IRS tech experts: Lerner’s hard drive only 'scratched,' not destroyed

[Care4all]

We will never know what Learner was doing, she is invoking the 5th, why?

Because the burden rests solely with the state to prove guilt, not the citizen to prove innocence. Lerner and all citizens are innocent until proved guilty in a court of law. The 5th Amendment prevents the government from pursuing criminal prosecution based only on the statements of citizens, absent objective, documented evidence.

One does not invoke the 5th Amendment to avoid criminal prosecution or punishment, it does not mean one is 'guilty,' or 'hiding something,' but is meant to compel the state to meet the standard necessary to potentially take from a citizen his liberty.

And the 5th Amendment is indeed significant in this situation, as the intent of the Amendment was to prevent the government from punishing political opponents for purely partisan reasons, which is clearly true in this case – where the republican agenda has nothing to so with the truth or facts.

Clayton -STFU - nobody reads your biased opinionated unqualified "legal briefs" so do yourself a favor and stop taking up space on everybodies computer screens - thanks Pal

he's the only one making sense...

The rest of you are salivating for a lynching, without a trial....and without evidence or proof....ONLY SPECULATION.

Amazing how you guys just LOVE THIS GOVERNMENT overreach and bashing and the gvt using their power to squash a citizen for no criminal reasons, only POLITICAL posturing,

while you all screamed bloody murder on how intrusive and horrible and overreaching our gvt was to Bundy....who actually did break the Law....

I GIVE UP, you all are hopeless, and hypocrites to the enth degree, and ya don't even know it...

 

[Jarhead]

Because the burden rests solely with the state to prove guilt, not the citizen to prove innocence. Lerner and all citizens are innocent until proved guilty in a court of law. The 5th Amendment prevents the government from pursuing criminal prosecution based only on the statements of citizens, absent objective, documented evidence.

One does not invoke the 5th Amendment to avoid criminal prosecution or punishment, it does not mean one is 'guilty,' or 'hiding something,' but is meant to compel the state to meet the standard necessary to potentially take from a citizen his liberty.

And the 5th Amendment is indeed significant in this situation, as the intent of the Amendment was to prevent the government from punishing political opponents for purely partisan reasons, which is clearly true in this case – where the republican agenda has nothing to so with the truth or facts.

Clayton -STFU - nobody reads your biased opinionated unqualified "legal briefs" so do yourself a favor and stop taking up space on everybodies computer screens - thanks Pal

he's the only one making sense...

The rest of you are salivating for a lynching, without a trial....and without evidence or proof....ONLY SPECULATION.

Amazing how you guys just LOVE THIS GOVERNMENT overreach and bashing and the gvt using their power to squash a citizen for no criminal reasons, only POLITICAL posturing,

while you all screamed bloody murder on how intrusive and horrible and overreaching our gvt was to Bundy....who actually did break the Law....

I GIVE UP, you all are hopeless, and hypocrites to the enth degree, and ya don't even know it...

This is an opinion board.

You know...where people had Zimmerman hanged for murder and racism before Martin was buried....Where people had Bush and Cheney guilty of war crimes with no proof such were committed....where YOU have accused congress of doing nothing without knowing that they have subpoenaed documents they never received and have numerous times did all the law will allow them to do to get to the bottom of the IRS situation.

So I find it interesting that you have "given up" with people on here that are doing exactly what you do.

 

[Jarhead]

If there's a crime you should be able to prove it without her testimony.

Because what is clear to me is that the poor woman just tried to do her job when a bunch of groups were defrauding the system.

See, there's Joe spewing his crap narrative again. No matter how many times it's been shown to be wrong he continues to spew it. Because facts dont matter to Joe. Only the narrative.

and here's the thing. If Lerner ever finds herself in front of a jury, especially a DC Jury, you are going to find a lot of people who see it that way.

So there's really no point to this, other than to grandstand, is there?

I find it interesting that you have no issue with the government declaring the 5th.

You have no issue with the government not adhering to the Federal Records Act

You have no issue with the IRS insisting we keep records for 7 years to ensure we tell them the truth, but they only need to keep them for 6 months making it difficult to see if they are telling the truth

Bet you would find issue with all of these things if it were a republican administration.

Just a guess....but an educated guess.

 

[GreenBean]

Because the burden rests solely with the state to prove guilt, not the citizen to prove innocence. Lerner and all citizens are innocent until proved guilty in a court of law. The 5th Amendment prevents the government from pursuing criminal prosecution based only on the statements of citizens, absent objective, documented evidence.

