Of which this is one of them is there any doubt that this lady needs to go to federal pen to live out the rest of her days.
Not trying to be political in this thread but a corrupt IRS is a problem for everybody depending on who is in office at the time. I hope this proves that a move to a fair tax and repeal of the 16th amendment is hopefully in our futures.
What that message is, I have no idea.
FWIW, I've had 3 external hard drives die on me over the last 4 years, plus one laptop PC and a Creative Zen music player. After the first one I learned and started backing EVERYTHING up, and started working primarily off shared drives at work, which are also backed up.
Crap breaks. ALL THE TIME.
IRS thing got blown way out of proportion, has been thoroughly debunked. As has Benghazi. As has Fast and Furious. A waste of time. Why don't you guys focus on the real scandals? NSA???
Please.
In any case, this thread should be deleted because it will do no good for anyone here and it is ultra political.
Works both ways.
No comment on this particular scandal, though. I'm much too concerned with the color of a dress I saw on Facebook.
IRS thing got blown way out of proportion, has been thoroughly debunked.
If this was nothing and thoroughly debunked ("not a smidgen of corruption") then why did Lois Lerner have to plant the question at that conference to let the cat out of the bag just before the IG did?
Have you ever seen the movie "The Hunt for Red October"? Remember the line, ironically uttered by Fred Thompson, regarding the speculation of what Rameus was going top do with the Red October? "Son, a Russian doesn't take a dump without a plan." Well when Jay Carney stood up in the West Wing and said that this was nothing but the work of some low level of employees, half a million tax accountants and 100,000 tax attorneys looked up from their desks and said "Son, a low level IRS employee doesn't take a dump without a supervisor's approval."
What should have taken place in the investigations would have started with the low level employees in Cincinnati who should have been granted immunity and been compelled to testify. Work up the chain from there to wherever it stopped. But God's gift to Democrats, Darryl Issa, decided he wanted to begin with the Oval Office and work his way down. The result is obfuscation, delay, and coverup and a disorganized investigation.
They would be better off with a real outsider, actually, I will suggest we should hope that both parties should run true outside the beltway types.
Its going to be ugly.
ditto inside the beltway republicans, unless they had an outsider voting record.
and I dont mean the stupid keystone pipeline bullshit, that is just drunk house speaker lack of strategy....putting that on top of the agenda.
not against it really...but...it is not what one would focus on right now.
FWIW, I've had 3 external hard drives die on me over the last 4 years, plus one laptop PC and a Creative Zen music player. After the first one I learned and started backing EVERYTHING up, and started working primarily off shared drives at work, which are also backed up.
Crap breaks. ALL THE TIME.
IRS thing got blown way out of proportion, has been thoroughly debunked. As has Benghazi. As has Fast and Furious. A waste of time. Why don't you guys focus on the real scandals? NSA???
Yeah, as someone who's worked in IT and did his share of desktop support and server administration, I agree that this isn't necessarily a smoking gun.
God, I used to hate it when users would have, say, their hard drive crash 3 days after I replaced their monitor and actually draw some flimsy, uneducated correlation between the two.
The author could be anticipating that something unlikely and coincidental is going to trigger a clusterfuck of questions and accusations, or the author could be making an admission.
It is by no means a smoking gun or conclusive proof of anything *because* it is ambiguous and open to interpretation.
The Blue-Dress-White-Dress analogy is spot on.
If it was al-queda or nazis, the FBI and Homeland Security comes into play, as well they should.
anything short of that level is sacrosanct. for either perceived 'side'
The right to organize to put forward a political view is a very high order right.
This is a very basic, simple, American tenant.
'what they fought for'
The author could be anticipating that something unlikely and coincidental is going to trigger a clusterfuck of questions and accusations, or the author could be making an admission.
It is by no means a smoking gun or conclusive proof of anything *because* it is ambiguous and open to interpretation.
The Blue-Dress-White-Dress analogy is spot on.
While certainly not dispositive, I think you have to view this in the context of the author planting a question at the conference in what appears to be an attempt at damage control in front of an IG report. I'll reiterate my comment above that this investigation should have started at the bottom and worked it's way up 2-3 years ago. I'm not sure that's possible at this point.
signed,
The same people that just took over your healthcare and the internet..
I don't think that's particularly unique.
90 days has been our corporate policy for at least 15 years.
for very obvious reasons
the state = owned by all the people, and the people have little to no choice in what it does through law, they / we must obey.
law = having totally different standards for each is a very basic concept at the heart of our nation and its highest laws
No. The emails would also be on the email server. That is unless they also deleted her user mailbox on the server. And even if they deleted the mailbox on the server the email would be on the backup tapes. Typically these backups happen nightly. And at most places there are multiple backup tapes are they are rotated so you can go back in time. Apparently the IG has found hundreds of tapes. It's pretty hard to believe that they couldn't recreate these emails with in a couple of hours. From an IT prospective it makes no logical sense.
And why congress did not subpoena these storage servers immediately is beyond me. Nobody that knew anything about email or works in a damn office knew this was bull.
Why not periodically export the files to a .pst and then store it?
Quote:
Governor dickwad here just put in a new policy where all of our emails (sent and received) are automatically wiped after 90 days. So much for FOIA. It's a big pain in the ass for all of us and no rationale other than his usual whimsy was given. For me, it sucks because I'm losing so much correspondence, data, protocols, addresses, etc. Just a clusterfuck here.
Why not periodically export the files to a .pst and then store it?
We're trying workarounds including filters etc. Now everyone is scrambling to move years worth of messages into folders that won't be purged.
It is embarrassing that some of you dopes question why this email is relevant with regard to a high-level government official who was held in contempt. If only the press went after this with a Watergate-like fury
He said "the press".
In that respect, it's a where's waldo type of thing
But the MSM doesn't really do stories that could upset the Dem apple cart, do they?
But PBS provided live coverage of every hour of the Senate Watergate Committee's hearings. You can probably equate that to CSPAN to day. However, in addition, the (then) 3 major networks for the first week all provided live daily gavel to gavel coverage. After the first week they alternated live coverage. And this was before the discovery of the "smoking gun". Unheard of.
Link - ( New Window )
Spying/intimidating political adversaries EVERYWHERE using the IRS NSA FBI = phony scandals.
Some get more worked up over "Bridgegate".
Who are "My Guys" exactly? I'd love to know. I don't blindly accept talking points, I come to my own conclusions. I've criticized this President, I've criticized many of the Democratic politicians, I've criticized Liberal pundits. There is plenty to complain about.
But distractions like the aforementioned phony scandals are just that, distractions. How many hearings and independent investigations on Benghazi now?
Sorry, the initial post was flat out lame.
As is trying to draw conclusions about my political beliefs without even knowing me.
Quote:
Anything that reflects bad on "their guys" is Fox News/RW propaganda and not worthy of our attention... but let's spend 2 weeks parsing the words of some republican politician to see if we can make a scandal for MSNBC.
Who are "My Guys" exactly? I'd love to know. I don't blindly accept talking points, I come to my own conclusions. I've criticized this President, I've criticized many of the Democratic politicians, I've criticized Liberal pundits. There is plenty to complain about.
But distractions like the aforementioned phony scandals are just that, distractions. How many hearings and independent investigations on Benghazi now?
Sorry, the initial post was flat out lame.
As is trying to draw conclusions about my political beliefs without even knowing me.
I don't see how you can define this as a phony scandal given the planted question by Lerner that initiated it.
Quote:
Isn't there like six different investigations into this? Seems like a lot.
He said "the press".
In that respect, it's a where's waldo type of thing
Yeah but that doesn't make sense as you're getting more press here than the Watergate investigation did. Two young reporters followed that story while everyone else ignored it.
Convict your Liddy and McCord and I'm sure you'll get a ton of press.
What scandals are you talking about? What exactly have they been proven to be doing wrong in this vast quantity of scandals you mention?
Quote:
In comment 12155696 schabadoo said:
Quote:
Isn't there like six different investigations into this? Seems like a lot.
He said "the press".
