IRS Scandal explodes. "no evidence that would support a criminal prosecution."

[TerryMathews]

The context here is emails, so SMS messages are out of scope. Nonetheless, I agree Blackberries will often contain text messages that are not stored on the mail servers. I also think that's an interesting question: are text messages subject to discovery in this lawsuit, or in the other investigations? I've seen no mention of them.

Re. mirroring whatever is on the server, that's based directly on the IRS statement from Manning:

"7. In the standard IRS configuration of Blackberry devices, the Blackberry device displays and stores only email (both sent and received) that is also stored in the Microsoft Outlook mailbox of the assigned user, with the possible exception of draft messages created on the Blackberry but not sent, which would appear on the Blackberry only. Therefore, standard IRS practice and policy in the collection of electronic data does not include collecting data from Blackberry devices because the email of a Blackberry user is collected through the process of collecting the contents of the user's Outlook mailbox files."
​

(Any typos are mine.)

The point is Biff's Observer story (and the National Review story, and all the similar stories popping up all over the nutter disinformation bubble) are intentionally misleading. They deliberately omit the part about Blackberries being ignored because they do not contain any email that's not also on the server.

I can't imagine a set of circumstances where her work Blackberry's SMS messages and Blackberry Messenger messages were exempt from discovery.

It may be a glaring hole in the government's data retention policy; it certainly wouldn't be the first time. I also know for a fact that these devices are not configured to reject SMS messages. I'm not going to disclose who or the relationship I had with the person, but I knew someone with a Blackberry with a CAC slot and I know for a fact it was capable of both phone calls and SMS messages.

My point being, SMS can be retained. It's a check box in Exchange. If that were done, the server would archive them according to the retention policy just like any other e-mail. It would also be searchable.

ETA: I think this is a good time for us to all recall when Lerner was inquiring about discovery and archiving of non-Exchange electronic messages.

 

[Jhhnn]

Simply isn't, especially after an investigation was ongoing. But I don't expect you to start being honest anytime soon either.

The IRS said it was, and I'm sure they can back that up with the records for God only knows how many blackberries dealt with in the same way.

As Bowfinger points out, there was likely nothing pertinent on the device at the time, anyway.

But it's a glimmer of hope for all the True Believers in Conspiracy out there. Issa plays the chumps, again, and they love it.

 

[Bowfinger]

If this is the case, why does a single hard drive crash equate to hundreds or thousands of missing emails?

The server has to retain the emails in order for mirroring and syncing to work. Otherwise, the IRS is full of shit.

For a purported tech guy, you're sure having trouble keeping up. The fundamental issue is the IRS imposed an email quota: 150 MB per user on the server. Everything above that had to be deleted from the server, and if the user wanted to save it, archived to local PCs.

So, can you figure it out from there, or do I need to "make it easy for you?" When IRS employees delete email from the Exchange server to stay within quota, they also in effect delete it from the Blackberry. Once again, deleted from server, deleted from Blackberry.

The drive crash was really a separate issue. Lerner's old mail was gone from the server by choice (and thus also gone from her Blackberry). She had to delete excess mail to stay within quota. The drive crash destroyed the archive on her PC. That's when he old emails changed from "archived, not on server" to "gone".

 

[TerryMathews]

For a purported tech guy, you're sure having trouble keeping up. The fundamental issue is the IRS imposed an email quota: 150 MB per user on the server. Everything above that had to be deleted from the server, and if the user wanted to save it, archived to local PCs.

So, can you figure it out from there, or do I need to "make it easy for you?" When IRS employees delete email from the Exchange server to stay within quota, they also in effect delete it from the Blackberry. Once again, deleted from server, deleted from Blackberry.

The drive crash was really a separate issue. Lerner's old mail was gone from the server by choice (and thus also gone from her Blackberry). She had to delete excess mail to stay within quota. The drive crash destroyed the archive on her PC. That's when he old emails changed from "archived, not on server" to "gone".

If nothing else comes out of this investigation, I hope that government data retention policies are brought into line with what is expected of the private sector.

