Trey Gowdy: NO WAY we’re giving Lois Lerner immunity, PERIOD!

Lois Lerner is coming back to Capitol Hill to testify about the IRS scandal but her lawyer says the only way she’ll comply is if a court compels her or if she’s given immunity. But Gowdy says the immunity request is absurd because they don’t even know what she’s done. He says there is no way they are giving her immunity, period!


Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

159 thoughts on “Trey Gowdy: NO WAY we’re giving Lois Lerner immunity, PERIOD!

  1. I’m sorry your in political office you are responsible to the people of the United States while in office. If the crimes were committed while in execution of your office there should be no immunity period. What the hell happened to common sense in this country.

  2. She claims that she did nothing wrong and now she wants immunity. Immunity from what, if she did nothing wrong.

  3. Lerner and her attorneys know that the longer they can postpone and stall, the less chance she’ll be compelled to testify. That’s her strategy and the White House strategy as well.

    I wonder if Lerner knows or is aware of the murders–which occurred consecutively in November and December, 2007–of two openly homosexual black men who were members of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. These two men were both murdered by gunshot at the time when Barack Obama–also then a member of TUCC–was preparing to announce his candidacy for President. The one murdered in December, 2007, was Donald Young, the choirmaster at TUCC. Young was thought by some to have been involved in a homosexual relationship with then Senator Barack Obama. Young’s mother has said that she believes her son had a homosexual relationship with Barack Obama. While Chicago police did find that both were cases of homicide (not suicide), to date, neither case has been solved. I hope that Lerner and her attorneys know of these crimes.

  4. There’s no “there” there, and Trey Goudy doesn’t want this to be exposed. If he wanted to get to the bottom of this he’d simply give her immunity and hold public hearings.

    But keeping things covered up while simultaneously doing a little grandstanding works to his advantage.

    1. Why should she get immunity from prosecution? Why is she even asking for immunity from prosecution? Because she is a criminal.

      1. Sure, everyone that takes the 5th is a criminal.

        If they had a case against her they’d use that as leverage to get what they want, if they had a case, if there was something there.

        But this is just more melodrama over a nonissue, Trey Goudy’s main purpose in life.

        1. You really must like that Kool-Aid. The violation of the 1st Amendment is not a non issue. That is the core of the issue here. Lerner must answer for her role in the gross violation of the Constitution.

          1. If there’s a case to be made, no one has laid it out. Just a bunch of grandstanding.

            1. Mike A., Trey Gowdy and the committee are attempting to gather the facts now so that they can be “laid out” before the committee, Congress, and the American people. That’s exactly why the committee sent Lerner a subpoena–to see what she has to say about the facts the committee already knows. As just one example, the committee has the letter Lerner signed and sent to Malik Obama. Neither Gowdy nor the committee will be able to lay out the case until all the facts are in, and this will include Lerner’s testimony whether she gives that testimony in exchange for use immunity or a court orders her to testify to the committee.

              1. It’s a dog an pony show, we’ve seen it before from the same cast of clowns. Nothing will come of it other than the clowns getting more TV time. That is the purpose.

        2. Mike A., you just contradicted yourself. You said Lerner is a criminal. Then you said “this is just more melodrama over a nonissue.” So which is it? Lerner committed a crime or she didn’t commit a crime, just a “nonissue”?

          1. You don’t see the sarcasm in my post? I’m not going to spell it out for you. Ask your parents to explain it to you.

    2. Actually, Gowdy doesn’t want to give her use immunity until he has an independent source of information bearing on the entire criminal episode and everyone involved in it. There are other potential sources of information. In other words, Gowdy will only give her use immunity if he has the goods on her before hand. For all we know at this point, he might already have that information or might find it soon. Time will tell. Lerner is simply stalling for time, and the stalling strategy is coming from the White House–for now.

      1. The House doing what it does best: wasting time. Just like the Benghazi conspiracy. Just like repealing the ACA 40 times. Just like trying to extract concessions over a debt increase. Laughing stock of the civilized world.

    3. If they turn Lois Lerner, the only supporters Obama will have are Martin Bashir, Kermit Gosnell , Fast and Furious Drug Lords and Bill Ayers.

