Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Networks Dodge Huge IRS Scandal News as DOJ Attorney Says Lost Lerner E-Mails Do Exist

4 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Markle

Markle

Ouch, this could sting too. My guess is that our semi-retired President will be back out on the gold links before the weekend. He probably can't believe so much could go south with his administration and have so many scandals coming so fast and piling on so deep. Of course, when it has gone without any leadership for the past six years.

Huge IRS Scandal News as DOJ Attorney Says Lost Lerner E-Mails Do Exist

By Curtis Houck | August 25, 2014 | 21:15

The latest bombshell in the IRS scandal has landed. On Monday, Judicial Watch’s president Tom Fitton told FNC’s Shannon Bream that a Justice Department attorney told them the missing Lois Lerner e-mails do exist.

Appearing on FNC’s The Real Story with Gretchen Carlson, Fitton announced: “A Department of Justice attorney told a Judicial Watch attorney on Friday that it turns out the federal government backs up all computer records in case something terrible happens in Washington and there is a catastrophe....So everything we’ve been hearing about scratched hard drives, about missing e-mails of Lois Lerner, other IRS officials, other officials in the Obama administration, it’s all been a pack of malarkey.”

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2014/08/25/irs-scandal-bombshell-doj-attorney-admits-lois-lerner-emails-exist#ixzz3BTzLhZjZ

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2014/08/heres-latest-right-wing-irs-fantasy

Here's the Latest Right-Wing IRS Fantasy

"Here's a great example of the conservative media bubble at work. I was browsing The Corner a few minutes ago and came across a post telling me that the government has, rather astonishingly, acknowledged that it has another backup of Lois Lerner's missing emails. Judicial Watch, which has been trying to get hold of these emails, sent out a press release trumpeting its discovery:

Department of Justice attorneys for the Internal Revenue Service told Judicial Watch on Friday that Lois Lerner’s emails, indeed all government computer records, are backed up by the federal government in case of a government-wide catastrophe....This is a jaw-dropping revelation. The Obama administration had been lying to the American people about Lois Lerner’s missing emails....The Obama administration has known all along where the email records could be — but dishonestly withheld this information.

Well. That's fascinating. But I wondered what was really up. I went to Google News but all I found were links to conservative news sites. The Judicial Watch story was plastered over all of them: Forbes, The Blaze, NRO, Breitbart, Fox, Townhall, the Washington Examiner, the Free Beacon, and the New York Observer. But none of the usual mainstream news sources seemed to have anything about this.

Except for The Hill. Hooray! So I clicked:

[An] administration official said Justice Department lawyers had dropped no bombshells last week, and that Judicial Watch was mischaracterizing what the government had said.

The official said that Justice lawyers were only referring to tapes backing up IRS emails that were routinely recycled twice a year before 2013, when the investigation into the Tea Party controversy began....The administration official said that the inspector general is examining whether any data can be recovered from the previously recycled back-up tapes and suggested that could be the cause of the confusion between the government and Judicial Watch..."

Floridatexan

Floridatexan




http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/13/white.house.email/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

White House: Millions of e-mails may be missing
POSTED: 7:07 p.m. EDT, April 13, 2007

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Millions of White House e-mails may be missing, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino acknowledged Friday.

"I wouldn't rule out that there were a potential 5 million e-mails lost," Perino told reporters.

The administration was already facing sharp questions about whether top presidential advisers including Karl Rove improperly used Republican National Committee e-mail that the White House said later disappeared.

The latest comments were a response to a new report from a liberal watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), alleging that over a two-year period official White House e-mail traffic for hundreds of days has vanished -- in possible violation of the federal Presidential Records Act. (Watch CREW's comments on the missing messages Video)

"This story is really now a two-part issue," CREW's Melanie Sloan told CNN. "First there's the use of the RNC e-mail server that's inappropriate by White House officials and secondly we've also learned that there were between March of 2003 and October of 2005 apparently over 5 million e-mail that were not preserved and these are e-mail on the regular White House server."

Perino stressed there's no indication the e-mails were intentionally lost, but she was careful not to dispute the outside group's allegations. "I'm not taking issue with their conclusions at this point," Perino said. "We're checking into them. There are 1,700 people in the Executive Office of the President."

