IRS Apologizes For Targeting Conservative Political Groups In 2012 Ele (2 Viewers)

[quickhands]

It is sickening how those poor conservative groups have been mistreated. They should be allowed to foottap in their wide stances in peace. Why would Obama be forcing this so far down our tender throats?

Why?

Cant you insult republicans with out insulting gays. What is your problem?

 

[Widbil83]

Due to a "computer crash", the IRS lost all of Lois Lerner's emails to the White House and other democrat offices from Jan 2009 - Apr 2011. Seems legit.

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=384506

No scandal here! Move along.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

It is sickening how those poor conservative groups have been mistreated. ..

You ever hear of the maxim, "Don't act guilty if you're not"?

As in if you see a cop, don't start running? And if they catch you, don't lie?

Losing "evidence" (which is supposed to be exculpatory if what they have said is true btw) is pretty much the opposite of that.

 

[avoiding injuries]

At least they informed the investigative committee right away about this.

What? You mean they waited 13 months?

Ok, but at least they were forthright when they eventually did inform the committee of these lost emails.

Huh? This bit of information was buried deep in a letter that was requesting that the committee end the investigation?

Well, I bet the NY Times will press to get some answers.

They didn't write a single word about it in today's paper?

 

[timschochet]

It doesn't look good.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

At least they informed the investigative committee right away about this.

What? You mean they waited 13 months?

Ok, but at least they were forthright when they eventually did inform the committee of these lost emails.

Huh? This bit of information was buried deep in a letter that was requesting that the committee end the investigation?

Well, I bet the NY Times will press to get some answers.

They didn't write a single word about it in today's paper?

Friday afternoon release, another beauty about the WH here, clearly trying to make it as quiet as possible.

 

[joffer]

At least they informed the investigative committee right away about this.

What? You mean they waited 13 months?

Ok, but at least they were forthright when they eventually did inform the committee of these lost emails.

Huh? This bit of information was buried deep in a letter that was requesting that the committee end the investigation?

Well, I bet the NY Times will press to get some answers.

They didn't write a single word about it in today's paper?

Friday afternoon release, another beauty about the WH here, clearly trying to make it as quiet as possible.

The West Wing called it "Take out the a Trash Day"

 

[tommyboy]

####s about to get REAL

RE: TTV v. IRS et al, 1:13-cv-00734 (D.D.C.), Litigation Hold – Preservation of Responsive Evidence

Dear Counsel:

As you know, True the Vote (“TTV”) filed its lawsuit in the above-referenced matter on May 21, 2013. By the time TTV filed its suit, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and its employees and officials were on notice of the commencement of several congressional investigations. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (“Oversight”), the House Committee on Ways and Means (“Ways and Means”) and the Senate Finance Committee (“Senate Finance”) (collectively, “the Committees”) have each provided notice to the IRS of their ongoing investigations into the IRS, and specifically, Defendant Lois Lerner and her activities related to the issues involved in the TTV litigation for over a year now.

Late Friday, the IRS apparently advised the Ways & Means Committee that the IRS has “lost” Lois Lerner’s hard drive which includes thousands of Defendant Lerner’s e-mail records. However, several statutes and regulations require that the records be accessible by the Committees, and, in turn, must be preserved and made available to TTV in the event of discovery in the pending litigation. Those statutes include the Federal Records Act, Internal Revenue Manual section 1.15.6.6 (which refers to the IRS’s preservation of electronic mail messages), IRS Document 12829 (General Records Schedule 23, Records Common to Most Offices, Item 5 Schedule of Daily Activities), 36 C.F.R. 1230 (reporting accidental destruction,) and 36 CFR 1222.12. Under those records retention regulations, and the Federal Records Act generally, the IRS is required to preserve emails or otherwise contemporaneously transmit records for preservation.

Therefore, the failure for the IRS to preserve and provide these records to the Committees would evidence either violations of numerous records retention statutes and regulations or obstruction of Congress.

Federal courts have held, in the context of trial, that the bad faith destruction of evidence relevant to proof of an issue gives rise to an inference that production of the evidence would have been unfavorable to the party responsible for its destruction. See Aramburu v. The Boeing Co., 112 F.3d 1398, 1407 (10th Cir. 1997). The fact that the IRS is statutorily required to preserve these records yet nevertheless publicly claimed that they have been “lost” appears to evidence bad faith. 18 U.S.C. § 1505 makes it a federal crime to obstruct congressional proceedings and covers obstructive acts made during the course of a congressional investigation, even without official committee sanction. See, e.g., United States v. Mitchell, 877 F.2d 294, 300–01 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Tallant, 407 F. Supp. 878, 888 (D.N.D Ga. 1975).

