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

From an IT professional

As a former Exchange Administrator I can say this.

If there is 1 single email for any of these 6 people during the time in question then the IRS is F'ed

They (IRS) said only the mail going to out to the WH; DOJ; FBI ECT ECT were the lost emails. That is NOT how this works folks

All mail is routed out the same hole, and truth be told the back end metadata on the exchange server still has records of said emails and yes you can see and read the content. I am soooo tired of all these lying bastards

They all need to be removed and replaced with honest people

I have seen CEO's of tech companies explaining how IT works but they too don't know crap

Get a real Exchange admin on these news shows and set the record straight.

I don't think I have heard 1 single truth come out of any ones mouth from DC -- Just makes me SICK

a reply to: bbracken677

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!

No, there are plenty of emails.

There are anywhere between 24,000 and 70,000 emails that were recovered in various ways that have already been turned over and there was nothing incriminating found in them.

Do you seriously believe that there are no emails at all?

a reply to: kruphix

Yes but how were those emails recovered for that period between 2009 - 2011?
By searching the mailboxes of all other employees whose hard drives hadn't magically disappeared.
Well we know at least 6 other people's hard drive crashes couldn't be retrieved from so we don't know how many emails were sent from her to them and vice versa.
How convenient, huh?

Also what do you call a strawman with no straw?

originally posted by: mclarenmp4
a reply to: kruphix

Yes but how were those emails recovered for that period between 2009 - 2011?
By searching the mailboxes of all other employees whose hard drives hadn't magically disappeared.
Well we know at least 6 other people's hard drive crashes couldn't be retrieved from so we don't know how many emails were sent from her to them and vice versa.
How convenient, huh?

Also what do you call a strawman with no straw?

Did I say we know how many emails are lost?

And what exactly is my strawman?

The other member is making a claim that there are NO EMAILS...aren't you the one with no dog in this race...and you are ok with that statement???

I really think your game is to pretend you are impartial because you think it makes your opinions more relevant...they really don't...and I really don't think you are impartial at all.

a reply to: kruphix

There is no way you will convince anyone that even has a slight understanding of IT that these emails were lost accidentally. The odds of that happening are so small that logic dictates that the truth is that someone at the IRS wiped these emails out on purpose, if there are in fact no backups left.

The question everyone should be asking is why? What was worth the possibility of jail time to cover up?

a reply to: kruphix

obviously I am talking about Lerner's emails that are missing. You know, the woman who pled the fifth?

Do you honestly believe the missing emails are missing by accident? In this day and age? Do you know anything about IT and email? Businesses are required to save their emails for years. Even cell phone providers are required (by govt) to save text messages for years....

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: kruphix

obviously I am talking about Lerner's emails that are missing. You know, the woman who pled the fifth?

Do you honestly believe the missing emails are missing by accident? In this day and age? Do you know anything about IT and email? Businesses are required to save their emails for years. Even cell phone providers are required (by govt) to save text messages for years....

Obviously? No, not really obvious when you keep repeating over and over that there are "NO EMAILS".

Myself and others have gone over the IT aspect many times...if you don't get it, sorry.

If the email is no longer on the email server, if it is no longer on the local hard drive archived file, and if the backup only keeps 6 months of email server backup...where exactly do you think these emails are?

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.

EXCEPT THAT SHE PLED THE 5TH WHEN QUIZZED ABOUT ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES!!

You do realize that means there were illegal activities going on, right?

You do understand the implication of pleading the 5th, right?

Ignoring that, and other posts pretty much makes you out to be a kool-aid drinking shill...

a reply to: kruphix

Lots of emails...including emails from over 2 years ago. The missing ones are Lerner's and 5 or 6 others.

Let's see...there is a LAW requiring maintaining emails for years (5?), so you are saying that the IRS intentionally violated the law?

You know there is stinky crap going on. Lerner pleads the 5th, and then voila' her emails are missing. No coincidence here...none at all lol

keep drinkin that kool aid.

originally posted by: bbracken677
EXCEPT THAT SHE PLED THE 5TH WHEN QUIZZED ABOUT ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES!!
You do realize that means there were illegal activities going on, right?
You do understand the implication of pleading the 5th, right?

So when folks were pleading the fifth during the McCarthy hearings...they were all just commies. Obviously guilty because they wouldn't talk!

I would plead the fifth if I was in Lerner's shoes. Not because I'm guilty, but because I'm not a witch. Nothing she would've said would've been sufficient for the committee chair.

She's already been judged. Obviously. Why bother trying to argue otherwise?

a reply to: links234

First: One does not claim the 5th if one has not committed illegal activities. The fact that Lerner did indicates that she was involved in some way with illegal activities.

I cannot speak for those testifying during the McCarthy era: Dark days, indeed. Just as dark as those days when we knowingly give our govt the pass when it has broken laws.

