ms. lerner ms. pettis ms. candle mrs. mrs. katzenberg and chief counselors officers were present. ms. lerner lesson meaning instructed everyone the applications weren't he the referred to advocacy applications and not tea party applications. august 2011 i attended a meeting with the applications assigned to me were discussed. i recalled don spelman and amy franklin of the chiefs counsel's office as well as justin low hillary --. ever recall ms. franklin stated that more current information was needed from my applications and letters be sent to the applicants. i recall a discussion of the creation of a template of the tea party applications very express my opinion that a template was not a good idea and a great deal of variance among the groups and each application needed to be developed according to its particular facts and circumstances. after the august 2011 meeting the applicatiapplicati ons assigned to me were transferred to another tax law specialist. after the applications were transferred i had no further involvement with respect to the tea party applications. thank you. >> than

ms. lerner and to the chief counsel and we unable to sign off those cases without their permission. >> pauld the general counsel's office role, william wilkins because there is only two political appointees, wilkins and whoever is running the irs. so this isjc-'ñ significant. what is the irs saying about wilkins' role? >> the irs is some pains that he wasn't at a key meeting where his office was reviewing some of these applications, but i think it's very interesting because one of the reasons that mr. wilkins was hired presumably when the white house hired him, they said specifically they admired his expertise in dealing with nonprofit organizations. so the idea he wasn't in the loop and all this was happening in the office is a little bit of stretch. >> paul: he was involved, was he not, in the campaign in 2008 when for the jeremiah wright who was then senator obama's pastor when his church was investigated for tax exempt issues, correct? >> right. that was the case where reverend wright's church was questioned whether or not the involvement was jeopardizeded his status. and they are not a

ms. lerner's senior adviser and the chief counsel's office. is this consistent with the instructions you received? >> i don't ever recall seeing that in a memo. >> but is it consistent with the instructions you believe you received? >> yes. >> is that unusual? >> yes. >> particularly the multitiered process, correct? >> oftentimes there is more than one reviewer, but multitiered is unusual. hawbaker, do you know anyone you would say your opinion have political motives in the role of treating of tea party groups? >> mr. hullnot read , to your personal knowledge, do you know of anyone in washington or cincinnati, for either view,, that you know have political motives against the tea party groups? >> no, sir. have any personal knowledge of lois lerner's politics, activities or motives? >> no, sir. >> one of the challenges we have here is determining whether or not specifically there was special treatment and your knowledge of tea party groups. ms. hofacre, you only worked on tea party groups? >> correct, in 2010. >> the special treatment that you

ms. lerner has information i am certain the committee counsel and the chairman would be happy to sit down with her then we can talk about limited immunity. neil: du dome grandeur that unless she has something to say? >> i don't think she gets it both ways she was to plead the fifth why we do do that if you're innocent and why would you need immunity? she knows something. no question you don't just give immunity to say now i will tell you ever want we need to know where this is going. neil: we knoww you have a crazy schedule with the president delays the health care law? meet the top money guy who says no. it is not about the delay neil: they snuck get back. that graphic. give it another look. [laughter] stake a syringe in it. fading fast and delaying the mandate that require employers to uue salad -- signed up but to hear court laugher telesat is coughing up blood as we speak. good to see you. the delay will not bring this. >> i don't think so i think the health care lot of obamacare is dead in the water and will be repealed and they will start to use allocation you cannot give the stuff

ms. lerner has information i am certain the committee counsel and the chairman would be happy to sit down with her then we can talk about limited immunity. neil: du dome grandeur that unless she has something to say? >> i don't think she gets it both ways she was to plead the fifth why we do do that if you're innocent and why would you need immunity? she knows something. no question you don't just give immunity to say now i will tell you ever want we need to know where this is going. neil: we know you have a crazy schedule. with the president delays the health care law? meet the top money guy who says no. it is not about the delay but the death of the law with the spark cash card from capital one... boris earns unlimited rewards for his small business. can i get the smith contract, ease? thank you. that's three new paper shredders. [ boris ] put 'em on my spark card. [ garth ] boris' small business earns 2% cash back on every pchase every day. great businesses deserve unlimited rewards. read back the chicken's testimony, please. "buk, buk, bukka!" [ male announcer ] get the spark business