Further, by letters dated September 17, 2013, TTV provided notice to counsel for the individual IRS Defendants in this litigation. The “Individual Defendants” are: Steven Grodnitzky, Lois Lerner, Steven Miller, Holly Paz, Michael Seto, Douglas Shulman, Cindy Thomas, William Wilkins, Susan Maloney, Ronald Bell, Janine L. Estes, and Faye Ng. TTV’s September 17, 2013 correspondence reminded you and your clients of the Individual Defendants’ obligation “not to destroy, conceal or alter any paper or electronic files, other data generated by and/or stored on your clients’ computer systems and storage media (e.g. hard disks, floppy disks, backup tapes) or any other electronic data, such as voicemail.” We identified the scope as encompassing both the personal and professional or business capacity of your clients and involving data “generated or created on or after July 15, 2010.” See Attached Letters to Ms. Benitez and Messrs. Lamken and Shur.

As the D.C. District Court has found, “[a] party has a duty ‘to preserve potentially relevant evidence . . . “once [that party] anticipates litigation.”’” Zhi Chen v. District of Columbia, 839 F. Supp. 2d 7, 12 (D.D.C. 2011) (internal citations omitted). In fact, “[t]hat obligation ‘runs first to counsel, who has a duty to advise his client of the type of information potentially relevant to the lawsuit and of the necessity of preventing its destruction[,]’” and “also extends to the managers of a corporate party, who ‘are responsible for conveying to their employees the requirements for preserving evidence.’” Id. (internal citations omitted).

By letter dated September 25, 2013, Ms. Benitez acknowledged receipt of our “litigation hold” letter, and vociferously objected to our having the temerity to send such a letter, “rejecting” our characterization of documents to be preserved. Indeed, Ms. Benitez, you indicated that you took great offense at having been put on notice to preserve and maintain documents related to the issues of this litigation. You further advised however, that you would continue to advise “your clients as appropriate and, as always, will abide by my legal and ethical obligations.” Attached Response of Ms. Benitez.

The public reports released late on Friday, June 13, 2014 stated that the IRS now claims to have “lost” the emails of defendant Lois Lerner. These reports are particularly astonishing in light of your representations, Ms. Benitez, that [you] would “advise your clients, as appropriate, and [would] abide by your legal and ethical obligations.” The “lost” emails, from press reports, appear to cover a time period from January 2009 to April 2011. See Press Release, Committee on Ways and Means, IRS Claims to Have Lost Over 2 Years of Lerner Emails (June 13, 2014), available at http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=384506.

We are deeply troubled by this news and are concerned about the spoliation of information and documents pertaining to this case and the apparent failure on your part to (a) protect and preserve all potentially relevant information and (b) to advise us of such failure and spoliation when you first learned of it. We are even more concerned after receiving your assurances that you would “abide by your legal and ethical obligations.”

Accordingly, we hereby request that you advise us of the following:

1. What steps did each of you, as counsel for the Defendants, each of them, take to ensure that any and all documents as described in the litigation hold letter and as required by federal law were, in fact, preserved?

2. When did you learn that the destruction, loss or spoliation of emails of Defendant Lois Lerner had occurred?

3. What steps have you, each of you, taken to restore Ms. Lerner’s “lost” emails?

4. Were the “lost” emails from Ms. Lerner’s computer at the IRS or her home computer?

5. Are there documents or records, as described in the Litigation Hold letter or the subpoenas issued to the IRS from any of the Committees, belonging to other defendants that have been “lost”?

We are most disturbed to learn this information from media reports and, in particular, after being chastised by Ms. Benitez regarding the fact that she “will abide by her legal and ethical obligations.” To Ms. Benitez in particular, were you aware of and/or did you participate in, authorize or otherwise sanction the destruction or “loss” of the Lois Lerner emails?

In addition to seeking responses to the questions in this letter, we also seek your consent to immediately allow a computer forensics expert selected by TTV to examine the computer(s) that is or are purportedly the source of Ms. Lerner’s “lost” emails, including cloning the hard drives, and to attempt to restore what was supposedly “lost,” and to seek to restore any and all “lost” evidence pertinent to this litigation.

We also seek access to all computers, both official and personal, used by any and all of the Defendants from and after July 1, 2010, in order to ensure preservation of the documents of all Defendants in this action.

We wish to resolve our concerns amicably but, absent your consent, we will file such motions as deemed necessary and appropriate asking the Court to require that you respond to the questions contained in this letter, and to permit such forensic examination described herein and for such other relief as may be appropriate for this egregious breach of legal authority and professional ethics.

Due to the time-sensitive and urgent nature of this request, please respond by noon on Wednesday, June 18, 2014.

Sincerely,
/s/ Cleta Mitchell
Cleta Mitchell
William Davis
Michael Lockerby
Mathew Gutierrez
Foley & Lardner LLP

Kaylan Phillips
Noel Johnson
ActRight Legal Foundation

Counsel for True the Vote

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Yeah, this:

By letter dated September 25, 2013, Ms. Benitez acknowledged receipt of our “litigation hold” letter, and vociferously objected to our having the temerity to send such a letter, “rejecting” our characterization of documents to be preserved. Indeed, Ms. Benitez, you indicated that you took great offense at having been put on notice to preserve and maintain documents related to the issues of this litigation. You further advised however, that you would continue to advise “your clients as appropriate and, as always, will abide by my legal and ethical obligations.”