Too many coincidences. Reminds me of Nixon.

Just for clarification: I do not believe that compaign contributions constitute free speech. I believe that PACS and other political non-profit groups should be illegal. If the political group is not directly associated with a specific individuals campaign then it is nothing more than a way to funnel monies that would otherwise be illegal into a campaign. Also allows for lies to be propogated without any responsibility falling on the campaigns themselves.
I also believe that lobbying should be illegal. The whole concept promotes graft, corruption and weakening the balance of power that should be in the hands of the voter as opposed to special interest groups.

Let's just be honest here: During the Obama administration the head of the IRS and other high ranking individuals visited the White House more than the previous 4 administrations combined. Lois Lerner pled the 5th. Within weeks her emails disappear. Coincidence much?

Where there is smoke, there is fire. If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck and smells like a duck...there is a high probability that it is a duck.

So instead of knee jerking support of the current admin (since, no doubt, they are your guys) how about we just actually have some real prosecutors investigate this stuff? I would rather see that then the circus going on, personally. All we have going on is the circus right now. Why? Hmm... perhaps cause those in charge are trying to stall, delay or prevent any real investigation from taking place.

I feel there are too many coincidences for this IRS thing to be clean... If they are clean, then they should quit with the 5th and just provide the facts, nothing but the facts. It's when you have something to hide that the sheet hits the fan.

Nixon was a crook. He got caught red handed, so to speak. His coverup resulted in him resigning. There was smoke, and there was a fire. The duck quacked, walked and got cooked. I am seeing a lot of parallels here.... I was in college during the Nixon Watergate scandal... This smells an awful like that smell...

Perhaps you would have been claiming that Nixon did nothing wrong.... cause you remind of of those who took his side early on.

******THIS JUST IN********


WOW,,,, the IRS HAS A 2 BILLION A YEAR BUDGET!!!!,,,WOW,,,(*see below.)




UPDATE: *******dESKTOP WAS xp,,,,,,,, *********

SONOSOFT now being mentioned,

Except Lois Lerner's emails were requested before 6 months had passed from at least the tail end of the time period in question. The IRS took a long time to get around to it. Which some may see as suspect, as well. a reply to: kruphix

Pleading the 5th doesn't automatically "implicate" someone. It's a right to not incriminate oneself. If it meant one had indeed done the illegal thing of which one's been accused, Why on Earth would the 5th amendment even be a "thing"? a reply to: bbracken677
I think the whole thing is suspect. I'm no partisan. But you people repeating the "pleading the fifth means you're GUILTY" thing are part of the problem, the big huge problem of the American public's civic ignorance.

Something interesting regarding Lerner's opening statement and the question of whether she can even plead the 5th at all:
Frompopehat.com Some people have argued that Lois Lerner should be compelled to testify, either by court order or by grant of immunity. Lerner and her lawyers would love that, as it would make prosecuting her for any suspected wrongdoing incredibly difficult.

Compelled testimony is radioactive. If a witness is compelled to testify, in any subsequent proceeding against them the government has a heavy burden to prove that no part of the prosecution is derived from the compelled testimony, which is treated as immunized. This is called the Kastigar doctrine:

"Once a defendant demonstrates that he has testified, under a state grant of immunity, to matters related to the federal prosecution, the federal authorities have the burden of showing that their evidence is not tainted by establishing that they had an independent, legitimate source for the disputed evidence." 378 U.S. at 378 U. S. 79 n. 18. This burden of proof, which we reaffirm as appropriate, is not limited to a negation of taint; rather, it imposes on the prosecution the affirmative duty to prove that the evidence it proposes to use is derived from a legitimate source wholly independent of the compelled testimony.
This is not a mere theoretical problem in Lois Lerner's case. Oliver North's convictions were reversed based on a Kastigar issue after he was compelled to testify before Congress. The appellate court found that the trial court had not held an adequate Kastigar inquiry into the independent source of the prosecution's evidence, and on remand the trial court found that the government could not carry its burden of showing an independent source.

Now, if a court found that Lerner had waived her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, and ordered her to testify on that basis, then her testimony would not be compelled for Kastigar purposes. But that's a risky gambit. If the Court of Appeals disagreed and determined that Lerner had not waived her privilege, then any testimony would be treated as compelled for Kastigar purposes.

In short, compelling Lerner might provide a circus, but if the purpose is to preserve the ability to prosecute her for any suspected wrongdoing, it's potentially counterproductive."


a reply to: kkrattiger

Did Lerner's lawyer(s) advise her to say something at the beginning which would make it ambiguous as to whether or not her later pleading the 5th would be allowable, just to throw even more uncertainty into the mix? So those who would go after her for the one thing would now have to contend with the other issue, too?

a reply to: tow69

ABSOLUTELY INDEED.