One does not invoke the 5th Amendment to avoid criminal prosecution or punishment, it does not mean one is 'guilty,' or 'hiding something,' but is meant to compel the state to meet the standard necessary to potentially take from a citizen his liberty.

And the 5th Amendment is indeed significant in this situation, as the intent of the Amendment was to prevent the government from punishing political opponents for purely partisan reasons, which is clearly true in this case – where the republican agenda has nothing to so with the truth or facts.

Clayton -STFU - nobody reads your biased opinionated unqualified "legal briefs" so do yourself a favor and stop taking up space on everybodies computer screens - thanks Pal

he's the only one making sense...

The rest of you are salivating for a lynching, without a trial....and without evidence or proof....ONLY SPECULATION.

Amazing how you guys just LOVE THIS GOVERNMENT overreach and bashing and the gvt using their power to squash a citizen for no criminal reasons, only POLITICAL posturing,

while you all screamed bloody murder on how intrusive and horrible and overreaching our gvt was to Bundy....who actually did break the Law....

I GIVE UP, you all are hopeless, and hypocrites to the enth degree, and ya don't even know it...

The Law is required to be applied equally to all- I sincerely doubt he would make any sense to you were it the Bush Administration he were applying his bias legal-eez to.

 

[Care4all]

I already posted a direct link to the IRS policy on emails, all your link does is explain why the IRS is scrambling for excuses for not following federal law.

ohhhh, but that is not a relevant point at all to this conspiracy....

if no one in the entire IRS followed that policy and made paper copies because they were directed NOT TO due to not having space on their 3 email servers, then how is Lerner to be blamed for this?

what makes what she did, archiving them on her own laptop, suspicious of wrong doing or criminality involved in this scrutiny of groups that this investigation is about? when all of the thousands of IRS employees did the SAME thing and followed the same IRS Policy?


Sure...the head of the IRS that made that financial decision on not to buy larger servers might be to blame,

but it has nothing to do with this investigation on lerner...and erases the suspicion that she and she alone did not print her emails because she wanted to hide them, which has been the republican contention.

so you can quote that rule all day long...shoot, even i have quoted and linked it earlier in this investigation, but NOW WE KNOW it is MEANINGLESS to this investigation...

We will never know what Learner was doing, she is invoking the 5th, why?

she's invoking the fifth because the government, the Republican Congress Critter Investigators, is on a fishing expedition and purely partisan witch hunt and have totally BLOWN this investigation with their Dog and Pony shows and grand standing....and UN-PROFESSIONALIM! they are a joke!


That's what her lawyer said....when he advised her to take the 5th...

This government over reach, is BEYOND REASON, and you allll....

you are just licking it up....? WHY when you supposedly hate the federal government's POWER so much? Is it all A-OK when it is your side of the aisle of government doing it?

my answer is a resounding, NO, it's NOT A-OK.

 

[Jarhead]

ohhhh, but that is not a relevant point at all to this conspiracy....

if no one in the entire IRS followed that policy and made paper copies because they were directed NOT TO due to not having space on their 3 email servers, then how is Lerner to be blamed for this?

what makes what she did, archiving them on her own laptop, suspicious of wrong doing or criminality involved in this scrutiny of groups that this investigation is about? when all of the thousands of IRS employees did the SAME thing and followed the same IRS Policy?


Sure...the head of the IRS that made that financial decision on not to buy larger servers might be to blame,

but it has nothing to do with this investigation on lerner...and erases the suspicion that she and she alone did not print her emails because she wanted to hide them, which has been the republican contention.

so you can quote that rule all day long...shoot, even i have quoted and linked it earlier in this investigation, but NOW WE KNOW it is MEANINGLESS to this investigation...

We will never know what Learner was doing, she is invoking the 5th, why?

she's invoking the fifth because the government, the Republican Congress Critter Investigators, is on a fishing expedition and purely partisan witch hunt and have totally BLOWN this investigation with their Dog and Pony shows and grand standing....and UN-PROFESSIONALIM! they are a joke!


That's what her lawyer said....when he advised her to take the 5th...

This government over reach, is BEYOND REASON, and you allll....

you are just licking it up....? WHY when you supposedly hate the federal government's POWER so much? Is it all A-OK when it is your side of the aisle of government doing it?

my answer is a resounding, NO, it's NOT A-OK.