In that respect, it's a where's waldo type of thing
Yeah but that doesn't make sense as you're getting more press here than the Watergate investigation did. Two young reporters followed that story while everyone else ignored it.
Convict your Liddy and McCord and I'm sure you'll get a ton of press.
Once it got to the point of Congressional committees it got substantially more coverage (live on all 3 major networks for a week - see my post above) than this has. Now there is no guarantee that this leads to the Oval Office, but neither had Watergate when the committee investigations began. Yes, Woodward and Bernstein were by themselves for a while, but not after the equivalent of Lois Lerner's planted question.
Quote:
In comment 12155696 schabadoo said:
Quote:
Isn't there like six different investigations into this? Seems like a lot.
He said "the press".
In that respect, it's a where's waldo type of thing
Yeah but that doesn't make sense as you're getting more press here than the Watergate investigation did. Two young reporters followed that story while everyone else ignored it.
Convict your Liddy and McCord and I'm sure you'll get a ton of press.
You think Eric Holder, who is in contempt of congress himself, is going to move forward with any investigation?
But we are told to believe that the IRS has nothing to hide which is why they've slow rolled this thing for close to two years. They've obstructed, lied and several key players have taken the fifth in something that is supposed to be phony. They lied about what happened, they lied about who was involved, they lied about how long it was going on, they lied about the emails, they lied about the back-ups, they covered up the sudden rash of selective hard drive crashes that only effected the people being investigated.
Yea, nothing to see here. Hell, the President even lied about it "not a smidgen".
Imagine this would have been resolved close to a year ago only if the administration, the IRS and the DOJ cooperated with the will of the people's house. But instead of helping, they obstruct simple oversight investigations into government enforcement agencies that denied due process to groups of citizens, the result of said obstructionism lead to a enormous waste of valuable time and taxpayer money.
All the while the media disparages citizens and belittles the effort to get to the bottom of what could have been the largest government led voter suppression effort in modern times.
Yea, nothing to see.
Quote:
In comment 12155696 schabadoo said:
Quote:
Isn't there like six different investigations into this? Seems like a lot.
He said "the press".
In that respect, it's a where's waldo type of thing
Yeah but that doesn't make sense as you're getting more press here than the Watergate investigation did. Two young reporters followed that story while everyone else ignored it.
Convict your Liddy and McCord and I'm sure you'll get a ton of press.
with the entire administration obstructing the investigation (as they also have done with Benghazi) that has been hard to do.
And if it does the network news shows may be able to tuck a quick summary between llama and dress color stories.
Quote:
...turns out to be much of anything. With the numerous investigations we should find out.
And if it does the network news shows may be able to tuck a quick summary between llama and dress color stories.
lol that was awesome.
Has any Congressional committee investigated the birth certificate?
Guess what?
Nothing.
But don't give up. We need MORE Benghazi investigations.
Republican-led report debunks Benghazi theories and accusations - ( New Window )
I wasn't replying to you. I was replying to shabadoo.
While IRS did work out to be much ado about nothing once it was realized that BOTH Conservative and Liberal organizations alike were being singled out similarly, and that some of the PAC's WERE acting unscrupulously - Lerner's actions were reprehensible, questionable and she should have stepped down immediately.
But it doesn't change the end result of the scandal, doesn't change the fact that the initial post of this thread proves nothing. (She well may have destroyed data, but that e-mail line doesn't prove that)
Definitely wrong that both liberal and conservative groups were targeted specifically. Sure one or two liberal groups may have been denied tax-free status. But Conservative groups were targeted because they were Conservative groups.
ok a few things here...
Lerner said her hard drive crashed and all of her e-mails were lost. The commissioner said he their IT dept could not retrieve those e-mails. This week, the IT dept testified that nobody asked them to even look for the e-mails. They had no problem producing them.
The smoking gun? I don't know. Why lie about the e-mails if there is nothing to hide? However, the real smoking gun (if it exists) would reside in the content of those e-mails. I suppose someone is going through them right now.
God forbid that happens. I'm someone you'd think would be inclined to support her as far as which side I take politically, but I think she's awful.
