[tomder55]

Hello again, tom:
In a sense, yes.

The reason WHY we have 5th Amendment rights in the first place, is so you can't be compelled to INCRIMINATE yourself.. But, if you've been promised that you WON'T be prosecuted for ANYTHING you say, NOTHING she could say WOULD incriminate her.

It's ELEMENTAL law. As a tool, it's been around for a LONG, LONG time. Hannity doesn't know that stuff. I do.

excon

And why should she be given immunity ? We are told that DOJ is currently pursuing investigations into IRS misconduct. I don't believe it ,but that's what we're told . So why would Congress give immunity to someone who may not be able to implicate anyone else ? That would be plain stupid. Be patient . She'll come around when she sees she's the only one thrown over the bus .

[excon]

Hello again, tom:

and why should she be given immunity ?

If you want legal information, ask ME. FAUX News isn't where you should go..

Look. The reason immunity is given, is because the prosecutors want BIGGER fish. I thought you wanted to nail Obama, or Holder, or SOMEBODY bigger than peon Lois Lerner. I thought this was about Obama targeting HIS enemy's.

I guess not.

You say she'll come around... DUDE!! She's retiring to Miami Beach to enjoy her will earned pension. Why, in Gods name, would she EVER come forward to exchange THAT life for a prison cell? DUDE, again!

Excon

[tomder55]

Hello again, tom:
If you want legal information, ask ME. FAUX News isn't where you should go..

Look. The reason immunity is given, is because the prosecutors want BIGGER fish. I thought you wanted to nail Obama, or Holder, or SOMEBODY bigger than peon Lois Lerner. I thought this was about Obama targeting HIS enemy's.

I guess not.

You say she'll come around..... DUDE!!! She's retiring to Miami Beach to enjoy her will earned pension. Why, in Gods name, would she EVER come forward to exchange THAT life for a prison cell?? DUDE, again!!

excon

You can end the constant reference to FOX .it's an irrelevant and bogus dig . I stand by the rest of my comment your didn't link to. "We are told that DOJ is currently pursuing investigations into IRS misconduct. I don't believe it ,but that's what we're told . So why would Congress give immunity to someone who may not be able to implicate anyone else ? That would be plain stupid. "
She'll come around if she sees that she's the one thrown under the bus ; the sacrificial lamb .

Back to Watergate... you know it and I know it that nothing would've happened to Nixon without the appointment of an independent prosecutor. There will be no accountability from the White House now as long as Holder is Att Gen. He has already declined to enforce the law against the Black Panthers in Philadelphia when they didn't even contest the charges. He has refused to investigate vote fraud allegations.He has refused to prosecute schemes to defraud federal entitlements . He has stonewalled Congress on the Fast and Furious . He declined to prosecute the IRS for leaking confidential taxpayer information on conservatives.
Her lawyer is telling her there is no way Eric Holder will authorize prosecutions that could shine a light on what really happened at the IRS. So long as she can outright refuse to cooperate with any proposed deal by Congress she will.

Edit . Yes I have more .
An immunity from Congress would not protect her from prosecution based on evidence already in the record .It would not protect her from prosecution for perjury . But Congress itself has no power to prosecute her. Congress can only refer the matter to DOJ.

[talaniman]

Looks like you guys have glitch of your own to overcome. Well its been 5 years and how many allegations of scandal and misconduct? You still got nothing. No wonder you think he is an emperor. No wonder the government is shut down even though the sequester level spending has been agreed to.

You want absolute destruction of your hated enemy, and victory over issues just won't do.

[smoothy]

The Clock on the statute of limitations hasn't started running yet... Holders days are numbered... as are everyone else that has been obstructing..

[tomder55]

The Clock on the statute of limitations hasn't started running yet... Holders days are numbered... as are everyone else that has been obstructing..

That won't happen either . American administrations do not go after criminal charges against previous ones. They have to be nailed in office. What we have here is a real constitutional crisis because the emperor has a Att General who will not perform his sworn duties.

[talaniman]

The Clock on the statute of limitations hasn't started runing yet.....Holders days are numbered...as are everyone else that has been obstructing..

Is that a promise to turn your loony's in?

[speechlesstx]

Looks like you guys have glitch of your own to overcome. Well its been 5 years and how many allegations of scandal and misconduct? You still got nothing. No wonder you think he is an emperor. No wonder the government is shut down even though the sequester level spending has been agreed to.

That's no glitch, it's a total lack of transparency, obstruction and refusal to do their worn duties by the regime.

