IRS: Yeah, It's A Scandal

[nodoginnafight]

MHO: It would not shock me at all to find out that legal lines were crossed at the IRS. But I'm gonna need to see some real evidence before I make a decision.

 

[depotoo]

MHO: It would not shock me at all to find out that legal lines were crossed at the IRS. But I'm gonna need to see some real evidence before I make a decision.

And that is what they are counting on, is for many to be like you, knowing that the most incriminating evidence has been 'lost'.
You do realize, though, that Lerner did admit to targeting? I guess her admission of guilt by the IRS, is not enough for you.

 

[nodoginnafight]

MHO: It would not shock me at all to find out that legal lines were crossed at the IRS. But I'm gonna need to see some real evidence before I make a decision.

And that is what they are counting on, is for many to be like you, knowing that the most incriminating evidence has been 'lost'.
You do realize, though, that Lerner did admit to targeting? I guess her admission of guilt by the IRS, is not enough for you.

I understand how political bias makes someone want to convict without evidence if the accused is on the "other" side.

But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence first. And yes, everyone who is ever accused of anything counts on people who are committed to the rule of law.

It is a mistake to try to substitute passion for evidence.

 

[PoliticalChic]

MHO: It would not shock me at all to find out that legal lines were crossed at the IRS. But I'm gonna need to see some real evidence before I make a decision.

And that is what they are counting on, is for many to be like you, knowing that the most incriminating evidence has been 'lost'.
You do realize, though, that Lerner did admit to targeting? I guess her admission of guilt by the IRS, is not enough for you.

I understand how political bias makes someone want to convict without evidence if the accused is on the "other" side.

But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence first. And yes, everyone who is ever accused of anything counts on people who are committed to the rule of law.

It is a mistake to try to substitute passion for evidence.

"But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence...."


Pretenders like you are one of the major reasons that they get away with it.

 

[nodoginnafight]

And that is what they are counting on, is for many to be like you, knowing that the most incriminating evidence has been 'lost'.
You do realize, though, that Lerner did admit to targeting? I guess her admission of guilt by the IRS, is not enough for you.

I understand how political bias makes someone want to convict without evidence if the accused is on the "other" side.

But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence first. And yes, everyone who is ever accused of anything counts on people who are committed to the rule of law.

It is a mistake to try to substitute passion for evidence.

"But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence...."


Pretenders like you are one of the major reasons that they get away with it.

Yeah, too bad we can't just round up a posse anymore.

Evidence my dear. Produce it. Sorry, but in the United States of America, we don't punish people based on how pissed off you get.

 

[depotoo]

MHO: It would not shock me at all to find out that legal lines were crossed at the IRS. But I'm gonna need to see some real evidence before I make a decision.

And that is what they are counting on, is for many to be like you, knowing that the most incriminating evidence has been 'lost'.
You do realize, though, that Lerner did admit to targeting? I guess her admission of guilt by the IRS, is not enough for you.

I understand how political bias makes someone want to convict without evidence if the accused is on the "other" side.

But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence first. And yes, everyone who is ever accused of anything counts on people who are committed to the rule of law.

It is a mistake to try to substitute passion for evidence.

Passion for evidence? You failed to acknowledge her admittance. Is that not evidence? The IRS has settled with a couple of groups that were targeted and who had their private information released. Is that not evidence?

 

[hadit]

MHO: It would not shock me at all to find out that legal lines were crossed at the IRS. But I'm gonna need to see some real evidence before I make a decision.

And that is what they are counting on, is for many to be like you, knowing that the most incriminating evidence has been 'lost'.
You do realize, though, that Lerner did admit to targeting? I guess her admission of guilt by the IRS, is not enough for you.

Even "losing" that evidence can get you in trouble in the real world. Washington, not so much.

 

[depotoo]

MHO: It would not shock me at all to find out that legal lines were crossed at the IRS. But I'm gonna need to see some real evidence before I make a decision.

And that is what they are counting on, is for many to be like you, knowing that the most incriminating evidence has been 'lost'.
You do realize, though, that Lerner did admit to targeting? I guess her admission of guilt by the IRS, is not enough for you.

Even "losing" that evidence can get you in trouble in the real world. Washington, not so much.

