Ryan lashes out at IRS commissioner: 'Nobody believes you'

originally posted by: mclarenmp4
a reply to: kruphix

You haven't addressed that post at all but nice deflection.

Likewise I'm happy to wait for all the facts to come out, that's how we get to the truth.
As I said I have no dog in this race, i just call people out on their false assumptions which you have done numerous times in all the IRS threads so far.

And yet you don't seem to be calling out the people who are accusing Sonasoft of lying to the American people or withholding information...huh?

Yeah, you don't have a dog in this race...nice try.

here is a hint though,,

originally posted by: BobAthome

originally posted by: kruphix

originally posted by: BobAthome
a reply to: kruphix

actually,,your quote "you have zero evidence" is not true.

Circumstantial evidence - Definition

"evidence that tends to prove a fact
by proving other events or circumstances
which afford a basis for a reasonable inference
of the occurrence of the fact at issue."

Well at least thats in a court of law,, and not neccesarily the cort of public opinion.

Thats if there is still Laws.

Ok...what is the circumstantial evidence that proves other events that provides a basis for inference???

I would love to hear this.

Sorry but that answer costs about $2,500 dollars an hour,,,

no freebies for u!

In other words...you don't have anything.

Got it.

"Can i see the paper work were these policy steps were undertaken',,would be a good opening remark ,,
ie: Mr. Ryan.

www.thetechmentor.com...

"If you are a tech, then you probably know that hard drive failures are inevitable.
Chances are that sooner or later it will happen to someone you support or possibly even you.
The good news is that there are lots of great recovery tools and methods out there and I would like to share them with you."


If there were no policy in place at the IRS for IT, Specialists,,why not?

So were is the work order #number ,,,?

Follow the Digits, Mr. Watson.

When people are arrested and claim abuse, and all the footage of their incarceration disappears, I'm sure it's all just a hard drive malfunction! Just a coincidence that video of bob sitting in a cell for 8 hours reading a book never goes missing, but when someone claims abuse the footage disappears. Mighty selective hard drives those government sponsored agencies have, huh?

I'm sure it's all just a big coincidence.... because that's all my mind can handle. Facing reality is too scary.

a reply to: James1982

"in a cell for 8 hours" kinda like being on ATS

originally posted by: kruphix
a reply to: lynn112

Actually that is the point of the this whole "witch hunt" as it has been called. It is find proof that either this was just a small incident as you believe or that it does in fact go much further up the food chain in the government.

And they have wasted hundreds of hours, wasted thousands of tax dollars, gone over thousands of documents and emails...and have found no evidence to say it was anything else than what the IRS has already stated it was.

At some point, you need to admit that there is nothing there.

We don't know what evidence exists or once existed because the IRS officials have consistently stalled, withheld information or outright lied during the investigation. If that sits well with you, then fine, you are entitled to that opinion. I on the other hand am not okay with what is clearly a case of a government agency hindering an investigation and failing to comply with federal laws.

a reply to: kruphix

That poor dead horse you're beating is starting to smell mighty bad...

The claim that the IRS recycles its backup tapes every six months is equally ludicrous. The federal government has more strict expectations for publicly held corporations. Sarbanes-Oxley regulations passed more than a decade ago specifically require retention of email data for five years, and make the kind of destruction claimed by the IRS in this instance a crime punishable by 20 years in prison.

The IRS claim raised eyebrows at the National Archives and Records Administration, which is tasked with preserving important federal records, calling itself “concerned” that a hard drive failure would wipe out two years’ worth of what should be permanent records. The IRS’s own manual made it clear that the storage of email was important enough to have permanent backups of their data. “IRS offices will not store the official recordkeeping copy of email messages that are federal records ONLY on the electronic mail system,” and even went so far as to require hard copies “for record-keeping purposes.”

The issue isn’t that some things should be kept in hard copy; it’s that the electronic copy of all e-mail is supposed to be retained for a much longer period, as well as storing important records by hard copy. That’s certainly the expectation that the federal government has of us.

Darrell Issa will have another witness testifying on Monday as well. Jennifer O’Connor, currently a White House counsel but an IRS counsel at the time of the original request for records in May 2013, will get grilled on what the IRS knew about the e-mails and when they knew it:

House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa is hauling in a former IRS counsel-turned-White House attorney to testify on the disappeared Lois Lerner emails.