  5. If Gowdy says he is not giving this piece of work immunity, lets hope he has enough real evidence that she has broken the law and can be convicted in court!!!

    1. Gowdy is attempting–along with other committee members–to gather the facts now. That’s precisely why the committee sent Lerner a subpoena: to compel her testimony. Lerner is engaged in stalling tactic which Gowdy knows is unavoidable. Gowdy and his colleagues will now have to get a court order compelling Lerner to testify, and that will simply burn up more time. Lerner’s legal strategy is the same as the White House: stall for time.

    1. It’s the White House stalling tactic. They’re playing for time. The longer they can keep Lerner quiet, the less chance of prosecutions and/or impeachment. Gowdy knows how this game is played. The only thing he can do now is try to speed up the process, IF he can find a way to do that. I’m not sure he can.

      1. But even Gowdy is forced to admit that he can do nothing without the Justice Department. The Justice Department is protecting their criminal underlings. How is the oversight committee or Congress going to enforce any sentencing or legal decision? They can’t. That’s the Justice Department’s job and the J.D. is overrun with left wing fanatics.

        1. If Gowdy said that, he’s probably being disengenuous. In other words, he’s probably just putting on a ‘poker face.’ He may already have information damaging to Lerner or others, maybe even Obama and other WH people. On the other hand, he may not yet, but is hoping that someone will come forward with corroborating information. He’s sure as heck not going to give her any use immunity without first gaining information on her participation in this matter from an independent source without at least trying to find it. And he would never give her transactional immunity under any circumstances. He’s a former prosecutor, this is how this game is played.

  6. This cretin knows all in this sordid scandal, she knows who authorized it, who directed that it be done etc. I’m thinking this reaches way up the chain in this corrupt regime, if not all the way to the top. The knowledge she possesses and is keeping secret were it fully known, could quite possibly lead to the collapse of the regime. The totally corrupt Holder knows what’s at stake, he will do whatever he has to in order that the American people never find the truth. An administration that would use a federal agency to destroy any opposition is capable of anything. With each passing day we see increasing lawlessness from the regime, yet Congress refuses to act, they huff and puff before the cameras but that’s it. They have powers granted to them by the Constitution to act upon this rogue administration, for the sake of our Republic they had better start using them. AND FAST!

  7. I hear that Lois Lerner has received death threats; I don’t doubt it–from this administration,. She’ll end up like Fuddy, not a betting man here, but if I were mark my words.

    1. As I said before, I hope Lerner is aware of the murders of two gay men, who were members of TUCC, which took place in Chicago in November and December of 2007–cold case files with CPD.

  8. Lois proclaims to have done nothing wrong, and then pleads the 5th and now wants immunity, you know, the typical pattern of behavior of the innocent, nothing to see here.
    If those eyes don’t look like sinkholes of evil I don’t know what does.

    1. Nothing gets done because they are stonewalled by this administration. When they do get documents, they are almost totally black with redactions. When they get close, as they did with Fast and Furious, obama declares Executive Privilege.

      1. Precisely. Add in what Trey Gowdy said about Congress not having prosecutorial powers. Legally, their hands are tied. Their angst and frustration is compounded by the fact that in order to achieve the desired results they need the Justice Dept. to do their job and therein lies a bigger problem… deeply corrupt a devious Attorney General, Eric, the Red Commie, Holder.

        1. Gowdy’s hands are not tied; it’s that Lerner is stalling, and there’s little or nothing Gowdy and others can do but to wait on a court order, other than press for a court order as soon as possible and look for other information and sources of information.

        2. Congress has INVESTIGATORY powers including the power to summon witnesses to testify under oath to the committee. Other than Gowdy, what’s your authority for the assertion that the committee’s hands are (legally speaking) tied? They’re certainly not tied–legally or otherwise–from investigating, and that’s what the committee is doing. That’s what Congressional committees do, and investigating is a “legal” action which is preliminary to any possible criminal proceedings. I suspect that Gowdy may have been ‘playing possum’ (i.e., playing dead) when he made that statement.

      2. They no doubt ARE stonewalled by this administration, but that doesn’t mean that information can’t or won’t leak out. It also doesn’t mean that the committee doesn’t already have information. The committee acts like a kind of grand jury, it first gathers facts then decides whether or not to proceed. You have an untold number of potential criminal defendants, any one of them might start leaking info to save himself or herself. There are also other ways of gathering information on this matter.