Yep, try telling that to this very agency the next time they audit you and see how far it gets you.

 

[nodoginnafight]

And that is what they are counting on, is for many to be like you, knowing that the most incriminating evidence has been 'lost'.
You do realize, though, that Lerner did admit to targeting? I guess her admission of guilt by the IRS, is not enough for you.

I understand how political bias makes someone want to convict without evidence if the accused is on the "other" side.

But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence first. And yes, everyone who is ever accused of anything counts on people who are committed to the rule of law.

It is a mistake to try to substitute passion for evidence.

Passion for evidence? You failed to acknowledge her admittance. Is that not evidence? The IRS has settled with a couple of groups that were targeted and who had their private information released. Is that not evidence?

I appreciate and respect your ability to argue your points well.

But unless you can produce evidence that the IRS targeted them based on their politics, I'm not convinced yet. The IRS is tasked with targeting tax cheats and that includes organizations that claim to be something they are not in order to get a more favorable tax situation.

As I said, it wouldn't shock me to find out lines were crossed, but I can't just assume that without the evidence.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I understand how political bias makes someone want to convict without evidence if the accused is on the "other" side.

But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence first. And yes, everyone who is ever accused of anything counts on people who are committed to the rule of law.

It is a mistake to try to substitute passion for evidence.

"But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence...."


Pretenders like you are one of the major reasons that they get away with it.

Yeah, too bad we can't just round up a posse anymore.

Evidence my dear. Produce it. Sorry, but in the United States of America, we don't punish people based on how pissed off you get.

1. Seems as though you have a limited facility with the English language....

I have produced 'evidence,' more than once.

1ev·i·dence noun \ˈe-və-dən(t)s, -və-ˌden(t)s\
: something which shows that something else exists or is true

: a visible sign of something
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/evidence


2. And this is why you are a gutless weasel:

"....we don't punish people based on how pissed off you get."

I never said anything about demanding punishment, did I?

This is your attempt to flee from the responsibility to make a judgement.


What I demand is an accurate opinion based on available "evidence."



3. As Theodore Roosevelt said of William McKinley, you have “no more backbone than a chocolate éclair.”

 

[depotoo]

I understand how political bias makes someone want to convict without evidence if the accused is on the "other" side.

But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence first. And yes, everyone who is ever accused of anything counts on people who are committed to the rule of law.

It is a mistake to try to substitute passion for evidence.

"But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence...."


Pretenders like you are one of the major reasons that they get away with it.

Yeah, too bad we can't just round up a posse anymore.

Evidence my dear. Produce it. Sorry, but in the United States of America, we don't punish people based on how pissed off you get.

Civil wrongdoing has never had convictions based on enough circumstantial evidence?
And in this case, there is plenty of that along with an admission of guilt in targeting certain groups. Along with judgements against the IRS for releasing private tax payor information to their direct opposite counterparts.

 

[hadit]

"But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence...."


Pretenders like you are one of the major reasons that they get away with it.

Yeah, too bad we can't just round up a posse anymore.

Evidence my dear. Produce it. Sorry, but in the United States of America, we don't punish people based on how pissed off you get.

1. Seems as though you have a limited facility with the English language....

I have produced 'evidence,' more than once.

1ev·i·dence noun \ˈe-və-dən(t)s, -və-ˌden(t)s\
: something which shows that something else exists or is true

: a visible sign of something
Evidence - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary


2. And this is why you are a gutless weasel:

"....we don't punish people based on how pissed off you get."

I never said anything about demanding punishment, did I?

This is your attempt to flee from the responsibility to make a judgement.


What I demand is an accurate opinion based on available "evidence."



3. As Theodore Roosevelt said of William McKinley, you have “no more backbone than a chocolate éclair.”

The 18 minute gap probably did as much damage to Nixon as any hard evidence did because it was viewed as a deliberate attempt to hide damaging information. Thus with the email situation. The bottom line is this, the IRS violated the law by not ensuring that copies were safely preserved. Storing emails on local workstations only is a massive cluster in IT terms. I don't see any IT people getting fired, most likely because they were doing what they were told to do. When the drives were discovered to have "crashed", the emails were still retrievable from tape. The IRS made the deliberate decision NOT to retrieve them, but "allowed" the tapes to be recycled. In essence, they had the ability to retrieve the emails, but just decided not to and made sure the backups were destroyed as well. This is a problem the Obama sycophants desperately want to just go away.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Yeah, too bad we can't just round up a posse anymore.