And this:

However, several statutes and regulations require that the records be accessible by the Committees, and, in turn, must be preserved and made available to TTV in the event of discovery in the pending litigation. Those statutes include the Federal Records Act, Internal Revenue Manual section 1.15.6.6 (which refers to the IRS’s preservation of electronic mail messages), IRS Document 12829 (General Records Schedule 23, Records Common to Most Offices, Item 5 Schedule of Daily Activities), 36 C.F.R. 1230 (reporting accidental destruction,) and 36 CFR 1222.12. Under those records retention regulations, and the Federal Records Act generally, the IRS is required to preserve emails or otherwise contemporaneously transmit records for preservation.

Therefore, the failure for the IRS to preserve and provide these records to the Committees would evidence either violations of numerous records retention statutes and regulations or obstruction of Congress.

There should be backups and a forensic audit to boot.

So when do the subpoena the IT guy?

 

[tommyGunZ]

Yeah, this:

By letter dated September 25, 2013, Ms. Benitez acknowledged receipt of our “litigation hold” letter, and vociferously objected to our having the temerity to send such a letter, “rejecting” our characterization of documents to be preserved. Indeed, Ms. Benitez, you indicated that you took great offense at having been put on notice to preserve and maintain documents related to the issues of this litigation. You further advised however, that you would continue to advise “your clients as appropriate and, as always, will abide by my legal and ethical obligations.”

And this:

However, several statutes and regulations require that the records be accessible by the Committees, and, in turn, must be preserved and made available to TTV in the event of discovery in the pending litigation. Those statutes include the Federal Records Act, Internal Revenue Manual section 1.15.6.6 (which refers to the IRS’s preservation of electronic mail messages), IRS Document 12829 (General Records Schedule 23, Records Common to Most Offices, Item 5 Schedule of Daily Activities), 36 C.F.R. 1230 (reporting accidental destruction,) and 36 CFR 1222.12. Under those records retention regulations, and the Federal Records Act generally, the IRS is required to preserve emails or otherwise contemporaneously transmit records for preservation.

Therefore, the failure for the IRS to preserve and provide these records to the Committees would evidence either violations of numerous records retention statutes and regulations or obstruction of Congress.

There should be backups and a forensic audit to boot.

So when do the subpoena the IT guy?

Exactly. No one would be stupid enough to think that simply losing a HD would erase an email trail, would they?

I'll be blown away if this conspiracy has legs.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Yeah, this:

By letter dated September 25, 2013, Ms. Benitez acknowledged receipt of our “litigation hold” letter, and vociferously objected to our having the temerity to send such a letter, “rejecting” our characterization of documents to be preserved. Indeed, Ms. Benitez, you indicated that you took great offense at having been put on notice to preserve and maintain documents related to the issues of this litigation. You further advised however, that you would continue to advise “your clients as appropriate and, as always, will abide by my legal and ethical obligations.”

And this:

However, several statutes and regulations require that the records be accessible by the Committees, and, in turn, must be preserved and made available to TTV in the event of discovery in the pending litigation. Those statutes include the Federal Records Act, Internal Revenue Manual section 1.15.6.6 (which refers to the IRS’s preservation of electronic mail messages), IRS Document 12829 (General Records Schedule 23, Records Common to Most Offices, Item 5 Schedule of Daily Activities), 36 C.F.R. 1230 (reporting accidental destruction,) and 36 CFR 1222.12. Under those records retention regulations, and the Federal Records Act generally, the IRS is required to preserve emails or otherwise contemporaneously transmit records for preservation.

Therefore, the failure for the IRS to preserve and provide these records to the Committees would evidence either violations of numerous records retention statutes and regulations or obstruction of Congress.

There should be backups and a forensic audit to boot.

So when do the subpoena the IT guy?

Exactly. No one would be stupid enough to think that simply losing a HD would erase an email trail, would they?

I'll be blown away if this conspiracy has legs.

I highly doubt that. You've shown absolutely ZERO propensity to criticize anything left of center and clearly anything that would put your Dear Leader in a negative light. Why would this change anything?

You're not fooling anyone.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Yeah, this:

By letter dated September 25, 2013, Ms. Benitez acknowledged receipt of our “litigation hold” letter, and vociferously objected to our having the temerity to send such a letter, “rejecting” our characterization of documents to be preserved. Indeed, Ms. Benitez, you indicated that you took great offense at having been put on notice to preserve and maintain documents related to the issues of this litigation. You further advised however, that you would continue to advise “your clients as appropriate and, as always, will abide by my legal and ethical obligations.”

