The Tea Party continues to pursue lawsuits against the IRS regarding IRS bias against conservative groups.

Lois Lerner is scheduled to testify soon in response to one of the lawsuits. Her attorneys are arguing her testimony should not be made public.


http://www.cincinnati.com/stor...arty-case/101591538/

Details about tea party bias claims against the IRS could remain secret because current and former agency officials say their lives are in danger if they publicly testify about the case.

Lois Lerner and Holly Paz both have argued in recent court filings that the threat to their lives outweighs the public's right to hear their testimony about how IRS employees in Cincinnati and Washington D.C. handled applications for tax-exempt status from tea party groups.

They recently filed evidence to support their claim under seal in U.S. District Court in Cincinnati. Though that evidence has not been made public, court records indicate it relates to death threats and other harassment the women say they endured after their names were connected to the bias claims against the IRS several years ago.

"This documentation, as the court will see, makes very personal references and contains graphic, profane and disturbing language that would lead to unnecessary intrusion and embarrassment if made public," their attorneys argued in a recent court brief. "Public dissemination of their deposition testimony would put their lives in serious jeopardy."

Attorneys for the tea party groups suing the IRS say the argument against full disclosure doesn't hold up. They asked the court Wednesday to make the IRS officials' testimony public and to also open a May 19 hearing to the public.

Their arguments, like most documents in the case, are not publicly available because U.S. District Judge Michael Barrett ordered them filed under seal. The hearing on May 19 will address those issues, but it, too, is closed to the public.

Edward Greim, an attorney for the tea party groups, said he's not permitted to discuss the brief he filed under seal, but said the allegations against the IRS are serious and the public has a right to know what happened. The tea party groups expect Lerner and Paz to shed light on the issue when they testify in sworn depositions.

Lerner, the agency's former Exempt Organization Director, resigned over the scandal. Paz, who worked under her, was reassigned.

Paz has previously said the Cincinnati office, which is home to the IRS' nonprofit division, was overwhelmed by applications from conservative groups when the tea party movement began in 2009 and employees struggled with how to process so many applications.

In their written argument to Judge Barrett, attorneys for Lerner and Paz said the threats against the women should take precedent over public disclosure, which they argued is not necessary.

I cannot imagine why anyone would be the least bit upset with her behavior or the agency. Puzzle to me.

She needs to pay dearly for weaponizing the IRS against conservatives.

I don't want to minimize the impact of getting death threats, having gotten a couple myself, but these days, almost anyone who ends up in the public eye gets at least a few.

You just never know how take them.

I can't imagine that anyone from the Right would have any reason to issue death threats against these two. I'd think the Right would be more interested in having them tell their story. So that leaves who?

If she is getting threats she needs to buy herself a gun and learn to use it. And then when she is tried and convicted for weaponizing the IRS and becomes a felon she can gift it to a good home.

Nothing but horse shit. Man up, Lois.

You thought you were protected, Ms. Lerner?

How has this changed?

Oh, your personal role has become known.

I see.

How has this materially changed any fact related to your actions, which occurred in the past?

Your name is attached?

I see.

So, once it became known that you personally ordered the IRS to target certain groups, you became afraid that those affected might decide you used your position to further the political aims of those you support?

Well, Ms. Lerner, did you not plant the question that exposed your actions?

You did plant the question that exposed your actions? Really?

Then too motherfucking bad. Your testimony shall occur in open court. Refuse, and be jailed for contempt. And remember, the people in jail may not agree with what you did.

So you fear for your life now?

Too motherfucking bad. You should have thought of that long ago.

I hope someone caps that skanky bitch.

Ok Sigforum attorneys. What stops Lerner from simply showing up for her depo and claiming the fifth again?

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
Ok Sigforum attorneys. What stops Lerner from simply showing up for her depo and claiming the fifth again?

Not a thing I know of.

This isn't about whether they will testify or claim 5th Amendment, but whether it will be public, or under court seal.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
This isn't about whether they will testify or claim 5th Amendment, but whether it will be public, or under court seal.

And that was kinda my point. If she strolls in and takes the fifth again, whether in open court or behind closed doors, then nothing has really changed, and she hasn't said anything to rile anyone any more than they've been in the past. That said, I hope the judge puts her butt in a chair in front of people and cameras and makes her respond, one way or the other.

she can testify and pay the price, or she can hide and pay the price

one way or other that bitch will pay dearly for what she did

she's called 'Slow Lerner' for a reason, and she's not gotten any smarter

death threats? big fucking deal if that's the best she gets

After further review, the materials being argued about are deposition transcripts, testimony under oath as part of discovery before trial. That is what they object to being released to the public. She apparently has not refused to testify.

quote:

"Public dissemination of their deposition testimony would put their lives in serious jeopardy."

So she is claiming that the public, against whom she waged political jihad by using her govermental position of power to subjugate purely political enemies, has no right to see her testimony as it may endanger her life??

Should have thought of that before you decided to do the bidding of the left sweetie. Unless what you have to say is classified it ALL needs to be public record.

Was thinking the same thing

Did she think no one would find out? Did she think Obama would be around to protect her forever?

The wheel turns slowly, but it does turn and I hope it crushes her.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
So she is claiming that the public, against whom she waged political jihad by using her govermental position of power to subjugate purely political enemies, has no right to see her testimony as it may endanger her life??

Should have thought of that before you decided to do the bidding of the left sweetie. Unless what you have to say is classified it ALL needs to be public record.

I can believe it, the Clintons will do anything.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
So she is claiming that the public, against whom she waged political jihad by using her govermental position of power to subjugate purely political enemies, has no right to see her testimony as it may endanger her life??

Should have thought of that before you decided to do the bidding of the left sweetie. Unless what you have to say is classified it ALL needs to be public record.

I am sure the liberals of Berkeley would protect her/provide for her safety.

Understand the situation, fail to see the problem. Have the FBI put her in the Witness Protection Program. New name, history, relocated to some podunk town in a deep red state. There she can be an unknown. That would suit her.

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:
You thought you were protected, Ms. Lerner?

How has this changed?

Oh, your personal role has become known.

I see.

How has this materially changed any fact related to your actions, which occurred in the past?

Your name is attached?

I see.

So, once it became known that you personally ordered the IRS to target certain groups, you became afraid that those affected might decide you used your position to further the political aims of those you support?

Well, Ms. Lerner, did you not plant the question that exposed your actions?

You did plant the question that exposed your actions? Really?

Then too motherfucking bad. Your testimony shall occur in open court. Refuse, and be jailed for contempt. And remember, the people in jail may not agree with what you did.

So you fear for your life now?

Too motherfucking bad. You should have thought of that long ago.

I hope someone caps that skanky bitch.

I understand your ire towards Lerner and Company and, you are among my most read Members here 2340 but, you might edit out the MFrs sir because it is not fitting for today. Thank you friend.

I'm confused. ? the left would kill their own if they tattle. Is that what I hear here.