Evidence my dear. Produce it. Sorry, but in the United States of America, we don't punish people based on how pissed off you get.

1. Seems as though you have a limited facility with the English language....

I have produced 'evidence,' more than once.

1ev·i·dence noun \ˈe-və-dən(t)s, -və-ˌden(t)s\
: something which shows that something else exists or is true

: a visible sign of something
Evidence - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary


2. And this is why you are a gutless weasel:

"....we don't punish people based on how pissed off you get."

I never said anything about demanding punishment, did I?

This is your attempt to flee from the responsibility to make a judgement.


What I demand is an accurate opinion based on available "evidence."



3. As Theodore Roosevelt said of William McKinley, you have “no more backbone than a chocolate éclair.”

The 18 minute gap probably did as much damage to Nixon as any hard evidence did because it was viewed as a deliberate attempt to hide damaging information. Thus with the email situation. The bottom line is this, the IRS violated the law by not ensuring that copies were safely preserved. Storing emails on local workstations only is a massive cluster in IT terms. I don't see any IT people getting fired, most likely because they were doing what they were told to do. When the drives were discovered to have "crashed", the emails were still retrievable from tape. The IRS made the deliberate decision NOT to retrieve them, but "allowed" the tapes to be recycled. In essence, they had the ability to retrieve the emails, but just decided not to and made sure the backups were destroyed as well. This is a problem the Obama sycophants desperately want to just go away.

So....ya' think Rose Mary Woods works with Lerner????


Who knew.

 

[hadit]

1. Seems as though you have a limited facility with the English language....

I have produced 'evidence,' more than once.

1ev·i·dence noun \ˈe-və-dən(t)s, -və-ˌden(t)s\
: something which shows that something else exists or is true

: a visible sign of something
Evidence - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary


2. And this is why you are a gutless weasel:

"....we don't punish people based on how pissed off you get."

I never said anything about demanding punishment, did I?

This is your attempt to flee from the responsibility to make a judgement.


What I demand is an accurate opinion based on available "evidence."



3. As Theodore Roosevelt said of William McKinley, you have “no more backbone than a chocolate éclair.”

The 18 minute gap probably did as much damage to Nixon as any hard evidence did because it was viewed as a deliberate attempt to hide damaging information. Thus with the email situation. The bottom line is this, the IRS violated the law by not ensuring that copies were safely preserved. Storing emails on local workstations only is a massive cluster in IT terms. I don't see any IT people getting fired, most likely because they were doing what they were told to do. When the drives were discovered to have "crashed", the emails were still retrievable from tape. The IRS made the deliberate decision NOT to retrieve them, but "allowed" the tapes to be recycled. In essence, they had the ability to retrieve the emails, but just decided not to and made sure the backups were destroyed as well. This is a problem the Obama sycophants desperately want to just go away.

So....ya' think Rose Mary Woods works with Lerner????


Who knew.

I think what she did was accidental. There's nothing accidental about what the IRS has done. I've been in IT for almost 30 years now, and you don't "accidentally lose" emails the way they did.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Same.

In light of the tragedy of the ballad of the lost hard-drives, and Lerner's 5th, chances are now close to zero. I guess that doesn't factor into the equation for you two patriots.

The lost hard drives make it look bad, but appearances do not a case make, especially not beyond a reasonable doubt which is in accordance with being a Patriot.

Shall we throw ppl in prison based on assumptions, or really suspicious appearing situations? That makes no sense.

Same.

In light of the tragedy of the ballad of the lost hard-drives, and Lerner's 5th, chances are now close to zero. I guess that doesn't factor into the equation for you two patriots.

The lost hard drives make it look bad, but appearances do not a case make, especially not beyond a reasonable doubt which is in accordance with being a Patriot.

Shall we throw ppl in prison based on assumptions, or really suspicious appearing situations? That makes no sense.

