BREAKING: E-mails Show Lois Lerner Intentionally Sought to Hide Information from Cong

[Care4all]

Government corruption and the liberals ignore the loss of not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, not six, but seven hard drives, not backed up as required, none of the seven. Imagine that! Them they are supposed to have paper copy and guess what...none of them do!

How do you explain this away as a coincidence?

How stupid do you have to be to believe it was all just happenstance?

I'm serious guys, who really is falling for this?

During this period of the 7 hard drive crashes, how many hard drive crashes took place at IRS?

IF it was only 2 others that crashed, then it is very suspicious that the 7 all crashed....

but if 70 hard drives crashed during the same period at the irs, it becomes LESS suspicious.

As far as these employees including Learner not printing back ups to their own emails...

It is NOT suspicious IF none of the IRS employees were making paper copies of their own email...

But it would be suspicious for the 7, including Learner, if the rest of IRS employees were making copies of their own emails and these 7 were not....

IF there was back ups on servers for IRS employee emails, with the exception of the 7 people of interest , that would be suspicious...

However, if there were no emails from irs employees from this time period saved on servers, then the emails lost or rather missing from these 7 people of interest, are not out of the ordinary because no one's emails were saved on servers.

The onus is on the IRS to provide evidence exonerating itself since it has not complied with a lawful subpoena. The onus is not on the citizens to accept speculation from a partisan political supporter of this administration.

no, the onus is on the accuser of the supposed wrong doer, ALWAYS in this nation. The law, the government, has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, guilt...so to say....so, if these dog and pony, showmanship congress critters have enough evidence to charge someone with criminal behavior, they need to do it....mere speculation is meaningless and serves no purpose other than political posturing for the up coming elections.

you're right that this should not be political, AS YOUR SIDE of the Aisle chose to make it, from day 1!!!! I challenge you to prove otherwise!

so so sad too....when these congress critters chose to spend all this tax money, on all these hearings, and once again, they've got nothing but speculations....they could have saved a ton and spared us their grand standing in front of the cameras if they would have just given lois learner immunity....


BUT NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, they benefit more politically, from the right wing media circus...is what they obviously decided.

I honestly don't see how you Obama haters can't see this? It's plain as day....

So, many of us would like to get to the bottom of this, we just don't accept mere speculation as PROOF, like you guys are so willing to do....or without information missing that is needed to become more suspicious....like I had inquired in my post above...

 

[Jarhead]

How come the investigator the president hired did not ask to see emails and hard drives of the subject of the investigation or interview the alleged victims before determining that no crimes were committed?

What evidence did she review that showed lerner did nothing criminal?

And before you simply answer "I don't know".....

Why would the President accept her findings as conclusive if, in fact, she did not have access to emails and hard drives of Lois Lerner?

And before you answer "I don't know"....

If you were a victim of a rogue banker who stole all of your money....would you be satisfied with findings of "no crime committed" if the investigator did not interview you or look at any of the electronic records of the banker?

Or are you going to do what everyone else on the left has done and ignore these questions?

BlindBoo....Siete....ClosedCaption......Care4All...

Why will none of you address these questions above? I have asked them several times over the past several weeks in multiple threads but no one will respond.

Why?

Can you truly say that such is not a bit strange? What did we pay that investigator?

Should the President have accepted her findings as fact?

You already know the answer.
Dems are lying scum. They don't really care if Democratic Senators pressured the IRS into suppressing conservative groups. Hell, they'd welcome that. That's their team kicking ass. That's all that matters to them.

I am not asking democratic politicians.

I am asking those who believe those politicians and are calling the likes of me, and you, and the alleged victims as loons and tax payer money wasters...and racists...

So I want them to answer. The fact that they wont speaks volumes about their confidence in their position.....

But I dare one to answer.

 

[The Rabbi]

So you don't think the IRS suppressing groups because of their political views is worthy of investigation or wrong in any way?
Wow. Just wow.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

During this period of the 7 hard drive crashes, how many hard drive crashes took place at IRS?