    2. Gowdy and others can only play by the rules. Lerner is stalling for time. She can do that legally. It’s HER tactic, not Gowdy’s.

  9. Notice Holder has slithered into a dark hospital room free from ‘telemetric bugs’ and the friendly press.

  10. Gowdy is right to keep focusing on Lerner and deny her immunity. Sadly though, I don’t believe for a moment that justice will be served. After the last five plus years, why the hell should I?

  11. I’m not Gowdy’s biggest fan but he is 100% correct here in his analysis. But to hope to expect the Obuma protector AG Holder, an integral part of this Obuma criminal Regime, to do something right at this point is hilarious at best.

  12. Nothing will happen–Trey and his pals will just keep threatening to issue subpoenas, but won’t follow through with anything.

    1. I really like Goudy and have high hopes but I agree with you; the greatest probability of the outcome is that nothing will come of this. On the other hand, it’ll soon be people like you and I and some Egyptian and Ukrainian Americans who, having had enough of the trash that infest government, will take back this nation and deliver retribution,

      1. I wouldn’t be so conclusory. Lerner is simply stalling. Let’s hope that Gowdy and others will press for a court order compelling her to testify as soon as possible.

    2. No, you’re wrong. Gowdy will have to press for a court order compelling her to testify. That will take time.

  13. But, hey, she’s absolutely innocent of any wrongdoing whatsoever, so why would she even need to ask for immunity.

    And if you believe THAT one… well, you probably voted for Obama in the first place.

    1. Uh, yes, he is, but he’s also voting like a RINO on immigration “reform.” Yes he is. Believe me, I was shocked and deeply disappointed to learn that this is true. Ann Coulter doesn’t lie.

  14. Why isn’t the Capitol police arresting Eric Holder for contempt of Congress in this dog and pony show?

      1. It’s a good question, but the answer, like all matters legal, is complex–too complex to explain here, at least, by me. The short answer is that Congress did indeed hold Holder in contempt of Congress, but basically Congress can’t do anything about it, at least, not yet.

  15. Why not Trey?! You would then get her to divulge Barry and Malik’s terrorist tax exempt organization. Don’t you want Barry more than Lois? Get the biggest fish…

      1. RAP, not wrap, but yeah, there are always problems involved with granting immunity, but TG knows all about this. Also, there’s a distinction between use and transactional immunity.

        Basically, Gowdy will NEVER agree to offer Lerner or anyone else transactional (full) immunity. But as for your comment, 1. I doubt Gowdy will offer her use immunity unless he has corroborating evidence on the entire matter being investigated; 2. Lerner will never take the rap for the whole matter; 3. Lerner may have waived her 5th Amendment privilege because she appears to have given testimony before she invoked the 5th Amendment privilege.

        Gowdy and other committee members will seek to compel her testimony by getting a court order ordering her to give testimony, and Gowdy & company will, of course, allege in their application for the order that Lerner waived her 5th Amendment privilege for the reason I just stated.

    1. TG is a prosecutor. He knows you have to get the goods on the little fish in order to go after bigger fish. Lerner is stalling for time. TG has to now get a court order compelling her to testify.

  16. Obama proved what a cold blooded, pathological liar he is when, during his Super Bowl interview with Bill O’Reilly, he told the nation and the world that there isn’t a smidgeon of corruption in the I.R.S. My first reaction upon hearing that intellectually insulting lie was to yell, “You da_n LIAR!”. Talk about live in a warped, delusional fantasy world! Does he really think that we are that stupid and gullible.

    1. For the safety of your home electronics devices, I suggest not watching BO on the screen. And yes, he does think you’re that stupid.

        1. BO is the nicest bunch of guys you could possibly know. lol On the other hand, he’s supposedly has several other nasty personalities.

  17. How can any sane and responsible person not like Trey Gowdy? The man is as direct and candid as we could ask him to be. He doesn’t mince words or insult us with stereotypical political rhetoric. I love when he’s asked questions that he legally can’t answer, but he does, anyways, with his facial expressions. It’s obvious that he’s biting his tongue while attempting to control his outrage over what he knows to be clearly obvious.