150MB is a joke, even in 2011/2012.

 

[Jhhnn]

If nothing else comes out of this investigation, I hope that government data retention policies are brought into line with what is expected of the private sector.

150MB is a joke, even in 2011/2012.

I'm sure that more budget cuts will smooth that transition, no doubt.

 

[ivwshane]

If nothing else comes out of this investigation, I hope that government data retention policies are brought into line with what is expected of the private sector.

150MB is a joke, even in 2011/2012.

We should reduce the IRS's budget, that will make it so that they can do their jobs better...right?

 

[Bowfinger]

I can't imagine a set of circumstances where her work Blackberry's SMS messages and Blackberry Messenger messages were exempt from discovery.

It may be a glaring hole in the government's data retention policy; it certainly wouldn't be the first time. I also know for a fact that these devices are not configured to reject SMS messages. I'm not going to disclose who or the relationship I had with the person, but I knew someone with a Blackberry with a CAC slot and I know for a fact it was capable of both phone calls and SMS messages.

My point being, SMS can be retained. It's a check box in Exchange. If that were done, the server would archive them according to the retention policy just like any other e-mail. It would also be searchable.

ETA: I think this is a good time for us to all recall when Lerner was inquiring about discovery and archiving of non-Exchange electronic messages.

I don't disagree with any of that. I simply don't remember SMS/text ever mentioned in any of the stories, transcripts, etc. Also, Lerner wasn't asking about SMS messages. She was asking about their internal IM system.

 

[TerryMathews]

She was asking about their internal IM system.

I think you're not giving her enough credit if you're assuming she couldn't derrive one answer from the other.

To the rest of your post, it was a general observation. Not necessarily something i expect to come up.

 

[Bowfinger]

If nothing else comes out of this investigation, I hope that government data retention policies are brought into line with what is expected of the private sector.

150MB is a joke, even in 2011/2012.

The IRS subsequently raised the quota to 500 MB, and I believe this was even before Lerner and her email became an issue. I hope they don't stop there, and move to a better design entirely.

I also read Obama (i.e., his administration) launched a new program in late 2013 (IIRC) to improve government handling and preservation of electronic records throughout the federal government. Sounds like it's long overdue.

 

[TerryMathews]

I'm sure that more budget cuts will smooth that transition, no doubt.

We should reduce the IRS's budget, that will make it so that they can do their jobs better...right?

Considering the IRS was still paying for a retention system under contract they stopped using, you're not going to find much empathy here.

The money they have needs to be used appropriately before more is given.

 

[Bowfinger]

Considering the IRS was still paying for a retention system under contract they stopped using, you're not going to find much empathy here.

The money they have needs to be used appropriately before more is given.

Nothing personal, but that's one thing that really pisses me off about the right-wing propaganda machine. They create lies like that, and even after the lie is refuted, you guys don't update your beliefs, and even the nutter media continue to repeat them. The lies live forever. Bill Maher calls them zombie lies, an apt description.

As has been explained in this thread, there was no retention system. The Sonasoft contract was only for the IRS Counsel's office, not EO and not the whole IRS, and it was for mail server replication, not email archiving. Never was. Sonasoft explained this in a press release that I posted here.

 

[Jhhnn]

Considering the IRS was still paying for a retention system under contract they stopped using, you're not going to find much empathy here.

The money they have needs to be used appropriately before more is given.

Yeh, nailing their foot to the floor will make 'em run faster, that's for sure. You betcha!

 

[TerryMathews]

Nothing personal, but that's one thing that really pisses me off about the right-wing propaganda machine. They create lies like that, and even after the lie is refuted, you guys don't update your beliefs, and even the nutter media continue to repeat them. The lies live forever. Bill Maher calls them zombie lies, an apt description.

As has been explained in this thread, there was no retention system. The Sonasoft contract was only for the IRS Counsel's office, not EO and not the whole IRS, and it was for mail server replication, not email archiving. Never was. Sonasoft explained this in a press release that I posted here.

