and considered law enforcement.

    ^ Since far too many liberals in America are stupidly, irresponsibly, mindlessly Nidal-Hasan-izing this country, it will be the height of irony if they — of all people — should end up the unwitting victims of anti-Western terrorists (perhaps analogous to the anti-Mubarak liberals in Egypt — ie, the intellectuals who pray at the altar of progressive-do-gooder-ism — who opened the door to the Muslim Brotherhood).

    Oh, well, so be it. C’est la vie, baby.

    (Only problem is people with sanity and common sense in this society will have to suffer with all the rest.)

    Mark (a9437b)

  85. 64. And by “being hanged out to dry” you mean that she’s in line for a cabinet post; am I right?

    Oh, don’t be so cynical, Icy. There is no cabinet post in the offering. Ms. Lerner will be joining Sandra Fluke on the lecture circuit as they travel to college campuses to tell feminist groups how mean the GOP is to accomplished professional women.

    Comment by JVW (23867e) — 5/22/2013 @ 7:38 pm

    JVW is correct. We shouldn’t be so cynical and as the Ear Leader told those recent Ohio grads reject those voices that tell us that tyranny is just around the corner.

    There will be NO cabinet positions offered to Lois Lerner.

    How do I know with such certainty? Cabinet positions require Senate approval. So at most Lerner will get a plum ambassadorship.

    Steve57 (9b1cdb)

  86. “Being rich and arrogant should not be a resume enhancer for conservatives.”

    mg – You’re right, we need rich, arrogant, lawyers or something.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  87. 89. Mr. D., if the last Black Swan may be labelled ‘Lehman’ can we call this one ‘Lerner’?

    My querulous reading of zero hedge has me thinking we’ve entered the next ‘trouble’.

    Japan public bonds broke over 1% and everyone recognized Abe and co. are totally, irrevocably hosed, Nikkei halted, down 1% instantly. Dow futures following a down day cratering on volume.

    And hedges have perforce made the biggest bet against gold, ever.

    Geeeronimo!

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  88. @ Comment by Mark (a9437b) — 5/22/2013 @ 9:37 pm

    So MS. Lerner has done nothing but wrong in her professional life.

    I seriously doubt she is capable of seeing the light ala @ Comment by happyfeet (8ce051) — 5/22/2013 @ 9:24 pm.

    Totally comfortable with her seeing the inside of a jail cell for the rest of her natural existence.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  89. daleyrocks- Issa has that covered.
    Will Issa blame his brother after all these investigations sour?
    Or maybe he runs for president with boobio.

    mg (31009b)

  90. What’s also surreal about this whole fiasco (besides the extremely obvious points) is that demographically so many of Obama’s most ardent supporters don’t pay any federal income taxes. So besides reflexively wanting to defend him come what may this sort of scandal doesn’t register with them, since they don’t have skin in the tax game.

    Either they don’t work, are they’re still in school as full-time student-brats, or they’re on disability, or they’re below the threshold of paying taxes in light of the EIC and other forms of credits and deductions and exemptions, or long ago they retired and they either simply stopped filing tax returns or they’re below the tax threshold. All part of the big political decline towards Idiocracy.

    William Scalia (89a442)

  91. “Will Issa blame his brother after all these investigations sour?”

    mg – Look to Media Matters again for your answers.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  92. “89. Mr. D., if the last Black Swan may be labelled ‘Lehman’ can we call this one ‘Lerner’?”

    gary – Collectively the recent scandals have broken through the Democrat media protection bubble. The IRS targeting scandal shows people being punished for the thought crime of disagreeing with the progressive agenda or President Obama, although I doubt the left sees it that way. We’ve seen the Administration punish thought crime in media by discriminating against media outlets, suppressing scientific findings, demonizing opponents and segments of the population throughout Obama’s time in office without much if any reaction in part because the media refused to report accurately. It remains to be seen whether the protection bubble bursting will be temporary or permanent.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  93. Patterico’s Pontifications » Point, Counterpoint

    griselda SveaBlogg.se (fea3be)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1141 secs.