Nobody's arguing that anyone, including Lerner, can or even should be charged with a crime and prosecuted in the absence of solid evidence of misconduct. We know that misconduct occurred, as reported by the Inspector General. IRS Commissioner Steven Miller was fired. Recall?

Obama fires IRS chief over 'inexcusable' tax targeting scandal | World news | theguardian.com

We know that the Cincinnati office was scapegoated. Recall?

IRS Agent 'Furious' with Lois Lerner for Scapegoating of 'Rogue Agents'

And so the people called Director Lois Lerner of the Exempt Organizations Unit of the IRS before the House Committee investigating this misconduct.

What did we get?

The Fifth and more misconduct:

The minute that this letter was delivered, the IRS was put on notice that it was under investigation. As per Federal Law, the IRS has a legal obligation to back-up all of the relevant files and begin to print out hard copies.

But the IRS didn’t follow the law. It didn’t secure any of the relevant documents!

In fact, ten days after the IRS was officially put on notice that it was under investigation, Lois Lerner’s computer mysteriously “crashed.” Next, the computers of six other targeting officials also “crashed.” These “crashes” allegedly wiped out Ms. Lerner’s email archive, something that was extremely convenient for an agency just notified it was under investigation.

No efforts were made to retrieve the data. Nor did the IRS attempt to retrieve any of the backed-up files. Instead, the agency physically melted down Lois Lerner’s hard drive and cancelled its contract with Sonasoft, a company whose sole purpose was email archiving.

The very minute that the IRS received notice it was under investigation, the agency had a legal obligation to do everything in its power to safeguard the evidence. That isn’t just a suggestion… that is Federal Law.

Instead, the tax agency ignored the Congressional letter and within days, all of Lois Lerner’s files were conveniently “lost.”

The reason it is so important to safeguard evidence and data during an investigation is because if that data is destroyed or goes missing, guilt becomes inferred. Regardless of whether Lois Lerner was responsible for targeting these Conservative groups (she definitely was), the fact that the IRS mysteriously lost the emails and then destroyed the physical evidence provides for inferred guilt! Proof Lois Lerner is Guilty! She Must Be Arrested! | Conservative Daily

House investigators: IRS tech experts say Lerner?s hard drive only 'scratched,' not destroyed | Fox News

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/21/irs-seeks-help-destroying-another-3200-computer-ha/

But of course nobody's at fault for behavior that clearly couldn't have occurred without higher authorization due to the very nature of the checks controlling the various field offices. Plenty of misconduct, but nobody seems to be responsible for it.

Now, of course, Lerner is well within her rights to plead the Fifth. But all we wanted to know is how this misconduct occurred and who's responsible. Pretty simple, really.

There's no conspiracy on the part of those who have documented this misconduct or on the part of those, including Obama and Lerner and others, who have acknowledge the actuality of this misconduct.

What's NYcarbineer babbling about?

Who above the pay grade of the personnel at the field-office level is responsible for this misconduct? It isn't Miller. He was fired for poor management. All things point to Lerner. We may never get actionable evidence against her, but that observation is not the stuff of conspiracy or mere assumption, which you confound with unanswered questions.

 

[depotoo]

And the lack of preservation alone is against the Federal Records Act- which is law, as well as 44 U.S. Code Chapter 31 - RECORDS MANAGEMENT BY FEDERAL AGENCIES, which outlines the responsibilities of Lerner were, which she shirked.

Yeah, too bad we can't just round up a posse anymore.

Evidence my dear. Produce it. Sorry, but in the United States of America, we don't punish people based on how pissed off you get.

1. Seems as though you have a limited facility with the English language....

I have produced 'evidence,' more than once.

1ev·i·dence noun \ˈe-və-dən(t)s, -və-ˌden(t)s\
: something which shows that something else exists or is true

: a visible sign of something
Evidence - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary


2. And this is why you are a gutless weasel:

"....we don't punish people based on how pissed off you get."

I never said anything about demanding punishment, did I?

This is your attempt to flee from the responsibility to make a judgement.


What I demand is an accurate opinion based on available "evidence."