I never saw you as a partisan ass.....until this thread.

You are so hell bent on pushing this under the carpet, you have lied in this thread, made up facts, ignored facts and....well....as I said....made an ass of yourself.

Basic fact.....when her hard drive crashed, she was able to retrieve via the back up ALL data except her archived emails.

Really?

Why does one archive emails if they do not feel the need to keep them...and if they feel the need to keep them, why would they set up the back up to back up everything EXCEPT the archived emails?

Sure...you will make some excuse such as...."She probably assumed she will never need them..."

Then why did she archive them and not simply delete them...

And you, again, will make up some excuse like....."she wasn't savvy enough to set the back up to back them up to..."

But to NOT back up something, the back up[ must be set to NOT back it up. It is an extra step.....so why would she intentionally set it to NOT back up the archived files...

And you will make an excuse like...."maybe it was the tech guy that did it in error..."

So why would the tech guy intentionally set it to NOT back up something?

And you will make another excuse.

It is your MO in this thread.

Tool.

 

[Care4all]

Clayton -STFU - nobody reads your biased opinionated unqualified "legal briefs" so do yourself a favor and stop taking up space on everybodies computer screens - thanks Pal

he's the only one making sense...

The rest of you are salivating for a lynching, without a trial....and without evidence or proof....ONLY SPECULATION.

Amazing how you guys just LOVE THIS GOVERNMENT overreach and bashing and the gvt using their power to squash a citizen for no criminal reasons, only POLITICAL posturing,

while you all screamed bloody murder on how intrusive and horrible and overreaching our gvt was to Bundy....who actually did break the Law....

I GIVE UP, you all are hopeless, and hypocrites to the enth degree, and ya don't even know it...

The Law is required to be applied equally to all- I sincerely doubt he would make any sense to you were it the Bush Administration he were applying his bias legal-eez to.

I watched a lot of hearings when President Bush was in Office, and the ones I saw, were run professionally....not at all like this CIRCUS that the Republican congress critters have CREATED in their hearings and in their beloved Right wing Media.... it's embarrassing to even watch and listen to them and the contortions they struggle to make....GUMBY would be proud.

 

[GreenBean]

ohhhh, but that is not a relevant point at all to this conspiracy....

if no one in the entire IRS followed that policy and made paper copies because they were directed NOT TO due to not having space on their 3 email servers, then how is Lerner to be blamed for this?

what makes what she did, archiving them on her own laptop, suspicious of wrong doing or criminality involved in this scrutiny of groups that this investigation is about? when all of the thousands of IRS employees did the SAME thing and followed the same IRS Policy?


Sure...the head of the IRS that made that financial decision on not to buy larger servers might be to blame,

but it has nothing to do with this investigation on lerner...and erases the suspicion that she and she alone did not print her emails because she wanted to hide them, which has been the republican contention.

so you can quote that rule all day long...shoot, even i have quoted and linked it earlier in this investigation, but NOW WE KNOW it is MEANINGLESS to this investigation...

We will never know what Learner was doing, she is invoking the 5th, why?

she's invoking the fifth because the government, the Republican Congress Critter Investigators, is on a fishing expedition and purely partisan witch hunt and have totally BLOWN this investigation with their Dog and Pony shows and grand standing....and UN-PROFESSIONALIM! they are a joke!


That's what her lawyer said....when he advised her to take the 5th...

This government over reach, is BEYOND REASON, and you allll....

you are just licking it up....? WHY when you supposedly hate the federal government's POWER so much? Is it all A-OK when it is your side of the aisle of government doing it?

my answer is a resounding, NO, it's NOT A-OK.

Ron Barber of Arizona
John Barrow of Georgia
Mike McIntyre of North Carolina
Patrick Murphy of Florida
Collin Peterson of Minnesota
Nick Rahall of West Virginia

Democrats who voted against Lerner,so what about them are they also on a "purely partisan witch hunt" . It takes a lot of guts to vote against the Democratic Party when you're one of their puppets - somewhat like a Nazi officer voting against Hitler -how many more are there that voted with their party and not their conscience ?

Partisan Politics Indeed !

 

[The Rabbi]

We will never know what Learner was doing, she is invoking the 5th, why?

she's invoking the fifth because the government, the Republican Congress Critter Investigators, is on a fishing expedition and purely partisan witch hunt and have totally BLOWN this investigation with their Dog and Pony shows and grand standing....and UN-PROFESSIONALIM! they are a joke!