You want absolute destruction of your hated enemy, and victory over issues just won't do.

And the irony still goes going right over your head.

FYI, you guys can pretend there's no "there" there all you want, it ain't over. Lerner and co. used private email accounts to transmit personal, protected, taxpayer data.

Senior Internal Revenue Service officials—including one at the heart of the IRS “targeting” scandal—violated agency policies and possibly federal records laws by using private email to send confidential taxpayer information, the GOP-led House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform said in a letter.

In a Sept. 30 letter to IRS Acting Commissioner Daniel Werfel obtained by the Free Beacon, Oversight Chairman Darrel Issa (R. Calif.) said an investigation revealed a “troubling pattern” of at least four top IRS officials using their private email addresses to relay confidential tax information.

“This not only raises the prospect of violations of the Federal Records Act but it also raises data security concerns and violates internal IRS policies,” Issa wrote to Werfel.

The committee discovered the emails while investigating the ongoing IRS scandal that began earlier this year when an official admitted that the agency targeted conservative groups during the 2012 election.

Lois Lerner, who headed the IRS’ tax-exempt division at the heart of the scandal, is one of the officials named in Issa’s letter.

Issa said the committee’s investigation produced more than 1,600 pages of emails and documents housed in Lerner’s nonofficial email account related to IRS business, including nearly 30 pages of confidential taxpayer information. Included in the material was a summary of an application for tax-exempt status the IRS instructed Lerner’s legal counsel to redact.

Lerner invoked her Fifth Amendment rights and refused to testify before the Oversight Committee earlier this year. She retired last month while an internal IRS probe was still ongoing, guaranteeing her a federal pension.

Among the other three officials named by Issa were IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, who stepped down following last year’s election.

Issa wrote that Judith Kendell, the senior technical adviser of the Exempt Organization Division, did not notify the IRS of work emails housed on her private account, despite a request by the agency to employees.

“According to the IRS, you did not inform the IRS that you had such documents housed in your non-official email,” Issa wrote. “The discovery of these documents suggest that you were not forthcoming to the IRS about documents related the Committee’s investigation in your personal possession.”

Issa said the committee’s findings suggest “such use is a systemic problem throughout the IRS.”

“This is also a concern to the committee because federal taxpayer information cannot be shared on nonsecure, nonofficial systems,” he wrote.

IRS policies prohibit employees from sending confidential taxpayer information through non-official channels. Federal statutes also strictly prohibit the IRS from releasing taxpayer information.

Additionally, federal employees are prohibited from using private email accounts to conduct official business, unless they copy their official accounts on such messages to ensure they are properly recorded.

- See more at: Darrell Issa: IRS Officials Sent Private Data Over Personal Email Accounts | Washington Free Beacon

No wonder Lerner took the fifth. But I get it, you true believers are OK the IRS violating the law as long as it's conservatives being targeted and an admission of guilt = no evidence, oddly enough.

[tomder55]

Very good. So its potential is universal. On this basis we can amend your original statement from "maybe in your countries" to "in all countries".

So that's what it's all about ? More quibbling nonsense .

[smoothy]

Is that a promise to turn your loony's in?

What loonies? OlonieBaba and his den of thieves?

[Tuttyd]

so that's what it's all about ? more quibbling nonsense .

Yes it is. It is the type of quibbling nonsense that invariably allows you to paint yourself into a corner.

[tomder55]

Fine ; I don't have the inclination to debate how many angels fit on the head of a pin .

[Tuttyd]

fine ; I don't have the inclination to debate how many angels fit on the head of a pin .

Well, why do you respond? Some people are starting to realize it is better to ignore my questions.

[Tuttyd]

I'm speechless.

Well, don't be. Say something.

[tomder55]

Well, why do you respond? Some people are starting to realize it is better to ignore my questions.

Because I think you may have something interesting to contribute

[Tuttyd]

because I think you may have something interesting to contribute

My apologies for the comments I made earlier about painting you into a corner.

[tomder55]

Who is Sarah Hall Ingram ? Hint the smoking gun moves closer to the White House.

[excon]

Hello again, tom:

Let me know when it gets there. Yaaaaawn.

excon

[tomder55]

It's closer than you admit. She's the reason why the WH will no longer post the Visitor's log.

[excon]

Hello again, tom:

it's closer than you admit.

You have NEVER listened to me.. IF Obama IS a crook, I WANT him in JAIL. I have NO problem with the congress going AFTER him. But, I'm NOT interested in the chase. I'm interested when they CATCH him.

Until then, YAWWWN.

Excon