3. As Theodore Roosevelt said of William McKinley, you have “no more backbone than a chocolate éclair.”

The 18 minute gap probably did as much damage to Nixon as any hard evidence did because it was viewed as a deliberate attempt to hide damaging information. Thus with the email situation. The bottom line is this, the IRS violated the law by not ensuring that copies were safely preserved. Storing emails on local workstations only is a massive cluster in IT terms. I don't see any IT people getting fired, most likely because they were doing what they were told to do. When the drives were discovered to have "crashed", the emails were still retrievable from tape. The IRS made the deliberate decision NOT to retrieve them, but "allowed" the tapes to be recycled. In essence, they had the ability to retrieve the emails, but just decided not to and made sure the backups were destroyed as well. This is a problem the Obama sycophants desperately want to just go away.

 

[nodoginnafight]

"But I don't get sucked up in that. I'm gonna have to see the real evidence...."


Pretenders like you are one of the major reasons that they get away with it.

Yeah, too bad we can't just round up a posse anymore.

Evidence my dear. Produce it. Sorry, but in the United States of America, we don't punish people based on how pissed off you get.

Civil wrongdoing has never had convictions based on enough circumstantial evidence?
And in this case, there is plenty of that along with an admission of guilt in targeting certain groups. Along with judgements against the IRS for releasing private tax payor information to their direct opposite counterparts.

Ok, then those who suffered damages can file suit and collect damages if it turns out they are right.

If you want criminal prosecutions you have a higher standard of proof.

But either way - at some point your are going to have produce evidence that supports your claims.

IMHO it's not a huge stretch, but you still have to prove that what you say happened really happened.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Did you post anything that says either of them was charged with rape?

Sure did.

Post #61.


But it seems that you're one of those who don't believe the "Wet Paint" sign on the benches....

...so have a seat.

No - you sure did not. There is absolutely nothing in post #61 or any of your posts that says anythjing about anyone being charged with rape.

Are you lying on purpose or are you just ignorant about our criminal justice system.

If it is ignorance, then you really don't expect us to accept anything you have to say about the evidence of criminality in the IRS scandal now do you?

If it is deliberate lying - then I guess there's no reason to read ANY of your posts again now is there?

Allegations of lying from you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

You should learn what the word 'charged' means.

Try a dictionary.

You can't redefine words to try to cover your tracks either.

When someone is charged with a crime, you'll be able to find the paperwork. It's public information.

Ponder the difference between an accusation (which was recanted btw) and being charged with a crime. I'll give you plenty of time.

I use words with precision.

ac·cu·sa·tion
ˌakyəˈzāSHən,ˌakyo͞o-/Submit
noun
a charge or claim that someone has done something illegal or wrong.
"accusations of bribery"
synonyms: allegation, charge, claim, assertion, imputation; More
the action or process of accusing someone.
"there was accusation in Brian's voice"
https://www.google.com/webhp?source...528&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=define+accusation



I am correct, and you are a weasel deathly afraid to confront the facts.

So an accurate re-stating of your position would be:

Bill Clinton was accused of rape, but never formally charged, or prosecuted, or convicted.

...much as one might say,

George Bush was accused of being AWOL during his time in the Guard, but never formally charged, prosecuted, or convicted.

...and thus, to apply YOUR reasoning, both were equally guilty of what they were 'charged' with.

 

[nodoginnafight]

You can't redefine words to try to cover your tracks either.

When someone is charged with a crime, you'll be able to find the paperwork. It's public information.

Ponder the difference between an accusation (which was recanted btw) and being charged with a crime. I'll give you plenty of time.

I use words with precision.

ac·cu·sa·tion
ˌakyəˈzāSHən,ˌakyo͞o-/Submit
noun
a charge or claim that someone has done something illegal or wrong.
"accusations of bribery"
synonyms: allegation, charge, claim, assertion, imputation; More
the action or process of accusing someone.
"there was accusation in Brian's voice"
https://www.google.com/webhp?source...528&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=define+accusation



I am correct, and you are a weasel deathly afraid to confront the facts.

So an accurate re-stating of your position would be:

Bill Clinton was accused of rape, but never formally charged, or prosecuted, or convicted.

...much as one might say,

George Bush was accused of being AWOL during his time in the Guard, but never formally charged, prosecuted, or convicted.

...and thus, to apply YOUR reasoning, both were equally guilty of what they were 'charged' with.

LOL - this is where you get called stupid. It's what happens when you thoroughly destroy his/her position.