IRS "loses" 2 years of Lois Lerner emails. How convenient.

[Googballz 39]

Dumbo can't count.

[MDC 7,482]

Thread deleting, welching, defending yourself with your own alias, 200+ posts in one thread = straight up loser. You are on par with child molesters and al Quaida, Google Poontang.

[Googballz 39]

200+ posts in one thread

Link?

[MDC 7,482]

FBI Surveillance Van thread, Sharon Angle bet ... the list of RP humiliations goes on and on.

[Googballz 39]

So, no link?

 

Just alias stuff. I'm sad for you.

[Googballz 39]

This thread completely sucks.

 

It's only use is as a r3tard lobster trap

There has been a lull in the IRS story so I decided to entertain myself by fukking with the tards.

 

Have I gone over my limit with my retard lobster trap in the interim?

[Googballz 39]

Even better is the IRS thread...been mocked so much about 200 posts that he keeps posting and deleting other posts to keep himself at 199....probably thinks its cool or something.

 

Mike needs to run a check on his ignore feature.

 

[MDC 7,482]

GPIAFP

[Googballz 39]

Bump

 

[MDC 7,482]

It keeps going.

[Googballz 39]

Yep.

 

 

[MDC 7,482]

I've been keeping count and that's 267 posts with 68 of them deleted.

 

It's like you're some kind of subhuman species designed to make able bodied people who aren't emotional cripples feel better about themselves.

 

Get help.

[drobeski 3,061]

I've been keeping count.

get help?

[NewbieJr 541]

I've been keeping count and that's 267 posts with 68 of them deleted.

 

It's like you're some kind of subhuman species designed to make able bodied people who aren't emotional cripples feel better about themselves.

 

Get help.

That's almost as sad as it is funny. 267!!! And for the last five days, has been deleting an old post every time he goes through withdrawal and HAS to post again. The good thing is, he knows how pathetic it makes him look, so he's making an effort to hide his shame. The bad news is...ouch. So many posts.

[Googballz 39]

[Sho Nuff 720]

 

BTW...about 10 seconds of searching produced this.

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=338443&p=3865837

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=338177&p=3860386

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=336652&p=3839681

 

 

 

Need more complaining about things clinton did too? Its kinda easy to find even with about a 1 year window when the board was actually around.

 

 

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=338315&hl=clinton&do=findComment&comment=3863655

 

This was fun too...me defending Bush and RP...holy fock.

 

drobs...still no comment on the links you requested...

[NewbieJr 541]

Wow. This thread will go down in history as the Slaughter of the Conservatives. Brutal.

[Googballz 39]

 

 

 

drobs...still no comment on the links you requested...

Maybe he is like the rest of us and just gets a chuckle at sending your Dumberer ass on wild goose chases.

[MDC 7,482]

269

[Googballz 39]

[Googballz 39]

IRS hearings are starting up again. Looks like Lerner was in full cover up mode.

 

 

 

GOP: Lerner warned IRS employees to hide information from Congress

 

Just as the IRS tea party targeting scandal was erupting, Lois G. Lerner warned colleagues to “be cautious” about what information they put in emails because it could end up being turned over to Congress, according to an email message released Wednesday.

The 2013 email exchange between Ms. Lerner and fellow employees at the Internal Revenue Service also says that instant message conversations were probably never stored and weren’t checked during open-records requests — even though they also fell under the law requiring electronic records to be stored.

“I was cautioning folks about email and how we have had several occasions where Congress has asked for emails and there has been an electronic search for responsive emails — so we need to be cautious about what we say in emails,” Ms. Lerner wrote in an April 9, 2013, message.

She went on to ask whether the instant message communications were stored automatically. When a tech staffer said no but the records could be stored if employees copied them, she replied, “Perfect.”

“Why did it take us this long to get these emails? We’ve been after this for six months,” said Rep. Jim Jordan, the Ohio Republican who raised the emails with IRS Commissioner John Koskinen at a hearing Wednesday.