And this:

However, several statutes and regulations require that the records be accessible by the Committees, and, in turn, must be preserved and made available to TTV in the event of discovery in the pending litigation. Those statutes include the Federal Records Act, Internal Revenue Manual section 1.15.6.6 (which refers to the IRS’s preservation of electronic mail messages), IRS Document 12829 (General Records Schedule 23, Records Common to Most Offices, Item 5 Schedule of Daily Activities), 36 C.F.R. 1230 (reporting accidental destruction,) and 36 CFR 1222.12. Under those records retention regulations, and the Federal Records Act generally, the IRS is required to preserve emails or otherwise contemporaneously transmit records for preservation.

Therefore, the failure for the IRS to preserve and provide these records to the Committees would evidence either violations of numerous records retention statutes and regulations or obstruction of Congress.

There should be backups and a forensic audit to boot.

So when do the subpoena the IT guy?

Exactly. No one would be stupid enough to think that simply losing a HD would erase an email trail, would they?

I'll be blown away if this conspiracy has legs.

I'm just going to say this exact same situation happened with Mayor Ray Nagin in New Orleans.

A local tv station asked for his emails and his schedule.... and whoopsie, just a certain mailbox for a certain time period was missing.

I don't want to compare the two any further but this is the federal government, the backups have backups and the servers are probably mirrored. If something and it's just one thing missing and it is truly missing - there is a huge problem.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I'm sad to see that the deaths of 4 Americans are hilarious to you. Anything for your Dear Leader, right?

I'm sad to see 4 American deaths would be used to score political points. Whatever it takes to rally the republican base, right?

☝

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

It doesn't look good.

The cover up is almost always worse than the crime. I don't see how a good forensic person couldn't recover everything though so eventually everything should come out.

 

[MaxThreshold]

I'm sad to see that the deaths of 4 Americans are hilarious to you. Anything for your Dear Leader, right?

I'm sad to see 4 American deaths would be used to score political points. Whatever it takes to rally the republican base, right?

☝

Hmmmm....trying to get behind the reasons why 4 Americans died is "political points"? I'm not sure if you guys laughing at dead Americans is worse than you pretending nothing really happened at all.

 

[tommyboy]

I'm sad to see that the deaths of 4 Americans are hilarious to you. Anything for your Dear Leader, right?

I'm sad to see 4 American deaths would be used to score political points. Whatever it takes to rally the republican base, right?

☝

apparently you were in a coma from 2002-2008

 

[BigSteelThrill]

trying to get behind the reasons why 4 Americans died is "political points"?

We know why. Because people in chaotic Libya killed them.

 

[MaxThreshold]

I'm sad to see that the deaths of 4 Americans are hilarious to you. Anything for your Dear Leader, right?

I'm sad to see 4 American deaths would be used to score political points. Whatever it takes to rally the republican base, right?

☝

apparently you were in a coma from 2002-2008

American deaths weren't so funny back then when there were political points to score.

 

[Sinrman]

The whole IRS thing is a joke. Don't care what side of the aisle you are...

 

[jon_mx]

The whole IRS thing is a joke. Don't care what side of the aisle you are...

Absuing government power and a cover-up? Not a joke at all.

 

[rockaction]

Why don't you guys just stop? You've been assured by left-wing members of a message board, in addition to the NYT, that there's nothing to see here.

So there's nothing to see here.

Get it?

IRS targeted liberals! Bengoofy!

 

[fatness]

Here's a chart showing what kinds of groups were targeted.

 

[rockaction]

Here's a chart showing what kinds of groups were targeted.

Yeah, that's great. From a liberal group that got a redacted FOIA. Even CNN is laughing at you. I remember when Maurile posted it, and I then, and protested, but out of respect for Maurile, and coupled with an aversion to politics, didn't make a stink.

Don't follow it. Don't need to. Let's investigate, and let it play out, is all I've said. When MSNBC has turned on your butt, you're screwed.

 

[3C's]

Yeah, this:

By letter dated September 25, 2013, Ms. Benitez acknowledged receipt of our “litigation hold” letter, and vociferously objected to our having the temerity to send such a letter, “rejecting” our characterization of documents to be preserved. Indeed, Ms. Benitez, you indicated that you took great offense at having been put on notice to preserve and maintain documents related to the issues of this litigation. You further advised however, that you would continue to advise “your clients as appropriate and, as always, will abide by my legal and ethical obligations.”

And this:

However, several statutes and regulations require that the records be accessible by the Committees, and, in turn, must be preserved and made available to TTV in the event of discovery in the pending litigation. Those statutes include the Federal Records Act, Internal Revenue Manual section 1.15.6.6 (which refers to the IRS’s preservation of electronic mail messages), IRS Document 12829 (General Records Schedule 23, Records Common to Most Offices, Item 5 Schedule of Daily Activities), 36 C.F.R. 1230 (reporting accidental destruction,) and 36 CFR 1222.12. Under those records retention regulations, and the Federal Records Act generally, the IRS is required to preserve emails or otherwise contemporaneously transmit records for preservation.