The California Republican on Thursday evening requested Jennifer O’Connor of the White House Counsel’s office to testify on Tuesday morning about her knowledge of the crashed hard drive of ex-IRS tax exempt chief Lerner. The IRS says the crash erased two years’ worth of Lerner’s emails just when the IRS was beginning to pull conservative social welfare groups for additional scrutiny.

O’Connor was hired on at the IRS from May 2013 to November 2013 to serve as counselor to Acting IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel. One of her primary duties was to help the IRS respond to congressional inquiries after the tea party-targeting controversy came to light. And IRS chief counsel William Wilkins told the panel during its IRS probe that O’Connor was one of two people supervising the collection of “documents relating to the committee’s requests for material.”

From the IRS *official* internal manual to employees...

1.15.6.9 (03-27-2014)
Retention and Disposition of Electronic Records

The IRS Records Officer is the liaison with NARA and customer organizations for ensuring that electronic records and the related documentation are retained for as long as needed by the IRS. These disposition and retention procedures shall include provisions for:

Scheduling all electronic records, as well as related documentation and indexes, by submitting an SF-115, Request for Records Disposition Authority to NARA or, in some instances by applying NARAs General Records Schedules. The information in electronic information systems, including those operated for the IRS by a contractor, will be scheduled as soon as possible, but no later that one year after implementation of the system.

Transferring a copy of the electronic records and related documentation and indexes to NARA at the time specified in the records control schedule for permanent records.
Note:

SF-115 is completed by the IRS Records Management staff only.

Records created within e-mail systems, which meet the criteria of a federal record, are subject to the same retention periods as the paper or hard-copy versions. Therefore, these records must be retained electronically according to the NARA-approved disposition authority or printed and associated with the appropriate recordkeeping system. Temporary e-mail records can be deleted only when they are eligible for destruction or when they have been printed and associated with the appropriate recordkeeping system. See additional information on the retention and transfer of permanent electronic records in subsection IRM 1.15.6.11.

At the direction of a management official as to what is considered a record, the E-mail/Systems Administrators will establish procedures for regular recopying, reformatting, and other necessary maintenance to ensure the retention and usability of electronic records throughout their authorized life cycle.

The responsibility for instructing users on how to copy and archive electronic mail records rests with the E-Mail/Systems Administrators at the user levels. With the proper direction from a management official, the user and/or end recipient should possess the expertise to identify and determine which records are worthy of preservation and/or archiving.

The disposition of electronic mail records that have been relocated to an appropriate recordkeeping system is governed by schedules that control the records in that system. If the records in the system are not scheduled, contact the Area Records Manager or the RIM Program Office to get them scheduled and approved by NARA.
Note:

Approved disposition authorities for electronic records created as part of tax processing systems are included in separate Records Control Schedules 8 through 37 based on their use and/or associated activity (published in Document 12990). Many other administrative systems are included in the General Records Schedules 38 through 64 (published in Document 12829). Questions concerning the scheduling of an electronic system should be directed to the IRS RIM Program Office.
www.irs.gov...

The IRS, those lying bast*ards...sure had to go to a lot trouble to keep these 2 years worth of emails from 8 IRS people (that we know of), from the eyes of legal investigations.

Des

As much of a non-story/non-scandal this IRS thing is, it's not unusual for something like this to happen:

Bush White House email controversy

In 2009, it was announced that as many as 22 million emails may have been deleted.

I've been looking for the outraged threads started in 2009 and 2007. I haven't been having much luck though.

originally posted by: links234
As much of a non-story/non-scandal this IRS thing is, it's not unusual for something like this to happen:

Bush White House email controversy

In 2009, it was announced that as many as 22 million emails may have been deleted.

I've been looking for the outraged threads started in 2009 and 2007. I haven't been having much luck though.

Probably because nothing illegal was done.

The Bush White House email controversy surfaced in 2007, during the controversy involving the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys. Congressional requests for administration documents while investigating the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys required the Bush administration to reveal that not all internal White House emails were available, because they were sent via a non-government domain hosted on an email server not controlled by the federal government. Conducting governmental business in this manner is a possible violation of the Presidential Records Act of 1978, and the Hatch Act.[1] Over 5 million emails may have been lost or deleted.[2][3] Greg Palast claims to have come up with 500 of the Karl Rove lost emails, leading to damaging allegations.[4] In 2009, it was announced that as many as 22 million emails may have been deleted.