That's what her lawyer said....when he advised her to take the 5th...

This government over reach, is BEYOND REASON, and you allll....

you are just licking it up....? WHY when you supposedly hate the federal government's POWER so much? Is it all A-OK when it is your side of the aisle of government doing it?

my answer is a resounding, NO, it's NOT A-OK.

I never saw you as a partisan ass.....until this thread.

You are so hell bent on pushing this under the carpet, you have lied in this thread, made up facts, ignored facts and....well....as I said....made an ass of yourself.

Basic fact.....when her hard drive crashed, she was able to retrieve via the back up ALL data except her archived emails.

Really?

Why does one archive emails if they do not feel the need to keep them...and if they feel the need to keep them, why would they set up the back up to back up everything EXCEPT the archived emails?

Sure...you will make some excuse such as...."She probably assumed she will never need them..."

Then why did she archive them and not simply delete them...

And you, again, will make up some excuse like....."she wasn't savvy enough to set the back up to back them up to..."

But to NOT back up something, the back up[ must be set to NOT back it up. It is an extra step.....so why would she intentionally set it to NOT back up the archived files...

And you will make an excuse like...."maybe it was the tech guy that did it in error..."

So why would the tech guy intentionally set it to NOT back up something?

And you will make another excuse.

It is your MO in this thread.

Tool.

I did peg this for you, did I not?
SHe is a tool and a half. She rationalizes, lies, ignore and misreads to get the results she wants: Republicans-BAD! Democrats-GOOD! Go my team!

 

[Sallow]

We will never know what Learner was doing, she is invoking the 5th, why?

Because the burden rests solely with the state to prove guilt, not the citizen to prove innocence. Lerner and all citizens are innocent until proved guilty in a court of law. The 5th Amendment prevents the government from pursuing criminal prosecution based only on the statements of citizens, absent objective, documented evidence.

Exactly right, she knows she is guilty and the 5th say she does not have to provide evidence against herself, it does not allow her not to give evidence against someone else. So I am guess immunity is the only answer.

One does not invoke the 5th Amendment to avoid criminal prosecution or punishment, it does not mean one is 'guilty,' or 'hiding something,' but is meant to compel the state to meet the standard necessary to potentially take from a citizen his liberty.

Here is the fifth amendment: The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Now granted it has been extended to mean any hearing or such that might lead to criminal charges to be filed, as has been pointed out in other threads. That is why those in organized crime pleaded the 5th.

Let me point out something very off topic, but the 5th, does not mean those who are Americans are to be afforded due process before their are killed? If not an immediate threat?

And the 5th Amendment is indeed significant in this situation, as the intent of the Amendment was to prevent the government from punishing political opponents for purely partisan reasons, which is clearly true in this case – where the republican agenda has nothing to so with the truth or facts.

The actually intent was to stop the government from using torture and such to obtain confessions. Actually it was meant to keep the government from asking, did you kill this person and forcing the person to answer yes or no. Or using truth serum on a person. In opinion that the 5th in this case is being used for political reasons or to cover a crime. The facts are pretty clear. The fact is that the IRS has been used to attack political opponents for years. It is certainly way past time to stop that practice.

What?

Where do you guys come up with this stuff?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

We will never know what Learner was doing, she is invoking the 5th, why?

Because the burden rests solely with the state to prove guilt, not the citizen to prove innocence. Lerner and all citizens are innocent until proved guilty in a court of law. The 5th Amendment prevents the government from pursuing criminal prosecution based only on the statements of citizens, absent objective, documented evidence.

Exactly right, she knows she is guilty and the 5th say she does not have to provide evidence against herself, it does not allow her not to give evidence against someone else. So I am guess immunity is the only answer.

One does not invoke the 5th Amendment to avoid criminal prosecution or punishment, it does not mean one is 'guilty,' or 'hiding something,' but is meant to compel the state to meet the standard necessary to potentially take from a citizen his liberty.

Here is the fifth amendment: The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Now granted it has been extended to mean any hearing or such that might lead to criminal charges to be filed, as has been pointed out in other threads. That is why those in organized crime pleaded the 5th.

Let me point out something very off topic, but the 5th, does not mean those who are Americans are to be afforded due process before their are killed? If not an immediate threat?

And the 5th Amendment is indeed significant in this situation, as the intent of the Amendment was to prevent the government from punishing political opponents for purely partisan reasons, which is clearly true in this case – where the republican agenda has nothing to so with the truth or facts.