White House: 'We screwed up'

Perino's disclosure about the White House e-mail comes a day after she admitted that the White House "screwed up" by not requiring e-mails from Republican Party and campaign accounts to be saved and was also trying to recover those e-mails.

Perino said 22 aides in the political arm of the president's office use party or campaign e-mail accounts, which were issued to separate official business from political work. Some of those accounts were used to discuss the December firings of eight federal prosecutors, a shake-up that has triggered a spreading controversy on Capitol Hill.

Congressional investigators have questioned whether White House aides used e-mail accounts from the Republican Party and President Bush's re-election campaign for official government business to avoid scrutiny of those dealings.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, accused the White House of trying to hide messages on the Republican Party system related to the firing of the U.S. attorneys, which has stirred up a hornet's nest on Capitol Hill.

"You can't erase e-mails, not today," said Leahy, D-Vermont. "They've gone through too many servers. They can't say they've been lost. That's like saying, 'The dog ate my homework.' " (Watch Leahy compare e-mails to Nixon tapes Video)

Leahy said the e-mails would have remained on party or campaign computer servers, and he compared the situation to the famous 18½-minute gap in one of the Watergate tapes.

"They're there," he said. "They know they're there, and we'll subpoena them, if necessary, and we'll have them."

Perino told reporters that the e-mails from those accounts should have been saved, but said policy has not kept pace with technology. She said computer experts were trying to retrieve any records that have been deleted.

"We screwed up, and we're trying to fix it," she told reporters.

E-mails sought by special prosecutor also missing

Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor in the CIA leak case, disclosed last year that some White House e-mails in 2003 were not saved as standard procedure dictated.

In a January 23, 2006, letter to the defense team of former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Fitzgerald wrote: "We advise you that we have learned that not all e-mail of the Office of Vice President and the Executive Office of President for certain time periods in 2003 was preserved through the normal archiving process on the White House computer system."

Robert Luskin, personal attorney for Rove, told CNN Friday that he "has no reason to doubt" Fitzgerald's assertion that some White House e-mail was missing.

"You're quite right," Luskin said in a telephone interview. "There was a gap there."

Democrats charge this raises questions about whether the public has gotten the full story on everything from the CIA leak case to the fired U.S. attorneys controversy.

"The biggest problem here is really that here is a White House that is deliberately violating an existing statute that requires them to preserve all records," said Sloan. "And we have significant evidence now both from the RNC e-mail and the White House e-mail that are missing that the White House was using every means possible to avoid complying with the law."

Luskin said it was "foolish speculation" for CREW -- which serves as counsel to former ambassador Joe Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame, in a private suit against Rove and other Bush officials -- to suggest that the gap in White House e-mail helped Rove avoid indictment in the CIA leak case. Luskin said Fitzgerald told him that Rove was cleared in the case because he "did nothing wrong."

Luskin added that until this month, Rove believed his RNC e-mail was being archived and did nothing wrong.

"Rove has always understood from very early on in the Bush administration that RNC and campaign e-mail were being archived," said Luskin. "He was absolutely unaware until very, very recently that any e-mails were lost. And he never asked that e-mails be deleted or asked for the authority to delete e-mails."

boards of FL

boards of FL

This thread nicely illustrates the fact that the GOP is essentially bankrupt in terms of economic policy, healthcare policy, foreign policy, border policy, etc... We're in the midst of an election year and this is basically all that the GOP has to offer - an imaginary scandal.


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

It's inconceivable that any of that data is coincidentally irretrievable. If the govt is little else... it's redundant.

Markle

Markle

Floridatexan wrote:


http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/13/white.house.email/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

White House: Millions of e-mails may be missing
POSTED: 7:07 p.m. EDT, April 13, 2007

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Millions of White House e-mails may be missing, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino acknowledged Friday.

Yours is a bogus issue in the first place. As you well know, all US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. If you will look back, President William Jefferson Clinton fired them all when he took office.

What you are saying is that because emails were lost, and it was an issue seven years ago, it is okay today that critical emails, involving REAL WRONG DOING, should just be ignored.

Wow.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


Don't try to put words in my mouth. I made the comparison because of the selective amnesia of the Reich Wing. The real IRS scandal is the fact that so many of these PAC's in disguise were allowed to keep their tax-exempt status and avoid donor accountability.