IF it was only 2 others that crashed, then it is very suspicious that the 7 all crashed....

but if 70 hard drives crashed during the same period at the irs, it becomes LESS suspicious.

As far as these employees including Learner not printing back ups to their own emails...

It is NOT suspicious IF none of the IRS employees were making paper copies of their own email...

But it would be suspicious for the 7, including Learner, if the rest of IRS employees were making copies of their own emails and these 7 were not....

IF there was back ups on servers for IRS employee emails, with the exception of the 7 people of interest , that would be suspicious...

However, if there were no emails from irs employees from this time period saved on servers, then the emails lost or rather missing from these 7 people of interest, are not out of the ordinary because no one's emails were saved on servers.

The onus is on the IRS to provide evidence exonerating itself since it has not complied with a lawful subpoena. The onus is not on the citizens to accept speculation from a partisan political supporter of this administration.

no, the onus is on the accuser of the supposed wrong doer, ALWAYS in this nation. The law, the government, has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, guilt...so to say....so, if these dog and pony, showmanship congress critters have enough evidence to charge someone with criminal behavior, they need to do it....mere speculation is meaningless and serves no purpose other than political posturing for the up coming elections.

you're right that this should not be political, AS YOUR SIDE of the Aisle chose to make it, from day 1!!!! I challenge you to prove otherwise!

so so sad too....when these congress critters chose to spend all this tax money, on all these hearings, and once again, they've got nothing but speculations....they could have saved a ton and spared us their grand standing in front of the cameras if they would have just given lois learner immunity....


BUT NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, they benefit more politically, from the right wing media circus...is what they obviously decided.

I honestly don't see how you Obama haters can't see this? It's plain as day....

So, many of us would like to get to the bottom of this, we just don't accept mere speculation as PROOF, like you guys are so willing to do....or without information missing that is needed to become more suspicious....like I had inquired in my post above...

Bat Shit Crazy!!! or Partisan ? You decide.

 

[Jarhead]

During this period of the 7 hard drive crashes, how many hard drive crashes took place at IRS?

IF it was only 2 others that crashed, then it is very suspicious that the 7 all crashed....

but if 70 hard drives crashed during the same period at the irs, it becomes LESS suspicious.

As far as these employees including Learner not printing back ups to their own emails...

It is NOT suspicious IF none of the IRS employees were making paper copies of their own email...

But it would be suspicious for the 7, including Learner, if the rest of IRS employees were making copies of their own emails and these 7 were not....

IF there was back ups on servers for IRS employee emails, with the exception of the 7 people of interest , that would be suspicious...

However, if there were no emails from irs employees from this time period saved on servers, then the emails lost or rather missing from these 7 people of interest, are not out of the ordinary because no one's emails were saved on servers.

The onus is on the IRS to provide evidence exonerating itself since it has not complied with a lawful subpoena. The onus is not on the citizens to accept speculation from a partisan political supporter of this administration.

no, the onus is on the accuser of the supposed wrong doer, ALWAYS in this nation. The law, the government, has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, guilt...so to say....so, if these dog and pony, showmanship congress critters have enough evidence to charge someone with criminal behavior, they need to do it....mere speculation is meaningless and serves no purpose other than political posturing for the up coming elections.

you're right that this should not be political, AS YOUR SIDE of the Aisle chose to make it, from day 1!!!! I challenge you to prove otherwise!

so so sad too....when these congress critters chose to spend all this tax money, on all these hearings, and once again, they've got nothing but speculations....they could have saved a ton and spared us their grand standing in front of the cameras if they would have just given lois learner immunity....


BUT NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, they benefit more politically, from the right wing media circus...is what they obviously decided.

I honestly don't see how you Obama haters can't see this? It's plain as day....

So, many of us would like to get to the bottom of this, we just don't accept mere speculation as PROOF, like you guys are so willing to do....or without information missing that is needed to become more suspicious....like I had inquired in my post above...

Now you sound like Truithmatters. Congress did not make it partisan. Congress got frustrated by not getting the info they need to determine if anything was done wrong to American Citizens.

