House committee votes to hold Lois Lerner in contempt of Congress

[Ravi]

Can Republicans get any more ridiculous?

[Peter1469]

Can democrats get any more ridiculous?

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Bob
I once brushed this off as just petty squabbling. But by the looks of it, and once I heard more testimony, it is so bad she took the 5th.

And Cummings is angry as hell that democrats are being outed.

Bear in mind that they wanted Scooter Libby in prison for a hell of a lot less than what she did. Lois Lerner is only one rat. She got orders.

And Scooter didn't do anything. It was a Colin Powell lackey. And the prosecution knew that long before it decided to ruin Scooter. That SoB should have his law license violently ripped from him.

Exactly so. Richard Armitage confessed yet he never suffered. Libby said, I believe, that he misspoke. That he was not accurate as to where he heard it first.

Bush should have given him a full unconditional pardon. Cheney is still burned up over that.

Clinton lies under oath. No conviction at his trial. Goes on to getting very rich.

Libby? Law career over. I am not certain he can ever practice law again since he was charged in a federal court. Maybe Peter can explain it to us.

[Matty]

Can Republicans get any more ridiculous?

Whatever do you mean?

[keymanjim]

Can Republicans get any more ridiculous?

Yes. They can become democrats.

[1751_Texan]

You have 5th amendment law incorrect.

If you are questioned by police for a crime you can start giving a statement. Even write it down. But if you decide to take the 5th, your statement is done. It is not signed by you or the police. It isn't admissible (generally).

You can't stand up in court, or congress, and give a statement about your innocence and then refuse cross examination based on your 5th amendment rights.

Lerner is a criminal. Now we need to turn her into a rat, so we can find out who the bigger criminals are.

I never said give a statement...I said questioned.

You can't stand up in court, or congress, and give a statement about your innocence and then refuse cross examination based on your 5th amendment rights.

Since I know this is not part of the 5th amendment, and I don't recall ever reading this congressional right in the Constitution...what supreme court ruling affirmed this caveat?

[nathanbforrest45]

So, now they'll send this over to a justice department that is run by a person that is also in contempt of congress.

!

You don't wanna go there buddy!

[Peter1469]

I believe Libby lost his law license. But all states have ways to get it back, although it is up to the state bar.

Exactly so. Richard Armitage confessed yet he never suffered. Libby said, I believe, that he misspoke. That he was not accurate as to where he heard it first.

Bush should have given him a full unconditional pardon. Cheney is still burned up over that.

Clinton lies under oath. No conviction at his trial. Goes on to getting very rich.

Libby? Law career over. I am not certain he can ever practice law again since he was charged in a federal court. Maybe Peter can explain it to us.

[Ransom]

Can Republicans get any more ridiculous?

We shall find out in November.

[Bob]

I believe Libby lost his law license. But all states have ways to get it back, although it is up to the state bar.

Well, since it was a felony and Bush only commuted the prison part, leaving standing the fine of $250,000 if my recall is correct, the state Bars certainly must have rules covering that.

Bush should have pardoned him fully. I don't know what Bush was thinking about. He could have told us all that the court should not have tried that at all. It was too petty. The idea he got jail and a fine for being wrong as to who told him greatly offended me. It has been since it happened that I read the case and so forth but I defended him many times. --Scooter Libby, i mean.