The actually intent was to stop the government from using torture and such to obtain confessions. Actually it was meant to keep the government from asking, did you kill this person and forcing the person to answer yes or no. Or using truth serum on a person. In opinion that the 5th in this case is being used for political reasons or to cover a crime. The facts are pretty clear. The fact is that the IRS has been used to attack political opponents for years. It is certainly way past time to stop that practice.

Nonsense.

The intent of the Amendment is clearly comprehensive and not limited only to "torture."

The intent was to safeguard citizens' liberties from the very partisan witch hunt House Republicans are currently conducting.

 

[saveliberty]

Because the burden rests solely with the state to prove guilt, not the citizen to prove innocence. Lerner and all citizens are innocent until proved guilty in a court of law. The 5th Amendment prevents the government from pursuing criminal prosecution based only on the statements of citizens, absent objective, documented evidence.

Exactly right, she knows she is guilty and the 5th say she does not have to provide evidence against herself, it does not allow her not to give evidence against someone else. So I am guess immunity is the only answer.

One does not invoke the 5th Amendment to avoid criminal prosecution or punishment, it does not mean one is 'guilty,' or 'hiding something,' but is meant to compel the state to meet the standard necessary to potentially take from a citizen his liberty.

Here is the fifth amendment: The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Now granted it has been extended to mean any hearing or such that might lead to criminal charges to be filed, as has been pointed out in other threads. That is why those in organized crime pleaded the 5th.

Let me point out something very off topic, but the 5th, does not mean those who are Americans are to be afforded due process before their are killed? If not an immediate threat?

And the 5th Amendment is indeed significant in this situation, as the intent of the Amendment was to prevent the government from punishing political opponents for purely partisan reasons, which is clearly true in this case – where the republican agenda has nothing to so with the truth or facts.

The actually intent was to stop the government from using torture and such to obtain confessions. Actually it was meant to keep the government from asking, did you kill this person and forcing the person to answer yes or no. Or using truth serum on a person. In opinion that the 5th in this case is being used for political reasons or to cover a crime. The facts are pretty clear. The fact is that the IRS has been used to attack political opponents for years. It is certainly way past time to stop that practice.

Nonsense.

The intent of the Amendment is clearly comprehensive and not limited only to "torture."

The intent was to safeguard citizens' liberties from the very partisan witch hunt House Republicans are currently conducting.

Can we all agree on soomething? Maybe the part in bold above? The 5th amendment would make a cool thread with awesome sauce, but it is getting a little out in left field for this subject.

 

[saveliberty]

Hey! No fair using so much bold. My part is the last one.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

here is a better link explaining the IRS policy on how to handle their emails back in 2011

basically saying if they were on the Cloud this would not have happened
IRS Emails Wouldn?t Have Vanished in the Cloud - Nextgov.com

So the Investigating committees got all of her emails after june of 2011 and at least 1800 of her most recent emails at the time of her crash were recovered...Why haven't they been able to find this collusion or collaborations with the white house or with someone, anyone, that this was politically motivated? WHY?

Is the speculation that she moved them all to her archives on purpose and then fried her own hard drive? Testimony says there is no evidence of her doing such...so why is this presumed...? and why wouldn't she just delete these supposed incriminating emails and then fry her hard drive...why would she archive them at all?

Seriously guys, have you even thought this conspiracy theory through?

Why would she archive these emails if she thought something incriminating was on them? Why?

10 to 1, there is nothing on those emails

1- because as she said, she has done nothing wrong
2- because if she did have something to hide, she certainly would not save this incriminating evidence to her hard drive

I already posted a direct link to the IRS policy on emails, all your link does is explain why the IRS is scrambling for excuses for not following federal law.

ohhhh, but that is not a relevant point at all to this conspiracy....

if no one in the entire IRS followed that policy and made paper copies because they were directed NOT TO due to not having space on their 3 email servers, then how is Lerner to be blamed for this?

what makes what she did, archiving them on her own laptop, suspicious of wrong doing or criminality involved in this scrutiny of groups that this investigation is about? when all of the thousands of IRS employees did the SAME thing and followed the same IRS Policy?


Sure...the head of the IRS that made that financial decision on not to buy larger servers might be to blame,

but it has nothing to do with this investigation on lerner...and erases the suspicion that she and she alone did not print her emails because she wanted to hide them, which has been the republican contention.

so you can quote that rule all day long...shoot, even i have quoted and linked it earlier in this investigation, but NOW WE KNOW it is MEANINGLESS to this investigation...