As far as this case goes, I don't know a whole lot about it. Did someone deny backup tapes existed, and then they were found, but data was never recovered from them? If so there's a highly possible explanation for that (and maybe even for why their existence wasn't admitted to): people who are in charge of backups fuck up all the time, and backing up to tape -- especially email databases -- sucks ass and is incredibly error prone. I read some alarming statistic some time ago about how many large restore attempts from tape backups fail. I can't remember the exact number, but it was near half.
Sometimes it's a conspiracy, but just as (or more) often, it's just incompetence or woefully archaic hardware/practices.
There were reasons why power was meant to be restrained. It must always be if you value freedom.
Why? I'll bet she's more like GW than Obama.
This is one of those few accusations that actually seems to have teeth. Whether you like it or not, the politicization of tax collection is a serious issue.
Quote:
And currently they are already pretty humorous.
This is one of those few accusations that actually seems to have teeth. Whether you like it or not, the politicization of tax collection is a serious issue.
How many times now has this been investigated and looked into?
Which ones vs Bush were nonsensical?
So if this is found out to be nothing like the 0ther 5-6 investigations into this are we done then?
How many times now has this been investigated and looked into?
Well, actually never. How can you fully investigate when the IRS had refused to turn over the evidence? Oh, and of course there was an internal investigation where they investigated themselves.
I agree that this thing has dragged on and it is hearing after hearing but until now nobody was complying with the directive to provide the information requested to complete the investigation.
profiling is not for the tea party. even though the inspector general conceded the flagged groups had "indications of significant political campaign intervention"
look, the irs shouldn't used as a weapon. but, i completely support making sure these tax free organization follow the law.
Seriously, have any of you actually paid attention to the evidence in this case? The IRS came up with a perfectly appropriate shorthand way to identify organizations that should be looked at for taking an inappropriate tax deduction. Do you think that an organization with Tea Party in its name might, just might, be involved in politics? And contrary to Issa's claims, they did NOT target only conservative organizations, as Cummings pointed out repeatedly during the hearings. The whole thing is utter bullshit. And the committee had plenty of evidence to look at. And found nothing. Do you realize what Darrell Issa is? I'll help you out: he's a liar and a demagogue who has no peer in current US politics. And if you really want a treat, read up on his past.
profiling is not for the tea party. even though the inspector general conceded the flagged groups had "indications of significant political campaign intervention"
look, the irs shouldn't used as a weapon. but, i completely support making sure these tax free organization follow the law.
Partisan bullshit. If everyone was getting the same scrutiny it would be a non-issue, but they're not.
a mistake was made. and it is over. there is no evidence of some vast conspiracy. i believe it is now 6 investigations that have concluded that.
Seriously, have any of you actually paid attention to the evidence in this case? The IRS came up with a perfectly appropriate shorthand way to identify organizations that should be looked at for taking an inappropriate tax deduction. Do you think that an organization with Tea Party in its name might, just might, be involved in politics? And contrary to Issa's claims, they did NOT target only conservative organizations, as Cummings pointed out repeatedly during the hearings. The whole thing is utter bullshit. And the committee had plenty of evidence to look at. And found nothing. Do you realize what Darrell Issa is? I'll help you out: he's a liar and a demagogue who has no peer in current US politics. And if you really want a treat, read up on his past.
A handful of progressive groups received additional scrutiny and then approval, versus years-long delays experienced by Tea Party groups. When a senior civil servant speaking on behalf of an Administration that ran on transparency invokes the Fifth Amendment, pretending that there is "nothing to see here" just doesn't cut it. And the additional annoying feature of this bullshit is that the paranoids that organize or join these groups can now point to an instance where they were actually discriminated against as proof of their rectitude.
a mistake was made. and it is over. there is no evidence of some vast conspiracy. i believe it is now 6 investigations that have concluded that.
It wasn't a mistake. It was intentional.
Yeah that is taking something to the absurdity level. A couple of my best friends are staunch Conservatives that we all enjoy talking about politics without it getting stupid. But these guys read-up on what they discuss and never pull asinine talking point BS into it.