I don't think you are as tired of such lying, duplicitous, traitorous, TERMINALLY CLUELESS AND STUPID globalist bustards as some of us are--wellllll--maybe you are.

And about as exasperating are their seemingly hired suck-up sycophants hereon. Do such folks even know how to read beyond a 3 year old level? Do they know how to think beyond . . . "Maybe I need to find a bathroom." ???

Do they have a clue beyond a gnat's fart's worth about ANYTHING that is WRONG vs RIGHT?

Oh, right, they have come to buy into the unbrilliant globalist blather that there IS NO right vs wrong. What idiocy. What unmitigated ignorant idiocy.

I hope that when they wipe in the morning they know to flush the result rather than eat it. No right vs wrong. Sheesh, what flaunted utterly stupid ignorance. If they really believe that, then on irregular days, they must eat it vs flush it.

What is the origin of this anesthetized, shriveled or lobotomized bunch of brains? I realize that D.C. seems to be a major center of such vacuumized craniums. But what's the origin of so many supporters and fellow empty headedness in the hinterlands?

Has the 60 years of the globalists' increasingly refined mass propaganda and brain washing REALLY BEEN THAT EFFECTIVE????????????????????

If so, then NO WONDER the country is so . . . . shafted, shredded, sabotaged, scrapped, scandalized and shaken to its foundations without a whimper or much notice at its precarious state.

It's just . . . wellll . . . I have a hard time putting it in words . . . even pondering it all as a psychologist and sociologist . . . I'm hard pressed to make what seems to be very comfortable sense of it. I keep wanting to think that 'PEOPLE CAN'T be THAT willfully blind and willfully stupid, can they? EVIDENTLY THEY CAN . . . day in and day out. And they're breeding.

The evidence in this case is plain as day . . . plastered everywhere even by the MSM.

Oh, I REALIZE that there MUST BE some convoluted MASTER PLAN strategy to script, set-up and media spew out this 'theatre d'absurd.'

But even knowing that . . .

WHY ON EARTH do soooooooooooo MANY supposedly brainy people demonstrate such terminal ignorance?

Why are they such gullible followers of the globalist Pied Pipers?

Why are they SOOOOO COMPLICIT with their own destruction?

It's like the oligarchy's raising the executioner's blade over their heads and all they can think to do is kiss the blade and kiss the butts of the executioners and cooo how beautifully wonderous it all is!

Lunacy in charge of the asylum, indeed.

And this is NOT THE FIRST TIME that the Destroyer-in-Chief, the Pathological-Liar-in-Chief has BRAZENLY FLAUNTED his inclination and haughty delight in lying to the very people who stupidly helped put him in power. It is his HABIT! It is his hobby, preference, compulsion, passionate habit to lie, distort, obfuscate, disassemble, . . . turn reality inside out and upside down and THEN to BLAME IT ON SOMEONE ELSE.

And the sycophants coo "Amen, Brother. Preach it, Brother." . . . The lemming suck-ups exclaim--

"Oh, sister, did you hear the glorious drops of wisdom the Chief Thug spewed into our dysfunctional ears? Ain't it magnificent!"

Clearly the nation has been thrown with great force down Alice's rabbit hole chute to hell.

And it's only going to get worse.

Those cheering such idiocies on will have their wish. It will get much worse.

It's difficult to imagine but it will be the case.

I wouldn't be surprised that masses of people will be 'eating it instead of flushing it' and claiming it's delicious cotton candy.

Things HAVE already become ABOUT THAT outrageously absurd.

There is NO DEFENSE for such criminal activity in high places.

NONE WHATSOEVER.

And history future will record that those who claimed there was a defense knew in their heart of hearts that they were off the wall stupid at the time and still claimed that the lies were wonderous truth.

Maybe part of it is that they were soooooooooooooo desperate for a more like-them-god-to-follow, they had no choice but to suck up to the imposter from hell and Kenya.

So now, all they can reflexively do is shout

"HAIL O'THUGA, OUR JACK-DADDY KING AND PIMP-IN-CHIEF!
HAIL O'THUGA, OUR MENTOR IN LYING AND ALL THINGS CRIMINAL!"

"HAIL O'THUGA, OUR MODEL DESTROYER AND SHREDDER OF NATIONS!
HAIL O'THUGA, OUR SHREDDER OF TRUTH AND TRASHER OF SANITY!"

"HAIL O'THUGA, OUR OBLITERATOR OF FAMILIES AND EXECUTIONER OF ECONOMIES AND JOBS.
HAIL O'THUGA OUR MASTER EVIL AT CALLING GOOD EVIL, BLACK WHITE AND UP DOWN!"

"Get your used tissue souvenir's here--
straight from O'Thuga's rear!"

Sigh.