Therefore, the failure for the IRS to preserve and provide these records to the Committees would evidence either violations of numerous records retention statutes and regulations or obstruction of Congress.

There should be backups and a forensic audit to boot.

So when do the subpoena the IT guy?

Exactly. No one would be stupid enough to think that simply losing a HD would erase an email trail, would they?

I'll be blown away if this conspiracy has legs.

I'm just going to say this exact same situation happened with Mayor Ray Nagin in New Orleans.

A local tv station asked for his emails and his schedule.... and whoopsie, just a certain mailbox for a certain time period was missing.

I don't want to compare the two any further but this is the federal government, the backups have backups and the servers are probably mirrored. If something and it's just one thing missing and it is truly missing - there is a huge problem.

you'd be surprised. then again, maybe you shouldn't.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Here's a chart showing what kinds of groups were targeted.

Yeah, that's great. From a liberal group that got a redacted FOIA. Even CNN is laughing at you. I remember when Maurile posted it, and I then, and protested, but out of respect for Maurile, and coupled with an aversion to politics, didn't make a stink.

Don't follow it. Don't need to. Let's investigate, and let it play out, is all I've said. When MSNBC has turned on your butt, you're screwed.

As MT pointed out, think progress is the group that made the foia request.

 

[rockaction]

Here's a chart showing what kinds of groups were targeted.

Yeah, that's great. From a liberal group that got a redacted FOIA. Even CNN is laughing at you. I remember when Maurile posted it, and I then, and protested, but out of respect for Maurile, and coupled with an aversion to politics, didn't make a stink.

Don't follow it. Don't need to. Let's investigate, and let it play out, is all I've said. When MSNBC has turned on your butt, you're screwed.

As MT pointed out, think progress is the group that made the foia request.

Yeah, and I remember it off the top of my head, believe it or not. Don't even need to look it up. That's how big of a joke that was, with due respect to MT's explanation, again. They requested the FOIA. Good on them. Do you think they were provided with accurate information?

CNN and MSNBC are even now laughing at this explanation.

I don't even dislike Obama -- this reeks to high stink.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Here's a chart showing what kinds of groups were targeted.

Yeah, that's great. From a liberal group that got a redacted FOIA. Even CNN is laughing at you. I remember when Maurile posted it, and I then, and protested, but out of respect for Maurile, and coupled with an aversion to politics, didn't make a stink.

Don't follow it. Don't need to. Let's investigate, and let it play out, is all I've said. When MSNBC has turned on your butt, you're screwed.

As MT pointed out, think progress is the group that made the foia request.

Here are the actual documents.

http://www.scribd.com/collections/4492912/IRS-Be-On-the-Look-Out-docs

Take a look - how would you react to those redactions? Feel like that's a pretty complete response? Feel like if you had questions they had all been answered?

22 redacted documents. Hand redacted by Sharpie by the way.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Here's a chart showing what kinds of groups were targeted.

Yeah, that's great. From a liberal group that got a redacted FOIA.

I'm sure it's hard to believe this whole thing has gotten as much airtime as it has when you see that chart, but there you have it.

Conservative groups weren't targeted. Potentially political groups were. Just like always.

But Darrell Issa requested information only on Tea Party groups that might have been checked out, and then when he got it made it sound like they were the only ones.

That's this entire "scandal" in a nutshell: an arsonist, car-thief and known liar set the IRS up, and the media bought his ridiculous story.

That chart doesn't exactly correspond with the underlying documents. Just saying.

http://www.scribd.com/collections/4492912/IRS-Be-On-the-Look-Out-docs

 

[rockaction]

It's such a waste. I'll just wait.

"Quasi-governmental?"

Oh, I saw that, man.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

These TP docs are a hoot.

Re Tea Party applications: "Any cases should be sent to Group 7822 [REDACTED] is coordinating. ..."

Why is the person's name redacted there?

Re people advocating on "Healthcare legislation" (for or against? doesn't say): "Per [REDACTED] email dated April 28, 2010 ... " and "New applicants are subjected to secondary screening in Group 7821, [REDACTED] is the coordinator."

So even when they leave in text basically they hide who was emailing and who was coordinating, but hey there's everything else you need right there.

What looks like ad hoc in black marker redactions must obfuscate around 75-90% of these pages, and even when stuff is revealed information about communications and persons' names are redacted. Great stuff there.

And finally let's remember that a group that destorys - oops "loses" emails en masse - can be expected to provide a full FOIA response totally 22 redacted pages. Makes sense.

 

[shader]

Due to a "computer crash", the IRS lost all of Lois Lerner's emails to the White House and other democrat offices from Jan 2009 - Apr 2011. Seems legit.

