Topic: IRS claims it has LOST two years' worth of emails from former official Lerner - page 11. (Read 22748 times)

Your choice is Issa or Holder.  

I know where I'm headed on that one.

As for your two paragraph essay on "seeking the facts", context is omitted.  Context is selective enforcement of IRS audit and prosecution thereof.   Oddly enough, your posts on this thread also show repeated selective enforcement of law, selective omission of facts and arguments, and micro examination of fairness in one context, while ignoring the greater picture.

You seem to illustrate the very mindset that is being criticized by Issa's group, frankly.

Your point?
If Lerner raised the issue with DOJ, as she should have, and later found the law permitted perimeters she thought to be beyond the law, then her conclusion would be as you provided.
So what?

"Lerner later acknowledged pursuing prosecutions of these groups would not fit well with the law."

Well thanks for the information, I appreciate it.

However, for the most part I think it may be a subjective analysis of what is for 501 c4's legal and what is prohibited. As I recall, to qualify, a majority of the efforts of such organizations must be non-political, and groups like Karl Rove's might make such an argument but it would frankly just be a lie.
As I recall Rove's group did seek, and may have obtained, this tax exempt status. But to argue that Crossroads America is not a purely political organization is laughable.
Therefore, it is not unreasonable to consider legal action against those who knowingly submitted fraudulent information to receive a tax exempt status.
We have to be careful not to ignore political motives in both the charges against the IRS and those making the charges.
So when you argue that their activities were clearly legal, I am not so easily convinced that that claim is factually true, and that is where Republican politics come into play.
I want the facts and I would not trust Darrell Issa to seek the facts, nor is the National review slanting toward objectivity.

No Wonder the IRS Is ‘Losing’ E-mails: It Was Trying to Throw Innocent Conservatives in Jail



Even a small child can connect these dots.

The IRS is announcing the “loss” of mass numbers of e-mails (do they have any computers that don’t crash?) even as the e-mails that do exist are beginning to show the extent of IRS corruption. Let’s take this exchange (previously uncovered by Judicial Watch) between Lois Lerner, the director of exempt organizations at the IRS, and Nikole Flax, then the IRS commissioner’s chief of staff. (To be clear, these are not “low level” employees.)

First, here’s Lerner on May 8, 2013, literally two days before last year’s fake apology for IRS tea-party targeting:

I got a call today from Richard Pilger Director Elections Crimes Branch at DOJ. I know him from contacts from my days there. He wanted to know who at IRS the DOJ folk s could talk to about [Rhode Island Democrat] Sen. Whitehouse idea at the hearing that DOJ could piece together false statement cases about applicants who “lied” on their 1024s –saying they weren’t planning on doing political activity, and then turning around and making large vis ible political expenditures. DOJ is feeling like it needs to respond, but want to talk to the right folks at IRS to see whether there are impediments from our side and what, if any damage this might do to IRS programs.

I told him that sounded like we might need several folks from IRS. I am out of town all next week, so wanted to reach out and see who you think would be right for such a meeting and also hand this off to Nan as contact person if things need to happen while I am gone –

Translation: The Obama Justice Department was reaching out to the Obama IRS to see if it could “piece together” prosecutions of nonprofits even before any evidence of wrongdoing emerged.

And how did Nikole Flax respond? By suggesting that even more federal agencies get involved:

I think we should do it – also need to include CI, which we can help coordinate. Also, we need to reach out to FEC. Does it make sense to consider including them in this or keep it separate?

In other words, rather than asking the DOJ whether it possessed any evidence of wrongdoing by American citizens engaged in constitutionally protected activities, two senior officials in the Obama IRS (including one, Lois Lerner, who “joked” about wanting to work for Organizing For Action, also known as BarackObama.com) pushed forward the effort to launch a multi-agency criminal probe, involving even the FEC. Oh, and keep in mind that this e-mail exchange occurred literally years after the IRS claimed it had ended all tea-party targeting.

And in the last few days we learn the IRS has “lost” e-mails from — among others — Lois Lerner and Nikole Flax. What a remarkable coincidence.

The scale of the wrongdoing is staggering. Targeting Americans for criminal investigation without evidence, attempting to enlist multiple federal agencies in the effort, selective audits, selective disclosures of confidential documents, selective questioning and delays of nonprofit applicants — all in the service of suppressing dissent. At the ACLJ, I’m one of the attorneys in our litigation — on behalf of 41 conservative groups in 22 states — against the IRS and key IRS officials.

As of today, we’re putting the DOJ, FEC, and even key Democratic senators on notice: They’re bound by law to preserve any communications with IRS officials that would be discoverable in our lawsuit.

The administration’s misconduct and its cover-up are so brazen, so contemptuous of common sense and the truth, that they will — once and for all — put the media and the Left to the test: When it comes to this administration, does the rule of law matter at all? Does the truth matter at all? Or is it all about ideology now?

I know how they’ll respond, and I fear for the future of our democracy. They fight us today — by virtually any means necessary — so their government of the Left, by the Left, and for the Left shall not perish from the Earth.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/380590/no-wonder-irs-losing-e-mails-it-was-trying-throw-innocent-conservatives-jail-david

I want the Republicans to take the Senate.

That is what leads me to suspect that this goes higher than the agency level. If she were a rogue they would hang her out to dry. If she has damaging information about her superiors she gets protected.

^^^ Very true ^^^

In order to restore some marginal level of respect and trust for the IRS and that greater US government, Lerner needs to do some jail time.  I can't fathom why the IRS would protect her.  Probably some kind of agency "protect our own" mentality, or alternately, some large number of people could fall like dominoes.

I got a little message for Lois.

Lois.  HEEELLLLLOOOO Lois?

That ain't Superman you are looking at way up there.

Lois Lerner's past.. She's been a weasel for a long time...

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2427043813001/lois-lerners-past-exposed/#sp=show-clips

CHICAGO - Former GOP U.S. Senate candidate Al Salvi's (photo right) revelation this week that IRS official Lois Lerner offered to drop the Federal Election Commission's (FEC) 1996 case against him if he promised to never run for office again was the proverbial tip of the iceberg.

512x"Before Lois Lerner (photo right) took us before the federal judge, her last offer was for me to promise to never run for office again. That was always part of their demands," Salvi said. "Before that last offer, another FEC representative that reported to Lerner wanted $200,000 and a promise not to run."

Knowing his $1.1 million campaign loan to himself was legal, Salvi rejected the initial settlement offer from FEC attorney Colleen Sealander. In later conversations, Sealander lowered the amount to $100,000, then $40,000, but always with the additional promise to never run for office again.

"Every time we talked, I refused the offer, and Colleen said she'd have to check with someone," Salvi said. "I finally told her I'd like to talk to whomever she reported. That's when I got a call from Lois Lerner."

During that call, Salvi said, he explained to Lerner exactly what happened -- that while the loan to himself was legal, there may be a difference of opinion on how the loan was reported to the FEC. Salvi explained it was a simple matter and said he thought Lerner would suggest an agreeable solution and dismiss the Democratic National Committee's complaint.

But that was not Lerner's reaction. Instead, that's when she said to Salvi, "Promise me you'll never run for office again, and we'll drop the case."

Salvi said he asked Lerner if she would be willing to put the offer into writing.

"We don't do things that way," Salvi said Lerner replied.

Salvi queried how then could such an agreement be enforced.

According to Salvi, Lerner replied: "You'll find out."

Without a settlement, the Salvi case went to federal court. After months and years of briefings, delays and court appearances, federal judge George Lindbergh dismissed the case on its merits. Lindbergh said the FEC's disagreement over filing, when two ways of reporting were acceptable, was groundless. The FEC appealed Lindbergh's decision, but their appeal was thrown back to Lindbergh's decision and the Salvi campaign won. Court documents show that Salvi was never fined or penalized.

Sealander and Lerner made similar offers to Salvi and his legal counsel in the process leading up to the court proceedings. Salvi's brother Mike and his wife Kathy led Salvi's defense against a team of D.C. attorneys, who were flown into Chicago to appear before the judge, Salvi said.

Negotiations with those facing FEC complaints are part of standard procedure, an FEC spokesperson told Illinois Review, but records of those negotiation conversations are not available in court documents.

http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2013/06/lerner-asked-salvi-for-200000-plus-never-run-again-promise.html

It's absolutely NOT possible, though. I think the point has been hammered into the ground by plenty enough people, including experts in the field, that emails are NOT stored on the hard drive of PC's or laptops. While they can certainly be stored there by the user in the form of a .pst file, emails are always stored on servers. Those servers are backed up on a very regular basis, especially for a place the size of the IRS. I'm surprised people are still buying into that lie about the emails being lost due to her hard drive crashing.


Most? Really? And which official involved in Fast and Furious was appointed by Bush? It certainly isn't the head hancho himself, Eric Holder. He was appointed by Joe Biden in 2009.
And the Right doesn't think it approprite to "hang" the President for his action. The Right thinks it appropriate to hold him accountable for what happens on his watch. The same thing the Left was doing to Bush. The fact is that the President is ultimately responsible for what happens on his watch. Remember what Truman (surprisingly enough, a Democrat) said? "The buck stops here."

Problem was, that it wasn't illegal.  See here
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/380717/lois-lerners-vanishing-e-mails-editors
 here:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/issa-seeks-answers-about-dojs-role-in-irs-targeting/article/2547651
and here :
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/04/16/breaking-new-emails-show-lois-lerner-contacted-doj-about-prosecuting-tax-exempt-groups-n1825292

I am curious...if a group had illegally claimed tex exempt status would not that be a matter for Justice to pursue?

I think it is interesting that the emails we do have show that the DOJ was in contact with Lerner trying to figure out a way to criminally prosecute these cases.  Nobody on the left seems to want to speak to that.  And if the White House didn't want to cast further suspicion the president really shouldn't have gotten on tv and declared that there wasn't a smidgen of corruption.

These may have been Bush appointees but that apparently has no bearing on whose water they were carrying.

Not to rain on your ignorance parade, but the current IG is a Bush appointee. You seem to have it in your head that ever single official in the government is appointed every time the White House changes hands. It doesn't. Obama retained quite a few Bush appointees, probably the most well known being Robert Gates, but not remotely the only one. The IG - who is still in office - is another.

Another interesting irony - do you know when Ms Lerner was appointed to lead the division of the IRS scrutinizing tax exempt status applications? In 2006. Yup - Lois Lerner was a Bush era appointee too. I don't know what the hell is going on with her email situation. I suppose it's possible that she may well be telling the truth about the hard drive crash that lost those old emails - if that's the case, it was certainly bad luck for her. Because it certainly looks suspicious. Add to that her having invoked 5th amendment protection, and things smell really bad around her. In our system of justice, a 5th amendment plea is not supposed to be interpreted as an admission of guilt - but human nature being what it is, it's sure hard not to look at this and be seriously suspicious of her.It's ironic, however, that most of the officials involved in these scandals (like this one and fast and furious) were in their jobs long before Obama was even elected, and somehow the right think it appropriate to hang the President for their actions.

They are all a nest of liars.  IF Lil Lois reported her hard drive crashed two weeks or more before they canceled the backup service----WHY didn't they reclaim that missing data before they canceled the contract.

It's all lies, the IRS needs to be GONE.

I understand they found the emails but were upset to find out they accidentally used black highlighter on the important parts.

Smug, arrogant, Dem a$$hole...fun to see that smug grin wiped off his face last night.  Wonder if he's willing to go to jail to protect Barack Hussein Obama?

Trey Gowdy’s Not Having It: IRS Head Gets Cute About ‘Lost’ Emails & Has the Grin Wiped Off His Face   

During a rare Monday night hearing, House Republicans hammered embattled IRS commissioner John Koskinen over the “lost” Lois Lerner emails and over his continued insistence that there was no criminal wrongdoing in their coincidental disappearance.

While, as to be expected, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) repeatedly challenged Koskinen, for instance, when he demanded that he cite a particular statute or statutes (law, viz.) on which to base his claim that no criminal wrongdoing occurred. When the commissioner replied, “you can rely on common sense,” Gowdy went off:

    “Common sense? Instead of a criminal code, you wanna rely on common sense? You can shake your head all you want to commissioner; you have said today that there’s no evidence of criminal wrongdoing and I’m asking you what criminal statutes you have reviewed to reach that conclusion?”


Koskinen finally conceded: “I have reviewed no criminal statutes.”

Ironically, the commissioner also insisted that outdated technology was to blame and that it would cost the IRS $10-30 million to update its systems.

In response, Rep. Scott DesJarlais (R-TN) reminded Koskinen that the IRS paid $89 million in bonuses last year, including $1 million to employees who owed back taxes. Not a good day for the defiant commissioner of the IRS.

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/06/150307-trey-gowdy-republicans-absolutely-obliterate-irs-commissioner-lost-lerner-emails/

How can that be when the IG reported it was just a couple rogue agents from cinci and obama stated clearly it was a couple of boneheads from cinci? Would an obama IG lie? Would obama lie? And why didn't this guy simply speak the leftwing truth and declare there was no targeting because both conservative and liberal groups were all subjected to the exact same scrutiny?