Guest


Guest

Floridatexan wrote:
Don't try to put words in my mouth. I made the comparison because of the selective amnesia of the Reich Wing. The real IRS scandal is the fact that so many of these PAC's in disguise were allowed to keep their tax-exempt status and avoid donor accountability.

It was legal... the irs targeting is not legal. Does anyone really want any impression of the irs politically targeting?

Markle

Markle

Floridatexan wrote:
Don't try to put words in my mouth.  I made the comparison because of the selective amnesia of the Reich Wing.  The real IRS scandal is the fact that so many of these PAC's in disguise were allowed to keep their tax-exempt status and avoid donor accountability.  

That has been proven wrong by the sheer numbers. That is not the topic of this thread, it is the massive, illegal cover-up and stonewalling of this investigation even by the Justice Department.

More lies and cover-ups continue now with retard to Lois Lerner's Blackberry.

knothead

knothead

Da Dude wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
Don't try to put words in my mouth.  I made the comparison because of the selective amnesia of the Reich Wing.  The real IRS scandal is the fact that so many of these PAC's in disguise were allowed to keep their tax-exempt status and avoid donor accountability.  

It was legal... the irs targeting is not legal. Does anyone really want any impression of the irs politically targeting?

***********************************************************

I disagree . . . . it my own belief that the IRS was swamped with applications for tax free status and 99.9% had right wing ideology. Had I been a supervisor at the IRS I, too, would have required a fair appraisal of the affairs of the applicant which is necessary to determine their legitimacy.

Guest


Guest

knothead wrote:
Da Dude wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
Don't try to put words in my mouth.  I made the comparison because of the selective amnesia of the Reich Wing.  The real IRS scandal is the fact that so many of these PAC's in disguise were allowed to keep their tax-exempt status and avoid donor accountability.  

It was legal... the irs targeting is not legal. Does anyone really want any impression of the irs politically targeting?

***********************************************************

I disagree . . . . it my own belief that the IRS was swamped with applications for tax free status and 99.9% had right wing ideology. Had I been a supervisor at the IRS I, too, would have required a fair appraisal of the affairs of the applicant which is necessary to determine their legitimacy.

Cmon... Lerner planted the question that was an admission to begin the scandal... as a way to preempt the ig report. Why?

I'm sure if she had known the lengths the administration would go to obfuscate transparency... she likely wouldn't have.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/05/17/exclusive-woman-who-asked-irss-lois-lerner-scandal-breaking-question-details-plant

The transcript: http://electionlawblog.org/?p=50160

" However, in these cases, the way they did the centralization was not so fine. Instead of referring to the cases as advocacy cases, they actually used case names on this list. They used names like Tea Party or Patriots and they selected cases simply because the applications had those names in the title. That was wrong, that was absolutely incorrect, insensitive, and inappropriate — that’s not how we go about selecting cases for further review. We don’t select for review because they have a particular name. The other thing that happened was they also, in some cases, cases sat around for a while. They also sent some letters out that were far too broad, asking questions of these organizations that weren’t really necessary for the type of application. In some cases you probably read that they asked for contributor names. That’s not appropriate, not usual, there are some very limited times when we might need that but in most of these cases where they were asked they didn’t do it correctly and they didn’t do it with a higher level of review. As I said, some of them sat around for too long."

Markle

Markle

knothead wrote:
Da Dude wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
Don't try to put words in my mouth.  I made the comparison because of the selective amnesia of the Reich Wing.  The real IRS scandal is the fact that so many of these PAC's in disguise were allowed to keep their tax-exempt status and avoid donor accountability.  

It was legal... the irs targeting is not legal. Does anyone really want any impression of the irs politically targeting?

***********************************************************

I disagree . . . . it my own belief that the IRS was swamped with applications for tax free status and 99.9% had right wing ideology.  Had I been a supervisor at the IRS I, too, would have required a fair appraisal of the affairs of the applicant which is necessary to determine their legitimacy.  

But NOT anyone or any group with a PROGRESSIVE agenda?

How cute!

You do realize that non-profits can have a right or left wing ideology don't you?  There are restrictions on what they can do.  News to you isn't it?

By the way, they were not "swamped" with applications. But you are desperate for explanations aren't you?

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum