Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
In the factor follow up segment tonight you may remember -- a senior official lowest Lerner took the Fifth Amendment when she testified before congress last month.
About the political targeting scandal but today the -- -- oversight committee voted that she waived that privilege cause.
Because she made a brief statement before invoking the Fifth Amendment.
The resolution finding -- -- waived her Fifth Amendment privileges on May 22.
I'm not gonna make this more difficult to mention being.
It's just said I think that while we are dealing with are very sensitive to this this this -- constitution.
Because I wouldn't be here if it was important.
Lowest Lerner is in fact the poster child.
For thumbing her nose -- federal bureaucrat thumbing her nose.
Lerner who is on paid administrative leave could be called back to the committee and be held in contempt.
If she refuses to testify with us now to analyze -- -- -- Is a democratic strategists -- right Joanna was dumped party lines they voted today said that she waived the privilege -- Dershowitz today on Dershowitz and esteemed Harvard law professor.
Said that she risks being held in contempt of congress for her actions.
He didn't think and it looks like there -- reason for her to invoke the Fifth Amendment but if she doesn't.
If she doesn't come back and testify.
She could fighters -- heap of trouble.
What -- defiance and contempt proceeding and remember it just for context the reason why she invoke the Fifth Amendment I think it's at least in part because.
Darrell Issa the chairman and accused -- -- crime so that should commit false statements.
And so then the question is the legal question answering questions once she protests or innocence remember unlike a courtroom -- in a congressional hearing you have to appear to invoke your fifth.
Amendment rights when -- protests here innocents have you waive that right.
Not was standing the comments of Alan Dershowitz I think the case slump particularly this one case in point the queen.
Case going back to 1950s would suggest that she didn't in that case you had.
A lot of conversation went back between the witness and the committee there and -- was held it the witness at that point did not waive the right.
June 2011 she first knew that these terms are going to be used to review these -- NC for Tea Party patriot and so forth.
And it wasn't until this year.
That she -- basically apologized.
Four this having happened under her watch.
She was giving a speech in -- meeting.
Want to take that long for her to realize that this is a bad thing to -- I think that's an excellent question and I certainly wouldn't defend that I think that the committee I think.
One thing you can say there there certainly is their license had earlier this week there's no evidence that point that attaches any of this to the White House.
-- the president's political stuff but I think it is a fair criticism to say.
As you point -- your question that once the white do the IRS staff knew about this -- were asked about it by congressional officials that they should have given all the information that they knew that.
We don't have all the answers to that to the question the US but I think that is a -- very relevant question.
And if in fact in June of 2011 she knew that there was targeting -- was target not just the sort of groups.
But some other groups as well as we weren't really this -- but if she knew of that and failed to disclose that I do think that that's a problem but.
IG was named.
The progressive view of word was used as a search term to again slow -- or slow walk.
It didn't -- delay.
-- any of these petitions so the idea that go to liberals are subjected to the same type of treatment.
That was the case in fact a lot of these liberal -- Scott -- got approval few I think were delayed a little bit.
But there there wasn't that kind of not equal burden being put on liberals vs cancer is I think that story got out that was not true story well I think.
I think -- you I would agree two -- of what you said I think it is here drink too much for the game there there there was.
About fifteen different lists.
Screening lists and some of them did include.
Liberal and progressive groups but for the most part.
The enhanced screening are editing was done on concern.
Hollywood parties doing well -- -- -- Spending a lavish spending at another guy and take affect the other winners and seriousness if you read the statute and a lot of these groups on the left and right you have never qualified for the status because they were -- I'll have to think about what like students who are -- and they always question that was very entries and I just got a I think they've lost so much credibility and to except for the IRS have much credibility plug the new IRS regulations on this event as well if you're his -- have a -- time and political and nobody.
You still qualify for the -- that's wrong as well enjoy -- good -- putting I had had the fact that.
Filter by section