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=384506

Perhaps another IT guy can correct me, but this explanation is just 100% ridiculous.

How on earth do you have all of her internal emails, but not her emails going to an external source???

The only explanation is that her particular mailbox was deleted, therefore you can recover all her internal emails through other people's mailboxes.

While it is possible to delete a user's mailbox, any competent system should have backups, and I would assume that is the case with the IRS!!!

 

[LAUNCH]

Due to a "computer crash", the IRS lost all of Lois Lerner's emails to the White House and other democrat offices from Jan 2009 - Apr 2011. Seems legit.

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=384506

Perhaps another IT guy can correct me, but this explanation is just 100% ridiculous.

How on earth do you have all of her internal emails, but not her emails going to an external source???

The only explanation is that her particular mailbox was deleted, therefore you can recover all her internal emails through other people's mailboxes.

While it is possible to delete a user's mailbox, any competent system should have backups, and I would assume that is the case with the IRS!!!

100% BS. There are disaster recovery sites and 7 year retention policies in all but the most basic mom and pop shops. If all of those places blew up we could just get them from the NSA.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Due to a "computer crash", the IRS lost all of Lois Lerner's emails to the White House and other democrat offices from Jan 2009 - Apr 2011. Seems legit.

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=384506

Perhaps another IT guy can correct me, but this explanation is just 100% ridiculous.

How on earth do you have all of her internal emails, but not her emails going to an external source???

The only explanation is that her particular mailbox was deleted, therefore you can recover all her internal emails through other people's mailboxes.

While it is possible to delete a user's mailbox, any competent system should have backups, and I would assume that is the case with the IRS!!!

100% BS. There are disaster recovery sites and 7 year retention policies in all but the most basic mom and pop shops. If all of those places blew up we could just get them from the NSA.

Those are the backups. On the other hand, what if you go on to the actual server and just those mailboxes or exchanges are missing, for just one person?

How does that happen?

 

[tommyGunZ]

Here's a chart showing what kinds of groups were targeted.

Yeah, that's great. From a liberal group that got a redacted FOIA. Even CNN is laughing at you. I remember when Maurile posted it, and I then, and protested, but out of respect for Maurile, and coupled with an aversion to politics, didn't make a stink.

Don't follow it. Don't need to. Let's investigate, and let it play out, is all I've said. When MSNBC has turned on your butt, you're screwed.

As MT pointed out, think progress is the group that made the foia request.

Yeah, and I remember it off the top of my head, believe it or not. Don't even need to look it up. That's how big of a joke that was, with due respect to MT's explanation, again. They requested the FOIA. Good on them. Do you think they were provided with accurate information?

CNN and MSNBC are even now laughing at this explanation.

I don't even dislike Obama -- this reeks to high stink.

Wonder why Fox or other conservative outlets have made similar FOIA requests if the think progress request is so stinky?

 

[rockaction]

Here's a chart showing what kinds of groups were targeted.

Yeah, that's great. From a liberal group that got a redacted FOIA. Even CNN is laughing at you. I remember when Maurile posted it, and I then, and protested, but out of respect for Maurile, and coupled with an aversion to politics, didn't make a stink.

Don't follow it. Don't need to. Let's investigate, and let it play out, is all I've said. When MSNBC has turned on your butt, you're screwed.

As MT pointed out, think progress is the group that made the foia request.

Yeah, and I remember it off the top of my head, believe it or not. Don't even need to look it up. That's how big of a joke that was, with due respect to MT's explanation, again. They requested the FOIA. Good on them. Do you think they were provided with accurate information?

CNN and MSNBC are even now laughing at this explanation.

I don't even dislike Obama -- this reeks to high stink.

Wonder why Fox or other conservative outlets have made similar FOIA requests if the think progress request is so stinky?

Hasn't the Republican Senatorial Committee done so? And been stonewalled? Isn't this what this is all about? A quick Google search tells me Judicial Watch sued the IRS for documents.

Look, let it play out. That's all I ask. But chalking this up to a manufactured scandal or a partisan political attempt at mere innuendo seems less and less likely by the day.

 

[timschochet]

Maybe this is a real scandal. Maybe it isn't. I've always been skeptical, though as I wrote losing all the emails doesn't look good.

Either way though, this is a Beltway story, and the public won't care. They're bored by this kind of stuff, it doesn't generate ratings, and that's why it won't be covered that much. If somebody can prove that President Obama himself illegally ordered the IRS to harass his opponents, then it will garner attention. But anything other than that, the general public is not going to pay any attention.

 

[LAUNCH]

Due to a "computer crash", the IRS lost all of Lois Lerner's emails to the White House and other democrat offices from Jan 2009 - Apr 2011. Seems legit.

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=384506

Perhaps another IT guy can correct me, but this explanation is just 100% ridiculous.

How on earth do you have all of her internal emails, but not her emails going to an external source???