Mr. Jordan said the emails were part of a pattern of Ms. Lerner trying to hide her activities, following on the crash of her computer hard drive two years earlier, which erased thousands of messages.

Mr. Koskinen said he hadn’t seen the email before but questioned the connections Mr. Jordan was drawing.

“I don’t see anything in here where Lois Lerner says, ‘Wow, I got rid of my earlier emails and now I’ve got to check on it,’” the commissioner said

Ms. Lerner’s email warning to colleagues to be careful about what they said in electronic communications issued less than two weeks after the IRS internal auditor shared a draft report with the agency accusing it of targeting tea party and other conservative groups.

A month after the email, Ms. Lerner would plant a question at a conference to reveal the scandal, just before the inspector general’s report was made public.

Ms. Lerner’s email was turned over to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee last week, more than a year after lawmakers sought it as part of their investigation into the IRS targeting.

Republicans said the email shows Ms. Lerner was aware that Congress was investigating the agency and that she was preparing to intentionally hide agency discussions from lawmakers.

Ms. Lerner’s email record has become a major scandal in and of itself after the IRS revealed that her computer hard drive crashed in 2011, causing the agency to lose thousands of her messages.

The IRS tried to recover some of the messages by asking others on the email chain to dig through their mailboxes, but the agency acknowledged that some messages may be permanently lost.

Some Republicans have questioned whether the IRS took enough steps to try to recover the emails from the hard drive in 2011.

 

The head of the National Archives testified to Congress that the IRS likely broke federal records laws by not storing Ms. Lerner’s emails properly.

IRS policy was to print out emails that constituted official records, but it’s unclear whether that ever happened.

Mr. Koskinen testified to Congress that he believed Ms. Lerner had printed out some emails. But Ms. Lerner’s attorney, William W. Taylor III, told the Politico online magazine that she didn’t know she was required print out emails and therefore did not do so.

On Wednesday, Mr. Taylor released a statement saying that “is not entirely accurate” and blamed a “misunderstanding.”

“During her tenure as director of Exempt Organizations, she did print out some emails, although not every one of the thousands she sent and received,” Mr. Taylor said.

“The facts are that Ms. Lerner did not destroy any records subject to the Federal Records Act, she did not cause the computer assigned to her to fail, and she made every effort to recover the files on the computer,” the lawyer said.

 

 

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/9/gop-lerner-warned-irs-employees-hide-information/?page=2#ixzz374qmUjmj
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

[Googballz 39]

Bump

[crackattack 520]

Could just as easily meant don't send personnel, private, inappropriate, non work type emails since they were being "watched". I've been told at work that inspections are coming or the vp's coming to observe, so watch what we do. A vague warning is hardly cover up worthy news. Not defending her, just a different take on the story. Playing devils advocate.

[Googballz 39]

That's one way to spin it, I guess.

[crackattack 520]

That's one way to spin it, I guess.

Not spin. That stuff happens in the work force. Not saying she's not trying to cover her asss, but it's not unrealistic to say that to her employees either.

[Mike Honcho 5,294]

Not spin. That stuff happens in the work force. Not saying she's not trying to cover her asss, but it's not unrealistic to say that to her employees either.

 

The spin is Issa releasing the email, going on tv and declaring it the "smoking gun". 100% ices the fact that this is a political witch hunt and not an investigation.

[crackattack 520]

 

The spin is Issa releasing the email, going on tv and declaring it the "smoking gun". 100% ices the fact that this is a political witch hunt and not an investigation.

If this was a true, meaningful, wanting to get to the bottom of things type investigation, they would give her immunity and find out what she knows. If she got her orders from the WH or higher ups, no way she rolls on them without immunity. Millions will be wasted on this investigation with little to no results.....unless she knows something and is given immunity.

[Googballz 39]

Immunity was brought up earlier in the thread and I had a question that nobody answered.