Sorry if you posted it I didn't see it. Much as I'd like to (/s) I don't actually live here.

I'll take you at your word that they didn't have any retention service under contract. That attacks the specifics of one of my points but not the overall point: there's plenty of money in the budget to pay for "essential" items like meetings and retreats.

They need to take retention seriously. It needs to be an essential item.

 

[TerryMathews]

Yeh, nailing their foot to the floor will make 'em run faster, that's for sure. You betcha!

More like taking the rolled up $100 bill out of Chris Farley's hand than your analogy.

 

[werepossum]

If this is the case, why does a single hard drive crash equate to hundreds or thousands of missing emails?

The server has to retain the emails in order for mirroring and syncing to work. Otherwise, the IRS is full of shit.

The exchange server was set up with hard limits per account, so that as new mail comes in, old mail gets deleted automatically. That mail would be retained on the individual computer unless deleted, until a hard drive crash wipes it out ten days after a Congressional letter of inquiry anyway.

Email would not remain on the Blackberry after its first sync, so searching that device would have been pointless. The Blackberry can pull files from the user's computer or from the Exchange server, but could not store thousands of emails on its own.

The system Judicial Watch references is not the Blackberry, but rather another government archival system which saves EVERY email EVERY day in case the Federal government has to be rebuilt from the ground to recover from a disaster.

The IRS is NOT denying that such a system exists; they are simply stating that its existence was disclosed earlier. The Judicial Watch links do not mention it that I've seen, so the IRS may be correct.

The claim that recovery via these backups is onerous is because there is literally no way to search the archive, which is designed to be restored in total, day by day, for Lerner's emails. One would have to restore each day's tapes or files, then search that temporary file. I do think it should be done as using the nation's most feared agency for political affect is one of the worst abuses possible, but it certainly is an onerous thing to contemplate.

A lot of people are volunteering to write the necessary SQL code without realizing that just because these are stored in one or two physical locations, that does not mean they are stored on one or two devices. In reality there would be at least one tape per day in question.

 

[Bowfinger]

As expected, Judicial Watch was spinning tales. Here's an update Fox (of all places) added to its story (though with the same sensational and misleading headline):

However, an administration official told Fox News Monday night, “ There was no new back-up system described last week to Judicial Watch. Government lawyers who spoke to Judicial Watch simply referred to the same email retention policy that Commissioner (John) Koskinen had described in his Congressional testimony.”
​

Of course the damage is already done. The wing-nut blogs are aflame with outrage over this "shocking" development. All sorts of wild accusations, demands for prison, etc. Some sociopath even called for Obama's head on an Isis pike.

Issa also used this as an excuse to grab the spotlight. He promised to bring Koskinen back to his inquisition for a "closed-door" interrogation session. This conveniently means Issa will be free to cherry pick whatever he wants out of context to further his lies, of course.

Bump, since this update has already been left behind by a flurry of new posts over the last couple of hours.

 

[Jhhnn]

Nothing personal, but that's one thing that really pisses me off about the right-wing propaganda machine. They create lies like that, and even after the lie is refuted, you guys don't update your beliefs, and even the nutter media continue to repeat them. The lies live forever. Bill Maher calls them zombie lies, an apt description.

As has been explained in this thread, there was no retention system. The Sonasoft contract was only for the IRS Counsel's office, not EO and not the whole IRS, and it was for mail server replication, not email archiving. Never was. Sonasoft explained this in a press release that I posted here.

Facts don't matter to Believers. You can't put this in a rational political frame while they insist on an irrational faith based conspiracy frame.

Think of it as religion. Remember that knowledge is the enemy of Faith. Therefore, that bit of knowledge is rejected no matter how many times it's brought up. It's the convenience of forgetfulness & the basis for all legends of propaganda.

 

[Bowfinger]

Everyone remember that Sonasoft email archiving contract that the IRS purportedly canceled right after Lerner's drive crashed? You know, the story earlier this week that exploded overnight throughout the nutter disinformation bubble, and was touted as the smoking gun that proved this was an Obama conspiracy to destroy evidence? Yeah, not so much.