    As for the very despicable, Lois Lerner returning, Gowdy said that she can’t hide behind the fifth amendment because she revoked that right when she pleaded innocence Before invoking her fifth amendment privilege.

  18. if you don’t provide here immunity (and I’m not saying you should), then don’t bother bringing her in.

    She’ll only plead the 5th again, and the elite media won’t even cover it.

    It’ll be a waste of time, with nothing gained.

    1. In all this time the only ones fired or defamed were the whistle blowers all others got immunity or were promoted. Without Repub leaderships support Gowdy won’t be able to do anything.

    2. She can’t plead the 5th; she did that last time but then declared her innocence, which means she has to answer the questions.

          1. Not exactly. Gowdy contended at the last hearing that Lerner had waived her 5th privilege. He’s probably correct, but a court has to make that determination first. She doesn’t lose her 5th privilege simply because Gowdy said she did.

            That said, yes, I think she did lose it, and a court will find that she did. I’m not sure how this works or will work, but it could be that when she comes back in response to the last subpoena, Gowdy may have a surprise waiting for her: a court order compelling her testimony and a finding that she waived her 5th privilege at the last congressional hearing because she gave testimony.

        1. She can’t plead the fifth because by her proclaiming her innocence, before claiming the fifth the last time she went before Congress, she waived her fifth amendment right.

          Congress can also hold her in contempt and then have her arrested and hauled off in handcuffs.

      1. You’re correct, except that it’s Gowdy who’s contending that she gave testimony at the prior committee hearing or what Gowdy is calling testimony–before she asserted the 5th privilege. A court will consider Gowdy’s contention that she waived her 5th privilege.

    3. You don’t know that. For one thing, her lawyers can contact any committee member anytime with an offer to testify with or without immunity. Lerner also doesn’t know what Gowdy & others have on her or on others involved in this matter. When she goes before the committee she’s going to be thinking, what does Gowdy have on me already? ALSO, and this is important: Lerner may have waved her 5th Amendment privilege when, at the last committee hearing, she appeared to give testimony prior to taking the 5th Amendment. Personally, I think Gowdy is right as a legal matter, she waived her 5th privilege.

    1. Indeed the GOP is but a rubber stamp Obama uses as he pleases.

      Obviously their actions prove they are fine with that.

        1. They speak loudly and carry a very small stick.

          Nothing and I mean nothing comes of it. No select committee no real actions no call for impeachment.

          1. Steve, the commitee has to to build a case for impeachment before they can call for a vote of the entire House of Representatives on the articles of impeachment. That’s the way it works. You don’t call for impeachment and THEN investigate. The purpose of the committee is to investigate and gather facts so that the House can base its decision to impeach on factual evidence.

            1. Everyone in the GOP except Congress knows Obama needs Impeached and his lackeys.

              Fast and Furious is four years old. By your logic no President could ever be impeached. Guess that is the game. Just fool us.

              We are tired of being fooled now we vote you OUT.

  19. Lerner asking for immunity without the committee knowing exactly what she’s done is kind of like Pelosi saying, “We’ve got to pass the bill in order to know what’s in it.” Cut the crap, people, and get down to business about the corrupt IRS. There’s a lot of underhanded dealings that the IRS has been involved in, and they need to start telling the truth about what they’ve done and who ordered that kind of illegal conduct. Betcha the White House is neck-deep in all of this.

    1. The people have settled for no answers for five years now. Most are just hoping the next elections will change directions of this administration and sweeping things under the rug will prevail.

      1. You might wait until we see what happens in this committee before committing yourself to firing all Republicans, especially those on this committee for not getting answers “for the last five years.” Seems to me Gowdy and Issa are headed in the right direction.

    1. He’s begging the whole of Congress, Republicans AND Democrats, which is actually the far more important feature of Prof. Turley’s comments.

  20. Since she did not invoke the 5th without proclaiming her innocence, put her in jail for not answering the questions. Contempt of Congress…

    1. A-freakin’-men! That’s what I’ve been saying since this whole debacle began. You can’t take a job for the government and then refuse to cooperate with the government UNLESS you disclose beforehand the full extent of your knowledge. This entire committee hearing has been run so ridiculously poorly by so many cowardly Republicans it’s had me sick to my stomach.