Congress got frustrated when the President accepted the findings of an investigator who did not interview any alleged victims and did not have a data trail or paper trail to review....

The fact that you see it as partisan tells me that you don't want to know the truth...

But....go ahead....

Answer my questions of a few posts earlier care4all.

 

[Jarhead]

During this period of the 7 hard drive crashes, how many hard drive crashes took place at IRS?

IF it was only 2 others that crashed, then it is very suspicious that the 7 all crashed....

but if 70 hard drives crashed during the same period at the irs, it becomes LESS suspicious.

As far as these employees including Learner not printing back ups to their own emails...

It is NOT suspicious IF none of the IRS employees were making paper copies of their own email...

But it would be suspicious for the 7, including Learner, if the rest of IRS employees were making copies of their own emails and these 7 were not....

IF there was back ups on servers for IRS employee emails, with the exception of the 7 people of interest , that would be suspicious...

However, if there were no emails from irs employees from this time period saved on servers, then the emails lost or rather missing from these 7 people of interest, are not out of the ordinary because no one's emails were saved on servers.

The onus is on the IRS to provide evidence exonerating itself since it has not complied with a lawful subpoena. The onus is not on the citizens to accept speculation from a partisan political supporter of this administration.

no, the onus is on the accuser of the supposed wrong doer, ALWAYS in this nation. The law, the government, has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, guilt...so to say....so, if these dog and pony, showmanship congress critters have enough evidence to charge someone with criminal behavior, they need to do it....mere speculation is meaningless and serves no purpose other than political posturing for the up coming elections.

you're right that this should not be political, AS YOUR SIDE of the Aisle chose to make it, from day 1!!!! I challenge you to prove otherwise!

so so sad too....when these congress critters chose to spend all this tax money, on all these hearings, and once again, they've got nothing but speculations....they could have saved a ton and spared us their grand standing in front of the cameras if they would have just given lois learner immunity....


BUT NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, they benefit more politically, from the right wing media circus...is what they obviously decided.

I honestly don't see how you Obama haters can't see this? It's plain as day....

So, many of us would like to get to the bottom of this, we just don't accept mere speculation as PROOF, like you guys are so willing to do....or without information missing that is needed to become more suspicious....like I had inquired in my post above...

In bold....

Who?

President Obama? To him the case is closed. Not a smidgen of corruption.

The AG? He refuses to assign a special prosecutor.

Ranking Member Cummings? He refuses to ask questions in hearings. He uses his time to blast the GOP for having hearings.

Reid? Case closed to him. Same with Pelosi.

So who?

 

[The Rabbi]

She's lying. They dont want to get to the bottom of it. And if they do they'll claim they really haven't. They think "the bottom" is that Darrel Issa has it out for Obama, The GOP is pissed with the IRS for leaning on Karl Rove over a campaign contribution, and the House Republicans are just looking to impeach the first black president.

 

[Jarhead]

What makes this suspicious, Care4all, is the fact that the President accepted the findings of his appointed investigator.

She said she reviewed all evidence and found no criminal activity whatsoever.

Yet she did not interview the complainants nor did she have access to the emails of the target of the investigation.

If her findings were "inconclusive due to missing information"...I would understand.

But her findings were "no crimes committed"......and the President accepted that and regurgitated it.

THAT makes it suspicious.

 

[Ernie S.]

During this period of the 7 hard drive crashes, how many hard drive crashes took place at IRS?

IF it was only 2 others that crashed, then it is very suspicious that the 7 all crashed....

but if 70 hard drives crashed during the same period at the irs, it becomes LESS suspicious.

As far as these employees including Learner not printing back ups to their own emails...

It is NOT suspicious IF none of the IRS employees were making paper copies of their own email...

But it would be suspicious for the 7, including Learner, if the rest of IRS employees were making copies of their own emails and these 7 were not....

IF there was back ups on servers for IRS employee emails, with the exception of the 7 people of interest , that would be suspicious...

However, if there were no emails from irs employees from this time period saved on servers, then the emails lost or rather missing from these 7 people of interest, are not out of the ordinary because no one's emails were saved on servers.

LOL...I know you WANT this to be explainable, Care but there is no way on God's green earth for all the things the IRS is claiming to have happened to have REALLY happened! First of all...what would the odds be that Lois Lerner's computer would crash (the Head of Exempt Organizations), Nikole Flax's computer would crash (formally working in Exempt Organizations for Lerner before becoming Chief of Staff to the IRS Commissioner) and Michelle Eldridge's computer would crash (IRS National Media Relations Chief) all in a short amount of time? Then amazingly enough four of the agents working in the Exempt Organizations office had THEIR computers crash as well! Keep in mind that all of these computer crashes occurred after Camp's letter arrived at the IRS.

That by itself would be extremely dubious but then you throw in that NONE of these 7 people committed any of their emails to paper even though by Federal law they are required to do so it gets even MORE dubious!

Then add to that the IRS's complete failure to recover any of this data from the tape back ups that they are required to have as well...even though they KNEW that Congress had been asking for the emails and the IRS had promised for months that they would get them! That's the one that should set off bells and whistles, Care! Everything Congress was asking for would have been on those tape backups. Yet months went by and none of it was recovered despite Congress's repeated requests. Then, those back up tapes were erased! ERASED!!! Think about that!!! Who the hell erases back up tapes that hold information that has been asked for in a Congressional investigation and that you have PROMISED repeatedly is going to be delivered? Are you REALLY contending that the IRS just "forgot" to get that data off those back ups?

Liberals know there's corruption.. They don't care. They will play this game and tear down this nation instead of doing what's right.

They keep yelling that Issa can't PROVE corruption. They ignore the fact that the IRS has illegally withheld evidence necessary to for that proof. Yeah, I do believe in coincidence. Lerner's hard drive COULD crash at the perfect time, but when 7 hard drives crash at the perfect time, it's hardly coincidence. The odds are a million to one that there is a deliberate cover-up.

 

[Jarhead]

And to answer one of your questions...

The head of the national Archives and Records Administration, at one of the hearings, informed the committee that anytime records are lost...INCLUDING EMAILS.....his administration is to be informed so a process can be undertaken to find/preserve them.

When asked if the IRS did this with Lerners emails....he said "No."

That, too, adds to the suspicion.

Were crimes committed?

We don't know. We cant get access to the information to prove guilt OR innocence.

Is there suspicion that such evidence was intentionally destroyed?

Yes. Every single protocol/law that was to be followed to ensure they are NOT lost was not followed.

You don't find that suspicious?

Why doesn't the President? The AG? The Ranking Member Cummings? You?

 

[Jarhead]

Why is it that every time I ask those questions, the people on the left ignore them and leave the thread for a while?

 

[depotoo]

What makes this suspicious, Care4all, is the fact that the President accepted the findings of his appointed investigator.

She said she reviewed all evidence and found no criminal activity whatsoever.

Yet she did not interview the complainants nor did she have access to the emails of the target of the investigation.

If her findings were "inconclusive due to missing information"...I would understand.

But her findings were "no crimes committed"......and the President accepted that and regurgitated it.

THAT makes it suspicious.

She would have been laughed at in a court of law. Wonder how much we paid her?

 

[depotoo]

Why is it that every time I ask those questions, the people on the left ignore them and leave the thread for a while?

Because they can't answer truthfully.

 

[Jarhead]

Lets see...

Hard drive crashes and no effort to ensure the back up tape is preserved. I mean, the day it crashed, they could have gone to the back up tape and implant it on her new hard drive. Why would they not? Was she not involved in any IRS "business" at the time the hard drive crashed?

I mean, my hard drive crashes and I immediately go to my most recent back up and implant it on my new hard drive. After all, I would have gone out of business if I did not have access to the stuff I was doing the day before. The week before. The month before.


No paper copies made despite the law saying otherwise.

NARA was not informed immediately of lost data as per regulation to ensure all can be done to retrieve the information.

That is not enough suspicion to warrant the AG getting involved?

 

[Jarhead]

What makes this suspicious, Care4all, is the fact that the President accepted the findings of his appointed investigator.

