Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sure they can answer how many go to their experts in the Criminal Investigation Forensics Lab. I'm quite sure the answer will be few if any and only for an executive who pushes or has a friendly connection in that Lab or a friendly IT connection that gets them there.
Then we're not talking about 4000 drives, we're talking about a single drive where extraordinary lengths were taken to recover data.
Quote:
We could debate all day how the IRS should function with regard to their system or what it would cost.
There is no debate, storage is cheap especially in this context with organization that has a 1.8 billion dollar IT budget. They could of done this for a few thousand a month at the very most.
There's evidence in her emails to the contrary. She was indeed aware this was all a political hot potato and cautioned others at the IRS not to think it was anything else on both sides of the aisle.
Whether or not she made good decisions based on that awareness is an entirely different matter.
I still don't think someone knowingly/intentionally engaged in something illegal at the direction of a president or his staff would put evidence of that in an email.
If as you say her goal was to stop those she didn't like....that's her agenda......not evidence of a conspiracy involving the White House.
There's evidence in her emails to the contrary. She was indeed aware this was all a political hot potato and cautioned others at the IRS not to think it was anything else on both sides of the aisle.
Whether or not she made good decisions based on that awareness is an entirely different matter.
I still don't think someone knowingly/intentionally engaged in something illegal at the direction of a president or his staff would put evidence of that in an email.
If as you say her goal was to stop those she didn't like....that's her agenda......not evidence of a conspiracy involving the White House.
Yeah low level "directors" routinely put their freedom and careers on the line for people they don't like just for the hell of it without any protection from higher up. ROFL.
There's evidence in her emails to the contrary. She was indeed aware this was all a political hot potato and cautioned others at the IRS not to think it was anything else on both sides of the aisle.
Whether or not she made good decisions based on that awareness is an entirely different matter.
I still don't think someone knowingly/intentionally engaged in something illegal at the direction of a president or his staff would put evidence of that in an email.
If as you say her goal was to stop those she didn't like....that's her agenda......not evidence of a conspiracy involving the White House.
That alone would not be. That all of these emails with so many others simply dissapearing gives the appearance of their being more to it. It's as unlikely that so many would go to these lengths to cover the behind of one IRS employee.
Then we're not talking about 4000 drives, we're talking about a single drive where extraordinary lengths were taken to recover data.
There is no debate, storage is cheap especially in this context with organization that has a 1.8 billion dollar IT budget. They could of done this for a few thousand a month at the very most.
Extraordinary lengths(which until they testify we don't know what they were lol....they could have taken the hard drive and moved it around to a few desks and then told her they couldn't do it for all we know.) IT people aren't known to be the most responsive people in the world to end users. In any case, extraordinary measures were only taken because she was an executive.
What they coulda, shouda done is irrelevant. They didn't.
I seriously doubt the reasons they didn't whether valid or not have anything to do with covering up a conspiracy between Ms. Lerner and the white house.
Yeah low level "directors" routinely put their freedom and careers on the line for people they don't like just for the hell of it without any protection from higher up. ROFL.
We agree they do not. However, they can get carried away with their own idealogy or over zealousness in what they perceive to be their mission that they cross the line into inappropriate and illegal activity with or without realizing that's what they are doing.
I'm sure that is happening all across the country today in both private and government offices.
Usually, there is someone who says hey wait......isn't that illegal or that's not gonna look good or what would the headline say if people become aware.......etc. Apparently, no one did that at the IRS this time.
That alone would not be. That all of these emails with so many others simply dissapearing gives the appearance of their being more to it. It's as unlikely that so many would go to these lengths to cover the behind of one IRS employee.
The appearance is not good, I agree.
But, before we proceed with impeaching a president for using the IRS against his enemies, lets get to something more than appearances ......like facts.
Unless, I misunderstood the evidence the only emails that have disappeared are Lois Lerners. Well other than the 4000 crashes some of whom lost data that's unretrievable under their system.
The alleged 6 others.........the testimony was that they are still reviewing those and they don't believe any data was lost despite hard drive crashes.
For me the question is why did Lerner plead the 5th when she knew there was no data, her drive had crashed so there was no chance of anyone finding out the facts ?
IMO the whole hard drive crash, data lost scenario was thought up after she had taken the 5th, someones latest and greatest "I know what we can tell them" idea to try and bail themselves out.
I have to back others up in saying if you can't see this whole thing is a cover up then you are blind.
For me the question is why did Lerner plead the 5th when she knew there was no data, her drive had crashed so there was no chance of anyone finding out the facts ?
IMO the whole hard drive crash, data lost scenario was thought up after she had taken the 5th, someones latest and greatest "I know what we can tell them" idea to try and bail themselves out.
I have to back others up in saying if you can't see this whole thing is a cover up then you are blind.
That doesn't make sense given there is an email trail three years ago that the hard drive did in fact crash.
In an opinion piece, the LATimes is calling for an independent investigator to look into the IRS scandal. Note, they can't bring themselves to call for an independent prosecutor, and they blame the need for an investigator on both parties (when libs split hairs, everyone gets the blame). Who can get to the truth at the IRS? An independent investigator.*-*Los Angeles Times
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