    2. The reason they can ask her back for more questions is because she first pleaded the 5th, but then said she was innocence. That declaration removed the protection of the 5th amendment.

      1. Correction. She claimed her innocence and ‘then’ invoked the 5th. That statement (testimony), removed the protection if the 5th.

        1. I think you’re correct, but in either case, I doubt that it will make any difference. Gowdy knows that if a witness says ANYTHING other or more than the basic magic words invoking the 5th Amendment privilege, a court is going to find that she gave “testimony,” at the prior hearing, and that means she waived her 5th Amendment privilege.

          To properly invoke the privilege, she should have simply said, ” I invoke my 5th Amendment privilege against self incrimination, and decline, on the advice of counsel, to answer any questions.” It need not be these words precisely, but she couldn’t say anything about her innocence or words to that effect without having waiving the privilege. In my view, there’s little doubt that she did because she said something about, “I haven’t done anything wrong.” This is a testimonial declaration of innocence if I ever saw one, thus, a waiver.

          1. Exactly. But like you said, nobody is going to do krap about it or they would have, in the beginning.
            🙁 🙁

      2. No. They can call her back because they can. They happen to be calling her back for several reasons including some unfinished business relating to her prior appearance and what she said to the committee at that time.

        1. Sorry for my lack of clarity; I meant that because her statement of innocence negated her 5th amendment plea, they now have the expectation that she’ll answer questions. No reason to request immunity or a court order otherwise.

          1. Okay, but I think that she’ll show up again in response to the subpoena, then she’ll assert the 5th privilege again. Then Issa will say, “you can’t assert the 5th,” but she will again assert it. Then Issa will ask, “do you intend to invoke your 5th Amendment privilege again to all the questions of this committee,” and she will say “yes.” Then Issa will say again, “You are dismissed, but we will call you again, this time, under court order compelling you to testify.” Unless the committee already has a court order. I don’t know that it does. I haven’t heard they do.

    1. I suspect that, very soon, she’ll be appointed to the White House so that way the Boy King can assert Executive Privilege to anything she’s done. Methinks that’s the only way to stop the train.

      1. Why would Lerner be appointed to the WH? She’s retired. The White House people want her GONE–never to be heard from again.

    2. Hence the reason why Gowdy said what he did about not counting on the Justice Dept., ( Eric, the commie racist, Holder ) to do their job.

  21. I hope obama’s house of cards is starting to fall , and maybe the TRUTH will come to light . Good news today about holder . Can’t wait to hear the story .

    1. Is Holder playing the same trick that Hillary pulled or is he just seeing if Obamacare will pay his hospital bill??

  22. I want her to burn… she sure seems guilty as sin. However her snotty, arrogant demeanor is enough. She was core to this whole scandal… SHE NEEDS TO COME CLEAN! NOW!!!

        1. Of course she’s a hired hand, but she’s absolutely, positively, not the big fish. Obama is the big fish. In fact, Gowdy already knows that Lerner’s boss had contact both with the WH and with Lerner at the time these events were going on. That’s evidence of the larger conspiracy pointing back to the WH.

          As for Holder, so far, I know of nothing suggesting that he’s involved specifically in the IRS scandal, which doesn’t mean he’s not–just I haven’t seen his name raised yet in the IRS scandal. Holder’s involved, however, in all the other scandals, absolutely.

    1. I’d be happy to let her go scott free if it meant a sure impeachment, removal, and conviction of Obama. She would have to give us an original, sworn and certified as true and correct, videotape of Obama holding the smoking gun with bullet ridden bodies and Obama proclaiming, “I murdered them all with this handgun!”

      1. Okay, I could get behind that. And you’re right… the sheer amount of incriminating evidence would have to be outlandish and mountainous. If it were Bush in the same situation, a crayon drawing of him doing it would be enough.

  23. If you “want something done now” why hasn’t the esteemed Speaker formed a select committee?????????

    This is political grandstanding, PERIOD.