 

Wouldn't any charges have to come from the Justice dept? Chances of Holder doing that are zero, so it seems she doesn't have to worry about charges. I could be off, but if it is up to Holder she is safe.

[crackattack 520]

Immunity was brought up earlier in the thread and I had a question that nobody answered.

 

Wouldn't any charges have to come from the Justice dept? Chances of Holder doing that are zero, so it seems she doesn't have to worry about charges. I could be off, but if it is up to Holder she is safe.

 

4. Immunity Power

A witness called before Congress may refuse to answer questions or to produce documents on the ground that doing so would violate his or her Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination. Under federal law [18 USC §§ 6002, here and 6005, here], however, a house of Congress or a committee may obtain a court order compelling such testimony or production in exchange for a grant of immunity against subsequent prosecution. The relevant statute authorizes the conferral of "use" immunity, which prohibits the use of the compelled testimony or information--or any information directly or indirectly derived from it--against the witness in a criminal case. A witness who answers questions under a grant of use immunity still may be prosecuted for an offense about which he or she testifies, so long as neither the compelled testimony nor information derived from it are used in the prosecution. In addition, the statute does not protect the witness against prosecutions for perjury, false statements, or failure to comply with the immunity order.

A federal district court will issue an immunity order upon the filing of a proper application by a house of Congress or committee. This application must show (1) that it was approved by a majority of house members present or by two-thirds of the full committee, and (2) that the Attorney General was served with notice of the intent to request the order at least ten days prior to the application. Upon the request of the Attorney General, the court must defer the issuance of the order for up to an additional twenty days. This provision is intended to provide the Department of Justice with time to consider whether the order would affect its own investigations or cases and to make its concerns known to Congress. In addition, it provides the Department with time to isolate the evidence already in its possession that could be used against the witness in a later prosecution. The isolation of such evidence is necessary because, in the event the witness is indicted, the prosecution will bear the burden of showing that its evidence was derived "wholly independent[ly]" of the testimony compelled by the immunity order.

 

Looks like they can bypass the DOJ if they want to. Looks to me a federal court can issue immunity. Maybe Worms can explain with his law background.

[drobeski 3,061]

Wow

[Googballz 39]

4. Immunity Power

A witness called before Congress may refuse to answer questions or to produce documents on the ground that doing so would violate his or her Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination. Under federal law [18 USC §§ 6002, here and 6005, here], however, a house of Congress or a committee may obtain a court order compelling such testimony or production in exchange for a grant of immunity against subsequent prosecution. The relevant statute authorizes the conferral of "use" immunity, which prohibits the use of the compelled testimony or information--or any information directly or indirectly derived from it--against the witness in a criminal case. A witness who answers questions under a grant of use immunity still may be prosecuted for an offense about which he or she testifies, so long as neither the compelled testimony nor information derived from it are used in the prosecution. In addition, the statute does not protect the witness against prosecutions for perjury, false statements, or failure to comply with the immunity order.

A federal district court will issue an immunity order upon the filing of a proper application by a house of Congress or committee. This application must show (1) that it was approved by a majority of house members present or by two-thirds of the full committee, and (2) that the Attorney General was served with notice of the intent to request the order at least ten days prior to the application. Upon the request of the Attorney General, the court must defer the issuance of the order for up to an additional twenty days. This provision is intended to provide the Department of Justice with time to consider whether the order would affect its own investigations or cases and to make its concerns known to Congress. In addition, it provides the Department with time to isolate the evidence already in its possession that could be used against the witness in a later prosecution. The isolation of such evidence is necessary because, in the event the witness is indicted, the prosecution will bear the burden of showing that its evidence was derived "wholly independent[ly]" of the testimony compelled by the immunity order.

 

Looks like they can bypass the DOJ if they want to. Looks to me a federal court can issue immunity. Maybe Worms can explain with his law background.