I have a question for you.

Why the fuck are you defending the single most hated branch of government in the US?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Internal Revenue Manual - 1.10.3 Standards for Using Email

You just lost the argument.

No, he didnt.
What you did was throw actual factual information at him. Joe doesn't do facts. They are irrelevant to him. He has a narrative and if he throws his narrative up against you enough times then you'll tire of it and he'll win. That's how Joe works. Because he's a piece of shit worthless goldbricking low information low intelligence motherfucker.

Well, I wasn't going to waste time on Quantum Crazybag's link, but just for fun, I found this.

The Secure Enterprise Messaging system (SEMS) establishes a standard size of 500 MB (500 megabytes) for individual mailboxes. The system mails you daily warning messages that the limit is being approached when your mailbox reaches a size of 475 MB. When it exceeds the 500 MB limit, you will receive the following warning each time you attempt to send a message:

"You have exceeded your storage limit on your mailbox " .

Delete some mail from your mailbox or contact your system administrator to adjust your storage limit. (Consider whether any of the items you want to delete may be a federal record. IRM 1.10.3.3.2 above.)

It is not the practice of the SEMS staff to adjust any individual mailbox storage limits, but rather to provide guidance on reducing the size of the contents. The Outlook Help menu provides instructions for enabling and configuring both Auto-archiving and Rules to manage mail and mailbox folders to maintain proper storage limits.

Wow. That encourages people to DELETE e-mails that are no longer needed.

I have used the same email for years. and haven't deleted a single email, quite a few of which have some really huge attachments, and haven't got close to hitting the limit on my inbox.

By the way, SEMS is still subject to the law of the land. You remember that, don't you? That thing you always use to argue how smart you are, even when you are wrong? Why aren't you outraged by the fact that the government is ignoring the law?

In other words, you still lost the argument.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, he didnt.
What you did was throw actual factual information at him. Joe doesn't do facts. They are irrelevant to him. He has a narrative and if he throws his narrative up against you enough times then you'll tire of it and he'll win. That's how Joe works. Because he's a piece of shit worthless goldbricking low information low intelligence motherfucker.

Aww give poor Joe a Break -yes he's low on information and high on parrotted rhetoric, but he's not really as dumb as he leads people to beleive -every now and again he betrays a slight glimmer of intelligence -

Um, check out the section I cited above. It tells IRS employees to delete emails and delete them frequently.

And there's nothing in that mess about printing out hard copies. In fact, the whole thing reads like 'cover your ass' instructions that probably no one actually follows.

Do you have any ideas how man emails it takes before you hit 500 MB?


Didn't think so.

You sill lose.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Because the burden rests solely with the state to prove guilt, not the citizen to prove innocence. Lerner and all citizens are innocent until proved guilty in a court of law. The 5th Amendment prevents the government from pursuing criminal prosecution based only on the statements of citizens, absent objective, documented evidence.

One does not invoke the 5th Amendment to avoid criminal prosecution or punishment, it does not mean one is 'guilty,' or 'hiding something,' but is meant to compel the state to meet the standard necessary to potentially take from a citizen his liberty.

And the 5th Amendment is indeed significant in this situation, as the intent of the Amendment was to prevent the government from punishing political opponents for purely partisan reasons, which is clearly true in this case – where the republican agenda has nothing to so with the truth or facts.

Clayton -STFU - nobody reads your biased opinionated unqualified "legal briefs" so do yourself a favor and stop taking up space on everybodies computer screens - thanks Pal

he's the only one making sense...

The rest of you are salivating for a lynching, without a trial....and without evidence or proof....ONLY SPECULATION.

Amazing how you guys just LOVE THIS GOVERNMENT overreach and bashing and the gvt using their power to squash a citizen for no criminal reasons, only POLITICAL posturing,

while you all screamed bloody murder on how intrusive and horrible and overreaching our gvt was to Bundy....who actually did break the Law....

I GIVE UP, you all are hopeless, and hypocrites to the enth degree, and ya don't even know it...

How does somebody who is almost always wrong make sense to you?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

ohhhh, but that is not a relevant point at all to this conspiracy....

if no one in the entire IRS followed that policy and made paper copies because they were directed NOT TO due to not having space on their 3 email servers, then how is Lerner to be blamed for this?

what makes what she did, archiving them on her own laptop, suspicious of wrong doing or criminality involved in this scrutiny of groups that this investigation is about? when all of the thousands of IRS employees did the SAME thing and followed the same IRS Policy?