ms. lerner's salary. house majority leader eric c cantor tells us how., sir. >> nice to see you, greta. >> my favorite topic. government waste and abuse. do you have any ideas? >> in fact, house republicans are really gearing up for one big week next week and we have a package of about 11 bills indirectly at that very point. the reason why we're really doing it is because you've seen now across the country a lot of waning, if you will, of the trust the people have in this government. and it is warranted. you hear what's going on in the irs, you look at what's going on in the white house, you look at the spending of these agencies. we've got some bills to get right at this. the first bill i want to talk about is getting the irs out of obamacare. we know what's going on at the irs, we know there are a lot of evidence -- there is a lot of evidence to demonstrate there is a political witch hunt going on in the tax enforcement agency, and yet that agency now is going to be into your health care records and help implement obamacare. that's not something we wan

ms. lerner? >> we know they're on the actual case reports. >> can you check back with us? that would make a big difference because it would indicate that she probably knew about it as early as april of 2010, some 14 months before she changed it. >> the first time that we know of her knowing his july 2011 but we will check. >> thank you. i appreciate the patients. >> thank the gentleman. whenever to the gym and from massachusetts. would you also include indigenous request. >> wrigley a short quick analysis to see if you can find one or more of these nearly 300 files that your people could potentially go through. >> it is clearly not conservative. if you find one more would you inform the ranking member and myself? i know an exhaustive extensive search by take time, but it is there. the ranking member and i would love to know anecdotally that at least one likely @booktv will then go to the ways and means committee to ask for a detailed look. right now we showed that there seven that have an impressive. >> may be more than one. >> progressives likely are not conservative grou

ms. lerner instructed her subordinates to -- is that right? >> what she did is she changed the criteria to no longer include tea party names, if that is what you are referring to. this is when it was changed from tea party. >> that is correct. >> that is what is in the document. >> just to be clear, the test cases he was working in washington on were both filed by groups affiliated with the tea party movement, right? >> only one. >> correct. >> do you think it was pretextual to learn these as advocacy cases when they were really tea party cases. recognized that these were inappropriate to use any names. she was trying to fix it. teaas better than using party, 912 and patriots. political advocacy. these were transfers from him in august of 2011 with no explanation and decide to hillary. does that reflect in your findings as well? >> yes. as weis interesting extensivethis service, 48 years in fact, do you have any sense of whether they have anywhere near the practical experience -- mark >> we do not have that. >> she had four months. before the

ms. lerner, if you don't speak, we're going to put you in jail until you do speak.th of time in jail is about 18 months. 18 months is a long time to be sitting there not for a crime but because she won't talk. most judges say it's obvious she's not going to talk. let her go. >>gretchen: will she be testifying in front of congress or in privacy? >> it would be a public interrogation much like the one where she claims she took the fifth amendment but then asserted her innocence nevertheless, which probably waives her fifth amendment right which is the first step towards immunity. >>gretchen: thanks so much. >> my pleasure. this is a saga that will go on all summer, i think. >>gretchen: coming up, parents ticked off because their kids are doing yoga in school. they say it's too religious. >>brian: more parents are giving medical -- are giving malatonin to their kids to get them to sleep. kids to get them to sleep. is that safe?aiaiaiaiain and swelling and for years i used ice. now there's something better. new thermacare cold wraps. the only wrap with targettemp techno

ms. lerner and i think it was mr. roseberg yesterday immediating the fifth when they come before the people's house to give the fifth amendment. i can appreciate that, but that adds then to the public's distrust and loss of faith in the government. so i know you have a large job on your hands. as we go forward though, you said to start off, and maybe i didn't understand you, but more investigation needs to be dope. to be done. how long do you foresee this going? >> that's a good question, and i don't want to lock into a particular time frame because i want to make sure that we follow the facts wherever they take us. but i would anticipate that over the next, you know, two months there'll be a material amount of interviews and document review that would enable us to revisit the issues and see where we are. i think that's probably the right complement of time. will i say it's over at that point? no. but i think that seems to me a good milestone to check in and figure out have we learned a material amount of information.

lerner and some of the others have told. >> yes, it's clear that there are employees who, like ms.who have indicated they were under direction from the white house. democrats will maintain they've spoke toen to irs employees who said this was simply an overwhelm of the system from the suicides united decision that -- citizens united decision that resulted in this extra scrutiny. that actually stands up only until you know, as i said, that 100% of the tea party, 9/12, you know, various groups were scrutinized, and many of them still waiting for approval versus only a few liberal groups. we don't know a lot about what happened at the direction of the washington irs employees, and we need to know more. and the problem, the reason this investigation continues to sort of disappear from the top of the debate is because, you know, until lois lerner's given immunity and we really learn everything, it's very hard in the face of democratic charges that this is a partisan witch hunt and has been cherry picked. jon yeah. >> you have an ig who withheld information in his report. this is going t