Here's a press release from Sonasoft:

Sonasoft Clarifies Its Position Regarding IRS and Sonasoft's Email Archiving Products

Sonasoft Corp. clarifies its position regarding Sonasoft’s email archiving products and the IRS. Sonasoft does not have IRS email; Sonasoft never had access to IRS email.
San Jose, California (PRWEB) June 25, 2014

Sonasoft Corp., a leader in enterprise-class email archiving and eDiscovery tools, clarifies its role with the IRS and Sonasoft’s email archiving services. Sonasoft does not have IRS email. Sonasoft never had access to IRS email.

“We have a strong presence with the public sector as part of our customer base, which at one time included as a customer the IRS Counsel Division. Sonasoft has earned a strong clientele with, among others, school districts, counties and city governments, which appreciate our affordable email archiving solutions that outperform their expectations,” said Andy Khanna, President and CEO of Sonasoft.
[ ... ]
“In regards to the IRS as one of Sonasoft’s customers, it is true that one Division within the IRS was Sonasoft’s customer from 2005 to 2011,” clarified Andy Khanna. “This Division was the IRS Counsel. The main branch of the IRS did not use Sonasoft’s software for its operations; only the IRS Counsel used our SonaExchange software, which is a Microsoft Exchange Server replication solution. This particular software allowed the IRS Counsel to replicate the email data by copying it to a remote server for disaster recovery and business continuity as a failover copy to take over if the main system failed. In the event that a client’s Microsoft Exchange Server went down, then end users could access the replicated data on the Microsoft Exchange Server quickly and efficiently. The IRS Counsel Division stopped using Sonasoft’s replication software in 2011.”

“To further clarify, no Division within IRS ever used Sonasoft’s email archiving software. Only a Division within the IRS used any Sonasoft product and that was our email replication software, not our archiving or backup software,” said Andy Khanna. ...

TL;DR -- Yet another fizzle. The nutter media duped the flock yet again.

Bumping this as well, since it prompted almost no discussion and was therefore missed by many.

 

[xBiffx]

For a purported tech guy, you're sure having trouble keeping up. The fundamental issue is the IRS imposed an email quota: 150 MB per user on the server. Everything above that had to be deleted from the server, and if the user wanted to save it, archived to local PCs.

So, can you figure it out from there, or do I need to "make it easy for you?" When IRS employees delete email from the Exchange server to stay within quota, they also in effect delete it from the Blackberry. Once again, deleted from server, deleted from Blackberry.

The drive crash was really a separate issue. Lerner's old mail was gone from the server by choice (and thus also gone from her Blackberry). She had to delete excess mail to stay within quota. The drive crash destroyed the archive on her PC. That's when he old emails changed from "archived, not on server" to "gone".

So basically, you are agreeing with me in saying that the IRS broke the law. Heck they've even done it willingly. I'd say I'm keeping up just fine.

But thanks, I know how an Exchange server works. But you've done a bang up job of showing how the IRS doesn't care about federal laws.

 

[TerryMathews]

Facts don't matter to Believers. You can't put this in a rational political frame while they insist on an irrational faith based conspiracy frame.

Think of it as religion. Remember that knowledge is the enemy of Faith. Therefore, that bit of knowledge is rejected no matter how many times it's brought up. It's the convenience of forgetfulness & the basis for all legends of propaganda.

Preach on brother!

 

[xBiffx]

Here's a decent article that I dug up from a couple months ago that explains the issues in another way.

http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/06/17/irs-manual-explicitly-governs-email-backup-retention/

Author's conclusions/Cliff's:

1. They’re gone due to a simple laptop or desktop computer hard drive crash. This must assume that IRS information technology personnel were not following their own set standards for data retention and security. In this case, more heads should be rolling as there may be federal law violated by an agency which is not in compliance with security policies laid out in FISMA.
2. Lois Lerner, in collusion with personnel at the IRS, is lying.

