“Immunity.” #irs #rumors

Let that word roll off of your tongue. It’s smooth. Silky. Rich. It’s a word that gets the attention of people like me… particularly when it’s brought up in the context of a government probe. And if this story checks out – big if, of course; rumors in This Town spawn like maggots on rotten meat* – then expect to hear that word coming to an Oversight Committee meeting near you:

IRS scandal figure Lois Lerner is negotiating through her lawyers with Rep. Darrell Issa’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee about possibly gaining immunity to testify again in the committee’s investigative hearings.

“The Chairman did not adjourn the hearing, he recessed it. Ms. Lerner remains under subpoena[**]. The Committee has not made any offer of immunity to Ms. Lerner. The Committee has, however, indicated a willingness to listen to any offers from her attorney about what she would testify to if it was offered,” Oversight Committee adviser Ali Ahmad told The Daily Caller.

As Public Secrets would no doubt agree, “immunity” lies at the intersection of fear and opportunity. I assume that it is beginning to dawn on various public officials that Darrell Issa – or somebody equally nosy – is likely to be Oversight Chair for some time longer than Barack Obama is going to be President. And that Obama doesn’t have any real interest in keeping too long a pardon list.

We’ll see how this goes.  No promises.  But Darrell Issa does enjoy his work.

Moe Lane

*Obligatory apologies to the maggots, of course.

**This clip never gets old.

5 thoughts on ““Immunity.” #irs #rumors”

  1. I’d still like to see the little fascist go to prison but it depends on what kind of info she has to offer and how verifiable the info is.

  2. Lois Lerner is a pretty big fish that seems to have spread her filthy bias against conservatives across multiple agencies over the years and broken laws for partisan purposes, I’d have to imagine that to get immunity she’d need to offer up a very, very large fish (Cabinet or White House staff level) with enough verifiable testimony to get a conviction.

  3. The main issue is whether she already gave up her 5th Amendment rights by making a self-serving statement. If she did, then there is no reason to negotiate: it is talk or contempt. If she did not, then she would be a damn fool to talk without immunity,

Comments are closed.