 

 

Thanks for the info. But, if I read it correctly she can still refuse to testify and the only thing I see they have on her is contempt. So the most she does is spend some time in jail until they give up.

 

Lerner is a true believer liberal hack. I see no chance she sells out higher ups over a few days in jail.

[Mike Honcho 5,294]

So, I guess the indictments are coming this week?

[MDC 7,482]

So, I guess the indictments are coming this week?

Just wait.

[Reality 3,121]

This story has been an embarrassment in almost every way.

 

Weird bump to the say the least...

[MDC 7,482]

This story has been an embarrassment in almost every way...

Don't be so hard on the board Repubtards, they've been trained by their media overlords to act like little girls.

[ZeroTolerance 584]

This story has been an embarrassment in almost every way.

 

Weird bump to the say the least...

 

I figured it was the board liberals' dumb response to all of RP's equally stupid "the indictment is coming any day, right?" stuff during the Valerie Plame affair.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Oops!

Looks like a lot of IRS officials have been perjuring themselves in front of Congress.

 

Gov’t Watchdog Says IRS Lawyer Admitted Lois Lerner’s ‘Lost’ Emails Were Backed Up

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told FoxNews Monday that attorneys for the IRS have admitted that all of the supposedly lost emails from former IRS employee Lois Lerner are backed up, and that the IRS has not admitted this because they say it would be too hard to dig them out of these backed up files.

“A Department of Justice attorney told a Judicial Watch attorney on Friday that it turns out the federal government backs up all computer records in case something terrible happens in Washington,” Fitton said.

“So everything we’ve been hearing about scratched hard drives, missing emails of Lois Lerner, other IRS officials, other officials in the Obama administration… it’s all been a pack of malarky,” he said. “They could get these records but they don’t want to.”

“There’s no such thing as Lois Lerner’s missing emails,” he added. “It’s all been a big lie. They’ve been lying to the courts, the American people, and to Congress.”

Judicial Watch has been pursuing its own investigation of the IRS targeting scandal, and was told that Lerner’s emails still exist by lawyers during that process.

Congress has also been seeking emails from Lerner, who was at the center of the IRS effort to apply extra scrutiny to conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status. But IRS Commissioner John Koskinen and others have said repeatedly that Lerner’s hard drive crashed, and that more than two years’ worth of her emails are lost.

Officials have also said emails from several other IRS officials are missing as well.

Judicial Watch learned this information from declarations to the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia from two IRS IT officials.

One of them, Stephen Manning, said there is “no record of any attempt by any IRS IT employee to recover data from any Blackberry device assigned to Lois Lerner in response to the congressional investigations or this litigation.”

Cause of Action Director Dan Epstein also blasted the IRS on Monday for failing to run basic searches on Lerner’s Blackberry for the lost emails.

“The IRS knew Lerner’s hard drive was not recoverable while the blackberry was operating,” he said. “This should have triggered a search and preservation of the blackberry contents – but the IRS failed to do that.”

Fitton said his next step would be to explore how the IRS has been able to hide the fact that they are in possession of Lerner’s emails, after telling Congress numerous times that the emails are gone.

“We’ve asked the Department of Justice that same thing,” Fitton said. “We want to know why they hadn’t told the court about this backup system.”

“If this backup system is working, then Lois Lerner’s emails are there,” he said.

 

 

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/25/govt-watchdog-says-irs-lawyer-admitted-lois-lerners-lost-emails-were-backed-up/

[crackattack 520]

Progress!!!

[Sho Nuff 720]

Who posted in: IRS "loses" 2 years of Lois L...

Member name Posts

Googballz 199

Recliner Pilot 1

 

 

So... back to 200...better get back to deleting posts again.

[Googballz 39]

Who posted in: IRS "loses" 2 years of Lois L...

Member name Posts

Googballz 199

Recliner Pilot 1

 

 

So... back to 200...better get back to deleting posts again.

RMFF!