So where are all the IRS-Obama Scandle People now that the Truth is coming out?
- Thread starter piezoe
- Start date
Not exactly. Let me see if I can clarify my position. Under the Bill of Rights each of us has the right not to be forced to bear witness against ourselves. The supreme court has interpreted that right broadly, as I outlined in a prior post. The court held that the 5th amendment right not only covers the situation in which you would otherwise be incriminating yourself but also situations in which you have done nothing wrong but have a reasonable belief that you could be "ensnared" (and I believe that was precisely the courts language). This is most likely the reason for Lerner's attorney advising her to invoke her right. One has to consider the very real possibility that there was interference by certain congressmen in the IRS review of 501c(4) applications, and to testify to that before congress could put one in danger of reprisal or ensnarement. This in no way means that the Congress can not carry out their oversight responsibilities -- they have many ways to do that without Lerner's testimony-- and it also does not mean that she is exempt from oversight by her superiors in the chain of command at the IRS. If Congress's interest is in carrying out their oversight responsibilities, which it should be, they will simply grant her the kind of immunity she seeks. It appears, however, that she has a reasonable belief that Issa's committee, based on its conduct, is not interested in oversight or improving the IRS performance, but rather in mocking the IRS for purely political purposes and that she could potentially become "ensnared." She should, of course, under these circumstances invoke here 5th amendment right. Any competent attorney would advise their client likewise.
A government employee does not lose their 5th amendment right in testimony before a congressional committee. There are many precedents that have clearly established that fact.
There is one clear exception to one's being able to invoke their 5th amendment right that I'm aware of. As a condition of service, military personnel are required to give up their 5th amendment right with respect to military matters. I'm not aware of this ever having been tested in the Courts however.
I've noted that there is some question of whether she may have already inadvertently waived her 5th amendment right. But I don't know any details, and this is apparently a matter of legal debate. I read that Issa is looking into this as a way to compel Ms Lerner to testify. I suspect he would have to go to court for a ruling.
I, and the courts, emphatically disagree with your assertion that Ms Lerner invoking a Constitutional right amounts to "thumbing her nose" at congress. And, apparently, you have information I don't. I don't know yet of any grounds which would justify firing her, and in any case it wouldn't be Obama who would do that.
With regard to whether there is a law forbidding Union members who take the 5th from holding Union office, I should mention something that I would guess you are very much aware of, and that is that since the first days of the U.S.adopting a Constitution it's provisions have been ignored on many, many occasions, often highly visible occasions! (There is a book, the tile of which escapes me at the moment, by a Georgetown Law professor, on this very topic.)
The most glaring recent example of the Constitution being ignored was in Gore v. Bush. (The Constitution spells out a specific remedy for an inconclusive election. see Amendment XX , Section 3, adopted in 1933) Of Course all our recent wars are also glaring examples.
Our trampling on the BIll of Rights is a matter that concerns me greatly, and that is why I give a little money each month to BORDC, the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, who are fighting this. I suppose it could be wasted effort, but it makes me feel good to know I'm doing what I can.
By the way, I respect your right to hold an opinion different from mine and appreciate your viewpoint. I'll change my position on issues when an argument compels me to do so.
Jem, I pleased to see that you also would like to return to tracking. I too advocate returning to Tracking in the public schools. But of course all tracks have to offer something of value to the students and lead to either high quality vocational job training and basic education, or advanced college preparatory education with an opportunity to engage in vocational activities at a minor level.
That's what worked well into the 1960's.
The other major changes needed are an expanded head start program, small class sizes K through the fourth grade, and a gradual shifting of responsibility from the schools and teachers to the students, starting around the fourth grade. That's what worked well in the past. We should return to that kind of public education system.
Your are really stretching the word broad. Others do not have the privilege with respect to fear of reprisals... solely if their words might incriminate.
and
one very important piece.
The 5th amendment decisions have been applied to criminal investigations not Congressional.
The 5th amendment protections may not apply in front of congress.
The proper application of the 5th amendment imo would be the following....
Private citizens may invoke the 5th when compelled to testify before congress.
Govt employees working on govt matters may not invoke the 5th in front of Congress when Congress is looking into matters over which they have oversight. (similar to the military) You can't take the 5th when it was your job to serve the people and Congress is trying to find out about what happened on your job.
and
one very important piece.
The 5th amendment decisions have been applied to criminal investigations not Congressional.
The 5th amendment protections may not apply in front of congress.
The proper application of the 5th amendment imo would be the following....
Private citizens may invoke the 5th when compelled to testify before congress.
Govt employees working on govt matters may not invoke the 5th in front of Congress when Congress is looking into matters over which they have oversight. (similar to the military) You can't take the 5th when it was your job to serve the people and Congress is trying to find out about what happened on your job.
(unless your are talking about skipping a grade and then you are still going to running into the same problem in the next grade in elementary school.)
Not in the the schools systems I know. I ask a lot of people from all over.
Elementary school classrooms are all jumbled up and the teachers spend a lot of time teach the kids who need help with the language... need help with math etc.
some schools even keep the kids who hardly speak english in with the kids who are advanced.
There may be exceptions... in some states... but there are not many of them.
The unions and the dems are really dumbing down our elementary schools on purpose. That is why so many non dems are for school choice.
Not in the the schools systems I know. I ask a lot of people from all over.
Elementary school classrooms are all jumbled up and the teachers spend a lot of time teach the kids who need help with the language... need help with math etc.
some schools even keep the kids who hardly speak english in with the kids who are advanced.
There may be exceptions... in some states... but there are not many of them.
The unions and the dems are really dumbing down our elementary schools on purpose. That is why so many non dems are for school choice.
Two, at the minimum. Special Ed might be considered a third track. And for the incorrigible one can envision a very special track called "reform school"
Most of the programs for "gifted" kids -- a term I'm repelled by -- sprang up after tracking was ended. You don't really need these programs if you have proper tacking.
Seriously, any school system needs a way to occupy the incorrigible and disruptive. Problem students must not be put out on the streets. This is the problem of expelling students. They must be expelled into something other than sending them home which is the equivalent, in many cases, of putting them on the street.
Good words, Pie. When I was a kid we got whacked when we got out of line. Can't do that anymore.Quote from piezoe:
Two, at the minimum. Special Ed might be considered a third track. And for the incorrigible one can envision a very special track called "reform school"
Most of the programs for "gifted" kids -- a term I'm repelled by -- sprang up after tracking was ended. You don't really need these programs if you have proper tacking.
Seriously, any school system needs a way to occupy the incorrigible and disruptive. Problem students must not be put out on the streets. This is the problem of expelling students. They must be expelled into something other than sending them home which is the equivalent, in many cases, of putting them on the street.
Slower kids just got pushed back a year. It was a stigma so slower kids tried harder mostly with parent/teacher support.