The only explanation is that her particular mailbox was deleted, therefore you can recover all her internal emails through other people's mailboxes.

While it is possible to delete a user's mailbox, any competent system should have backups, and I would assume that is the case with the IRS!!!

100% BS. There are disaster recovery sites and 7 year retention policies in all but the most basic mom and pop shops. If all of those places blew up we could just get them from the NSA.

Those are the backups. On the other hand, what if you go on to the actual server and just those mailboxes or exchanges are missing, for just one person?

How does that happen?

If it is an Exchange or a Domino server the user has limited options. No end user should ever really be able to delete their emails. They should be able to not see them in their mailbox and look deleted to them, but should be stored somewhere. We are a medium sized company and our emails are backed up in many places. We are not under Sarbanes-Oxley rules and if we were we would know in about 5 seconds who attempted to do what. This is also the baffling thing about the Snowden fiasco. There had to be alerts going off all the time that someone was accessing and copying data. The answer though to your question is the only way it could have "disappeared" is if an IT person with enough access deleted her email not only from the exchange, but all backups. They could possibly write a script to do it, but it would be unlikely that one person could have access to both the main site and the DR site. Network Administrators are generally pretty territorial so it would likely have to be an order from higher up to multiple people.

 

[Hang 10]

Maybe this is a real scandal. Maybe it isn't. I've always been skeptical, though as I wrote losing all the emails doesn't look good.

Either way though, this is a Beltway story, and the public won't care. They're bored by this kind of stuff, it doesn't generate ratings, and that's why it won't be covered that much. If somebody can prove that President Obama himself illegally ordered the IRS to harass his opponents, then it will garner attention. But anything other than that, the general public is not going to pay any attention.

 

[rockaction]

Maybe this is a real scandal. Maybe it isn't. I've always been skeptical, though as I wrote losing all the emails doesn't look good.

Either way though, this is a Beltway story, and the public won't care. They're bored by this kind of stuff, it doesn't generate ratings, and that's why it won't be covered that much. If somebody can prove that President Obama himself illegally ordered the IRS to harass his opponents, then it will garner attention. But anything other than that, the general public is not going to pay any attention.

We're not really arguing realpolitik, we're kind of arguing the morality of it. At least I am. And if two years of emails go missing, you best believe I'm laughing at those who laughed about this being a scandal. John King is yukking it up about this. This is some big joke, I guess. Election fraud, harassment, etc. Just a feather in the cap of possible executive corruption.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Maybe this is a real scandal. Maybe it isn't. I've always been skeptical, though as I wrote losing all the emails doesn't look good.

Either way though, this is a Beltway story, and the public won't care. They're bored by this kind of stuff, it doesn't generate ratings, and that's why it won't be covered that much. If somebody can prove that President Obama himself illegally ordered the IRS to harass his opponents, then it will garner attention. But anything other than that, the general public is not going to pay any attention.

That's called plausible deniability, and insulating the president, and that definitely exists. But the disappearance of evidence and the failure to report it has gotten people's attention.

 

[timschochet]

Maybe this is a real scandal. Maybe it isn't. I've always been skeptical, though as I wrote losing all the emails doesn't look good.

Either way though, this is a Beltway story, and the public won't care. They're bored by this kind of stuff, it doesn't generate ratings, and that's why it won't be covered that much. If somebody can prove that President Obama himself illegally ordered the IRS to harass his opponents, then it will garner attention. But anything other than that, the general public is not going to pay any attention.

That's called plausible deniability, and insulating the president, and that definitely exists. But the disappearance of evidence and the failure to report it has gotten people's attention.

It's gotten the attention of the same people who have been interested in this from the beginning: partisans on both sides. That's it.

 

[rockaction]

Maybe this is a real scandal. Maybe it isn't. I've always been skeptical, though as I wrote losing all the emails doesn't look good.

Either way though, this is a Beltway story, and the public won't care. They're bored by this kind of stuff, it doesn't generate ratings, and that's why it won't be covered that much. If somebody can prove that President Obama himself illegally ordered the IRS to harass his opponents, then it will garner attention. But anything other than that, the general public is not going to pay any attention.

That's called plausible deniability, and insulating the president, and that definitely exists. But the disappearance of evidence and the failure to report it has gotten people's attention.

It's gotten the attention of the same people who have been interested in this from the beginning: partisans on both sides. That's it.

John King is not a partisan hack. This is gaining a bit of traction. Not saying it'll wind up as a front-and-center story, but as soon as CNN ridicules you and asks "Do you believe in Santa Claus?" you've got an -- um, how would this administration put it? -- oh yes, an optics problem.

 

[dhockster]

Maybe this is a real scandal. Maybe it isn't. I've always been skeptical, though as I wrote losing all the emails doesn't look good.

