House vote pending to hold Lois Lerner in contempt

The right not to self-incriminate means that you don't have to give any testimony by which you point the finger at yourself. Did Lois Lerner give up that right when, in her initial testimony before Congress, she gave an opening statement but then refused to answer questions? Darrell Issa clearly thinks so, and his committee is about to conduct a vote that would hold her in contempt of Congress:

---

Last year, Lerner appeared before the committee, gave an opening statement, and then invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination three times before being excused. She returned again last month and spoke even less, once again exercising her Fifth Amendment rights. Democrats convinced Darrell Issa can’t hold Lois Lerner in contempt, but . . . "Documents and testimony point to Lois Lerner as a senior IRS official responsible for conduct that deprived Americans of their rights to free speech and equal protection under our laws,” committee chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif, said in a statement. “Americans expect accountability and want Congress to do all it can to gather relevant evidence about what occurred and who was responsible so that this never happens again. Ms. Lerner’s involvement in wrongdoing and refusal to meet her legal obligations has left the Committee with no alternative but to consider a contempt finding.”

---

---

If contempt for Congress is a crime, about 95 percent of this country needs to get fitted for orange jump suits and handcuffs. They can take this vote all they want, but it's still on them (or a federal prosecutor if they want to go that route) to come up with the evidence that Lerner did what she's accused of doing. It doesn't sound like it would be too difficult, but I seriously question the value of this vote. If anything, it gives Lerner and her attorneys the opportunity to mount a defense that might stand a ghost of a chance. Are people really incensed that someone is in "contempt of Congress"? Why not just focus on proving she mis-used the IRS for the political benefit of Barack Obama, which she clearly did? And that brings us to the real parties who ought to be found in contempt - of the Constitution and of the American people. We'll start with Obama himself, who arrogantly declared that the IRS scandal involves "not even a smidgen of corruption" even as the person in the middle of it was taking the Fifth so as not to incriminate herself. And then the news media, which decided last summer that the scandal had "fizzled" and that it was no longer interested. Now that it's clear the IRS was absolutely harassing conservative groups, and that Lois Lerner was one of the driving forces behind it, the scandal still gets almost no coverage in the MSM because they've settled on the narrative that it's not a scandal and that's that. The government can pretty much do whatever it wants to you if the people who are supposed to hold them accountable don't care to do so. And if you're a Tea Party member or an individual who lost your health insurance, these days they would rather attack you.

---