Bush White House email controversy

Not a smidgeon !!

a reply to: xuenchen

Funny, I don't remember anything illegal occurring with Lois Lerner either. That doesn't stop the threads though.

In one of these many, many IRS threads I mentioned the definition of 'scandal'. Still looking for the illegal part of the story.

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: xuenchen

Funny, I don't remember anything illegal occurring with Lois Lerner either. That doesn't stop the threads though.

In one of these many, many IRS threads I mentioned the definition of 'scandal'. Still looking for the illegal part of the story.

For starters;

You forgot about Lois pleading the 5th more than once.

Which means she can "Legally" not divulge criminal activity that may implicate herself.

Which means she most likely knew (knows) about the illegal destruction of key evidence which most likely implicates higher government officials

a reply to: xuenchen

Well, when they throw somebody in jail, let me know.

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: xuenchen

Well, when they throw somebody in jail, let me know.

LOL

Lois is already in full Contempt of Congress

THAT just might bite her back. Her impudence will get the best of her.

Following a contempt citation, the presiding officer of the chamber is instructed to refer the matter to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia;[10] according to the law it is the "duty" of the U.S. Attorney to refer the matter to a grand jury for action.

The criminal offense of "contempt of Congress" sets the penalty at not less than one month nor more than twelve months in jail and a fine of not less than $100 nor more than $1,000.

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: xuenchen

Well, when they throw somebody in jail, let me know.

You'll be the first I give the good news to....

Someone will go to trial over this IRS debacle...we just don't know who they are going to throw under the bus yet.

Des

originally posted by: Destinyone

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: xuenchen

Well, when they throw somebody in jail, let me know.

You'll be the first I give the good news to....

Someone will go to trial over this IRS debacle...we just don't know who they are going to throw under the bus yet.

Des

Please, tell me as well.

Don't worry...I won't hold my breath.

so at what point does the rabbit-hole end?

look the last thing Issa or lerner, or the IRS are after is truth.

they're alll looking to either toss someone under the bus, or have someone else get tossed under the bus instead of themselves.
so far everything I've read about this is clouded in bitter partisan rhetoric.

originally posted by: kruphix
a reply to: Metallicus

Love or hate Paul Ryan you have to give him credit for this.

Credit for political theater???

I'll give Ryan and the rest of the GOP credit for one thing...they are unapologetic about their witch hunts and giving their supporters fake scandals for them to have fake outrage against.

Ahh... I see.

So: emails are sent, received. Emails from the person (and to the person) who chose to take the 5th when testifying before Congress, go missing. There are no emails. The people receiving the emails have no emails, the person sending the emails have no emails... no one has emails.

You seriously believe this?

In the immortal words of the 3 Stooges: What a maroon!

a reply to: links234

Well, you have it now. Coverup. Destruction of govt records.

Lerner pled the 5th, ergo, there was illegal activity by definition. We just cannot use that without evidence to convict.

Seems like the evidence has "gone missing". If you believe that all the emails sent by Lerner have gone missing from her system, that they have gone missing from recipients systems and they have gone missing from backups, then I have some ocean front property in Arizona to sell you. Wait...I also have some ocean front property in North Dakota. I also have for sale, at a vastly reduced price, the Brooklyn Bridge!

Remind anyone of Watergate? A POTUS resigned over the exposure of that cover up.

This is a cover up including the destruction of evidence. There can be no doubt by anyone with half a rational brain.

originally posted by: links234
As much of a non-story/non-scandal this IRS thing is, it's not unusual for something like this to happen:

Bush White House email controversy

In 2009, it was announced that as many as 22 million emails may have been deleted.

I've been looking for the outraged threads started in 2009 and 2007. I haven't been having much luck though.

And here is the obligatory: Bush did it! Therefore Obama is in the clear. Next up: The obligatory "Bush is responsible".

If that is factual then he is just as damned. The problem is why did it not come up til now? Why were there not threads about that back then? Why did you not start a thread if you are so outraged? Don't get me wrong, I am not a Bush supporter, kool-aid drinker. But I do find it hilarious how Bush's name comes up so often in connection to Obama's name the last 6 years.....Classic display of a lack of responsibility, classic case of: "I am not responsible for my own actions, nor those under me".

What ever happened to "The Buck Stops Here!"?