Either way though, this is a Beltway story, and the public won't care. They're bored by this kind of stuff, it doesn't generate ratings, and that's why it won't be covered that much. If somebody can prove that President Obama himself illegally ordered the IRS to harass his opponents, then it will garner attention. But anything other than that, the general public is not going to pay any attention.

I think that with all the issues surrounding this administration that are in grey areas as to whether they did anything wrong/are incompetent/are possibly corrupt, once one of those issues clearly moves out of the grey and into the black and white, the opinion on all those issues will change. I kind of agree with you, though, that the national press is not going to go into a feeding frenzy on this until there is a clear smoking gun.

Could this loss of e-mails be the smoking gun? Possibly. Could I see the administration finding these lost e-mails during election season that have nothing damning in them, so they can paint the republicans as out to get Obama? Sure. In fact

I will not be surprised in the least if this happens.

 

[shader]

Due to a "computer crash", the IRS lost all of Lois Lerner's emails to the White House and other democrat offices from Jan 2009 - Apr 2011. Seems legit.

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=384506

Perhaps another IT guy can correct me, but this explanation is just 100% ridiculous.

How on earth do you have all of her internal emails, but not her emails going to an external source???

The only explanation is that her particular mailbox was deleted, therefore you can recover all her internal emails through other people's mailboxes.

While it is possible to delete a user's mailbox, any competent system should have backups, and I would assume that is the case with the IRS!!!

100% BS. There are disaster recovery sites and 7 year retention policies in all but the most basic mom and pop shops. If all of those places blew up we could just get them from the NSA.

This is not true. Many, many companies have terrible DR and retention policies. Most companies are working hard to get to the point where they have these things, but many are not close yet. You would think the IRS would have a great plan, but who knows.

 

[joffer]

worked for one of the top 3 computer companies in the world for 10 years with an IT department like an army and you wouldn't BELIEVE the lack of backup for some critical data, let alone email.

 

[avoiding injuries]

Maybe this is a real scandal. Maybe it isn't. I've always been skeptical, though as I wrote losing all the emails doesn't look good.

Either way though, this is a Beltway story, and the public won't care. They're bored by this kind of stuff, it doesn't generate ratings, and that's why it won't be covered that much. If somebody can prove that President Obama himself illegally ordered the IRS to harass his opponents, then it will garner attention. But anything other than that, the general public is not going to pay any attention.

Just so I understand, this won't be covered that much because it won't generate ratings, but if the left lane of the Northbound side of the George Washington Bridge is closed for a few hours, everybody will have interest?

 

[avoiding injuries]

Maybe this is a real scandal. Maybe it isn't. I've always been skeptical, though as I wrote losing all the emails doesn't look good.

Either way though, this is a Beltway story, and the public won't care. They're bored by this kind of stuff, it doesn't generate ratings, and that's why it won't be covered that much. If somebody can prove that President Obama himself illegally ordered the IRS to harass his opponents, then it will garner attention. But anything other than that, the general public is not going to pay any attention.

I think that with all the issues surrounding this administration that are in grey areas as to whether they did anything wrong/are incompetent/are possibly corrupt, once one of those issues clearly moves out of the grey and into the black and white, the opinion on all those issues will change. I kind of agree with, though, that the national press is not going to go into a feeding frenzy on this until there is a clear smoking gun.

Could this loss of e-mails be the smoking gun? Possibly. Could I see the administration finding these lost e-mails during election season that have nothing damning in them, so they can paint the republicans as out to get Obama? Sure. In fact

I will not be surprised in the least if this happens.

I agree. It's like a game of rope-a-dope, and they have close to perfected it.

 

[tommyboy]

This is not true. Many, many companies have terrible DR and retention policies. Most companies are working hard to get to the point where they have these things, but many are not close yet. You would think the IRS would have a great plan, but who knows.

here's a former IRS IT guy laying out all the redundancies required by law and explaining how the IRS backs up everything

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/06/16/exclusive-former-irs-information-tech-worker-doubts-agencys-claim-to-have-lost-lerners-emails/?singlepage=true

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

worked for one of the top 3 computer companies in the world for 10 years with an IT department like an army and you wouldn't BELIEVE the lack of backup for some critical data, let alone email.

Yes, there are plenty of examples of companies like Enron and BP where emails got trashed.

 

[timschochet]

Maybe this is a real scandal. Maybe it isn't. I've always been skeptical, though as I wrote losing all the emails doesn't look good.

Either way though, this is a Beltway story, and the public won't care. They're bored by this kind of stuff, it doesn't generate ratings, and that's why it won't be covered that much. If somebody can prove that President Obama himself illegally ordered the IRS to harass his opponents, then it will garner attention. But anything other than that, the general public is not going to pay any attention.

Just so I understand, this won't be covered that much because it won't generate ratings, but if the left lane of the Northbound side of the George Washington Bridge is closed for a few hours, everybody will have interest?

More people because it affected them directly. But I don't think that story had much legs either. I know I didn't give a ####.