ShareThis Page

The Thursday wrap

| Wednesday, May 22, 2013, 9:08 p.m.

Lois Lerner, a figure central to the IRS' targeting/harassing of conservative groups, turned out to be too clever by half on Wednesday. Her attorney previously had said she would invoke her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. But, and after she was sworn in, she testified, making a statement denying any wrongdoing. Only after her statement did she take the Fifth. And in doing so, she waived her Fifth Amendment right, says Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. He says he'll haul Ms. Lerner back before the committee. Ooooh, this is getting juicy. ... Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., wasted no time in blaming the massive Oklahoma tornado on “climate change.” As Climate Depot's Marc Morano noted, Ms. Boxer has not only “no sense of decency” but “no understanding of science.” ... Former reporter and current Obama press secretary Jay Carney on Tuesday compared questions about the scandals plaguing the administration to questions about the president's birth certificate. It's an arrogance that reflects how little respect Mr. Obama, through his mouthpiece, has for the rule of law and the American people. ... By the way, not only did the administration secretly rifle through Fox News' James Rosen's phone and email records but it also obtained the phone records of his parents. Can checking the grocery bags of reporters, and the diapers of their children, be far behind?

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.