She said she reviewed all evidence and found no criminal activity whatsoever.

Yet she did not interview the complainants nor did she have access to the emails of the target of the investigation.

If her findings were "inconclusive due to missing information"...I would understand.

But her findings were "no crimes committed"......and the President accepted that and regurgitated it.

THAT makes it suspicious.

She would have been laughed at in a court of law. Wonder how much we paid her?

Why did the president accept her findings?

I mean....HOW CAN HE?

Why does he not want to know the truth? He is President.

Or is it that he doesn't want US to know the truth.

Someone should ask him my question....

if a banker stole all of his money and the police investigation showed that the banker did nothing wrong....but the investigator did not interview him and di not have access and review the bankers data and paper records....

Would he be happy and accept the findings that the banker did nothing illegal?

 

[Jarhead]

Why is it that every time I ask those questions, the people on the left ignore them and leave the thread for a while?

Because they can't answer truthfully.

yet they say the GOP has made it political.

The fact that democrats call it a witch hunt is what makes it political.

 

[depotoo]

And to answer one of your questions...

The head of the national Archives and Records Administration, at one of the hearings, informed the committee that anytime records are lost...INCLUDING EMAILS.....his administration is to be informed so a process can be undertaken to find/preserve them.

When asked if the IRS did this with Lerners emails....he said "No."

That, too, adds to the suspicion.

Were crimes committed?

We don't know. We cant get access to the information to prove guilt OR innocence.

Is there suspicion that such evidence was intentionally destroyed?

Yes. Every single protocol/law that was to be followed to ensure they are NOT lost was not followed.

You don't find that suspicious?

Why doesn't the President? The AG? The Ranking Member Cummings? You?

Actually , according to NARA they did break the law.

 

[Jarhead]

And to answer one of your questions...

The head of the national Archives and Records Administration, at one of the hearings, informed the committee that anytime records are lost...INCLUDING EMAILS.....his administration is to be informed so a process can be undertaken to find/preserve them.

When asked if the IRS did this with Lerners emails....he said "No."

That, too, adds to the suspicion.

Were crimes committed?

We don't know. We cant get access to the information to prove guilt OR innocence.

Is there suspicion that such evidence was intentionally destroyed?

Yes. Every single protocol/law that was to be followed to ensure they are NOT lost was not followed.

You don't find that suspicious?

Why doesn't the President? The AG? The Ranking Member Cummings? You?

Actually , according to NARA they did break the law.

That is what I was saying...

He said "no" to the question of "Did the IRS report the crashed hard drive and missing data when it first happened in accordance with the law"

 

[The Rabbi]

Why is it that every time I ask those questions, the people on the left ignore them and leave the thread for a while?

Because they can't answer truthfully.

yet they say the GOP has made it political.

The fact that democrats call it a witch hunt is what makes it political.

But Bush lied to us and started 2 unnecessary wars! He crashed the economy! Dick Cheney looted the Treasury for Halliburton! Legalize pot!

 

[BlindBoo]

What I know and what you claim she stated as fact are two different things.

How come the investigator the president hired did not ask to see emails and hard drives of the subject of the investigation or interview the alleged victims before determining that no crimes were committed?

What evidence did she review that showed lerner did nothing criminal?

And before you simply answer "I don't know".....

Why would the President accept her findings as conclusive if, in fact, she did not have access to emails and hard drives of Lois Lerner?

And before you answer "I don't know"....

If you were a victim of a rogue banker who stole all of your money....would you be satisfied with findings of "no crime committed" if the investigator did not interview you or look at any of the electronic records of the banker?

Or are you going to do what everyone else on the left has done and ignore these questions?

BlindBoo....Siete....ClosedCaption......Care4All...

Why will none of you address these questions above? I have asked them several times over the past several weeks in multiple threads but no one will respond.

Why?

Can you truly say that such is not a bit strange? What did we pay that investigator?

Should the President have accepted her findings as fact?

I feel ya, no one has answered my question yet either. All they seem to do is dodge and make accusations.