    1. Gowdy is sincere but since nothing has happened yet, he shouldn’t be making statements I don’t think he can fulfill.

    2. Don’t forget that there are dems on the same committee that are stonewalling and protecting the WH.

      1. Nobody has forgotten that, least of all Trey Gowdy. I see the Democrats on that committee, and they are doing all they can to complain about “fishing expeditions,” blah, blah, blah … I mean, so what? That’s what opposition party members are going to do, until there’s more or stronger evidence. Even then, you can be sure that Elijah Cummins will be a “bitter-ender.” He wouldn’t jump onboard Gowdy’s team, if Gowdy came up with a videotape of Obama telling the IRS commissioner to harrass and intimidate convervative groups,” or in other words, even if Gowdy had the proverbial “smoking gun.” Besides being a Marxist fellow traveler, Cummins is also a racist to the core, just like his hero, Zer0.

    3. Excuse me, but neither D. Issa nor Trey Gowdy is the Speaker of the House. In fact, the Speaker is not a member of chairman Issa’s committee. Are you suggesting that the Speaker should be a member? As for your call for a “select” committee, please explain what you mean by the term “select,” and why the Speaker must form or call for a “select” committee when Issa’s committee is busy right now collecting evidence, or in other words, doing its job.

      Your charge that Issa, Gowdy, or others are “grandstanding” assumes that there’s been no illegal conduct on the part of anyone in the Obama administration. You can be sure of that BEFORE the committee is finished HOW exactly? Don’t you think it’s necessary to wait and see what Issa’s committee does or does not do before we can accurately describe them as merely “grandstanding”? I mean, if Trey Gowdy comes up with direct–or just indirect– evidence that Obama and others in the WH used the IRS to harrass, intimidate, or deny conservative groups their rights under the Income Tax laws, don’t you think that would be a little more than “grandstanding”?

      1. Because it is apparent to everyone this is a coverup operation. This is a let us not make the stupid conservatives too upset so we can get reelected committee. There is no real attempt to get to the bottom of it just an attempt at propaganda. Like Roman Circuses.

    1. He would be great but Judge Jeanine I think is more outspoken, more motivated, and more effective. She’d clean out the crud in the DOJ. She isn’t afraid of Obama, she certainly isn’t afraid of Boehner.

      1. Could we please let Gowdy do his work on this committee first before we crown him Attorney General? For one thing, Gowdy has indicated that he will vote with the RINOs for Obama’s “immigration reform,” which puts me off of him immediately. I know, I know, it shocked and disappointed me to learn that too, but it’s true. Ann Coulter doesn’t like, or in any case, she’s not lying about this.

    1. I’m not sure. The DOJ is a very particular beast. I’ve read about some of its behind-the-scenes shenanigans in two different books, and I’m not convinced anyone can fix it. This may be a case of “let’s tear it down and start over” more than anything else.

      1. Holder is the most political Attorney General in 40 years . Let’s start with impeaching him and see if the shenanigans slows to a trickle . Regardless of which party occupies the White House the people need belief that the DOJ is acting on behalf of all of us . Do you feel that Holder’s DOJ is pursuing the IRS investigation with vigor , or with glue on the bottom of their shoes ? Holder is a miscreant that needs to be disbarred , he’s lied repeatedly to Congress and applies laws only that he agrees with . Someone with some regard for the constitution perhaps ? I’ve read about other AG ‘s and their DOJ’s too…….this is one on political steroids .

        1. Holder isn’t doing jacksch!t about the IRS scandal. Of course he’s not! Jeeez, get a clue. It’s the Issa committee that’s investigating this sewer called the IRS.

    2. Forget Trey Gowdy as AG! We have to get a Republican or someone who’s not a Democrat elected President first. Until then, let’s keep the focus on what’s going on NOW, not 2015 and 2016.

  24. I work with kids, and a kid never asks for a get-out-of-jail free card before their questioned unless they’ve done something wrong. I doubt this is any exception.

  25. The DOJ “won’t do their job”. Of course not, holder is only interested in prosecuting whites for pretend crimes against blacks, homosexuals and lesbians.

    1. IMPEACH HOLDER then.

      But no. This is just a circus for us plebes. They are all for Obama and Holder taking it to the Tea Party. That is the simple truth.

      Actions speak louder than words. There is much they could do but will not do. No select committee for example.

      1. Congressional committees are investigating Holder. They have to come up with more evidence on him first. They can’t just call for the entire Congress to convene articles of impeachment against Holder or anyone else without evidence and lots of it.

Comments are closed.