Sure...the head of the IRS that made that financial decision on not to buy larger servers might be to blame,

but it has nothing to do with this investigation on lerner...and erases the suspicion that she and she alone did not print her emails because she wanted to hide them, which has been the republican contention.

so you can quote that rule all day long...shoot, even i have quoted and linked it earlier in this investigation, but NOW WE KNOW it is MEANINGLESS to this investigation...

We will never know what Learner was doing, she is invoking the 5th, why?

she's invoking the fifth because the government, the Republican Congress Critter Investigators, is on a fishing expedition and purely partisan witch hunt and have totally BLOWN this investigation with their Dog and Pony shows and grand standing....and UN-PROFESSIONALIM! they are a joke!


That's what her lawyer said....when he advised her to take the 5th...

This government over reach, is BEYOND REASON, and you allll....

you are just licking it up....? WHY when you supposedly hate the federal government's POWER so much? Is it all A-OK when it is your side of the aisle of government doing it?

my answer is a resounding, NO, it's NOT A-OK.

They are trying to find out why everything that could possibly go wrong did, yet it only happened to people involved in what might be a criminal act. An intelligent person would wonder why all the hard disk failures were limited to people that were involved in the alleged criminal act, a hack would just see this as a partisan fishing expedition.

I used to think you were intelligent.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

he's the only one making sense...

The rest of you are salivating for a lynching, without a trial....and without evidence or proof....ONLY SPECULATION.

Amazing how you guys just LOVE THIS GOVERNMENT overreach and bashing and the gvt using their power to squash a citizen for no criminal reasons, only POLITICAL posturing,

while you all screamed bloody murder on how intrusive and horrible and overreaching our gvt was to Bundy....who actually did break the Law....

I GIVE UP, you all are hopeless, and hypocrites to the enth degree, and ya don't even know it...

The Law is required to be applied equally to all- I sincerely doubt he would make any sense to you were it the Bush Administration he were applying his bias legal-eez to.

I watched a lot of hearings when President Bush was in Office, and the ones I saw, were run professionally....not at all like this CIRCUS that the Republican congress critters have CREATED in their hearings and in their beloved Right wing Media.... it's embarrassing to even watch and listen to them and the contortions they struggle to make....GUMBY would be proud.

That is an outright lie. I can show you plenty of committee hearing during the Bush years that were outright circuses.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Because the burden rests solely with the state to prove guilt, not the citizen to prove innocence. Lerner and all citizens are innocent until proved guilty in a court of law. The 5th Amendment prevents the government from pursuing criminal prosecution based only on the statements of citizens, absent objective, documented evidence.

Exactly right, she knows she is guilty and the 5th say she does not have to provide evidence against herself, it does not allow her not to give evidence against someone else. So I am guess immunity is the only answer.

One does not invoke the 5th Amendment to avoid criminal prosecution or punishment, it does not mean one is 'guilty,' or 'hiding something,' but is meant to compel the state to meet the standard necessary to potentially take from a citizen his liberty.

Here is the fifth amendment: The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Now granted it has been extended to mean any hearing or such that might lead to criminal charges to be filed, as has been pointed out in other threads. That is why those in organized crime pleaded the 5th.

Let me point out something very off topic, but the 5th, does not mean those who are Americans are to be afforded due process before their are killed? If not an immediate threat?

And the 5th Amendment is indeed significant in this situation, as the intent of the Amendment was to prevent the government from punishing political opponents for purely partisan reasons, which is clearly true in this case – where the republican agenda has nothing to so with the truth or facts.

The actually intent was to stop the government from using torture and such to obtain confessions. Actually it was meant to keep the government from asking, did you kill this person and forcing the person to answer yes or no. Or using truth serum on a person. In opinion that the 5th in this case is being used for political reasons or to cover a crime. The facts are pretty clear. The fact is that the IRS has been used to attack political opponents for years. It is certainly way past time to stop that practice.

Nonsense.

The intent of the Amendment is clearly comprehensive and not limited only to "torture."

The intent was to safeguard citizens' liberties from the very partisan witch hunt House Republicans are currently conducting.

No it wasn't, if it was it would apply to government agencies instead of individual human beings. Since Congress created the IRS they have the power to investigate it, even if it chaps your pathetic excuse for balls.