Its also worth noting that the following part of the IRS manual was updated in March of this year. I wonder why?

http://www.irs.gov/irm/part1/irm_01-015-006.html

 

[Bowfinger]

So basically, you are agreeing with me in saying that the IRS broke the law. Heck they've even done it willingly. I'd say I'm keeping up just fine.

But thanks, I know how an Exchange server works. But you've done a bang up job of showing how the IRS doesn't care about federal laws.

No, I'm saying you're pathologically incapable of presenting something honestly. Federal regulations do not require agencies to preserve all emails. It requires agencies to preserve all "official records". The IRS policy for preserving official records from email was for employees to print and file those emails. As long as employees followed that policy, it didn't matter how many PC drives crashed or Blackberries were destroyed. It didn't even matter if email servers crashed. All that mattered to meeting those regulations was following IRS policy and printing all emails that qualified as official records.

This has been covered a good dozen times in this thread already, so I doubt you'll get it this time either. Nonetheless, that's why your legal presumptions mean squat.

And re. you understanding how things work, you clearly do not based on your comment to which I responded. Either that or you were being dishonest. You pick.

 

[Jhhnn]

Preach on brother!

You're the one who dragged out a completely discredited talking point as the truth, one that's been repeatedly debunked, even in this very thread iirc.

Hell, you dragged it out as an emotionally appealing crutch for a spurious argument. You very much want to believe that there's some greater conspiracy behind all this, and you'll clearly go to extraordinary lengths to keep believing in that seemingly remote possibility.

What will it take for you to admit that Issa & friends have been stringing you along by telling you what you want to believe?

 

[werepossum]

No, I'm saying you're pathologically incapable of presenting something honestly. Federal regulations do not require agencies to preserve all emails. It requires agencies to preserve all "official records". The IRS policy for preserving official records from email was for employees to print and file those emails. As long as employees followed that policy, it didn't matter how many PC drives crashed or Blackberries were destroyed. It didn't even matter if email servers crashed. All that mattered to meeting those regulations was following IRS policy and printing all emails that qualified as official records.

This has been covered a good dozen times in this thread already, so I doubt you'll get it this time either. Nonetheless, that's why your legal presumptions mean squat.

And re. you understanding how things work, you clearly do not based on your comment to which I responded. Either that or you were being dishonest. You pick.

You're being seriously dishonest here. The only way to make that apply is to accept that Lerner generated NO "official records" in three years, yet we know that she sent and received thousands of emails during that time period concerning IRS business because they have been recovered from other IRS employees' computers. We also know that the emails were recovered from other employees' computers, NOT from Lerner's supposed vast personal paper archive.

Suggesting that retaining none of these electronically meets the standard of preserving "official records" and that there may be mountains of paper that for some reason haven't come to light to make her technically in compliance is a bridge beyond "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is." You might as well claim that a giant electronic dog ate it. Frankly, you'd look brighter and more honest.

 

[Bowfinger]

You're being seriously dishonest here. The only way to make that apply is to accept that Lerner generated NO "official records" in three years, yet we know that she sent and received thousands of emails during that time period concerning IRS business because they have been recovered from other IRS employees' computers. We also know that the emails were recovered from other employees' computers, NOT from Lerner's supposed vast personal paper archive.

No, as has been explained to you countless times, the way to make that apply is for Lerner to have PRINTED emails that qualified as official records. This isn't a hard concept to grasp, and I can only assume your stubborn refusal to do so is just more of your blatant dishonesty.

Want to tell us again how the Obama administration claimed 60% of the groups targeted were not conservative?

Suggesting that retaining none of these electronically meets the standard of preserving "official records" and that there may be mountains of paper that for some reason haven't come to light to make her technically in compliance is a bridge beyond "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is." You might as well claim that a giant electronic dog ate it. Frankly, you'd look brighter and more honest.

The IRS has produced over a million pages of documents, plus 67,000 of Lerner's emails alone. You haven't the faintest, foggiest clue what's in them. They may include every single "official record" Lerner has from 2009-2011. If they don't, that means Lerner didn't follow the IRS policy, not that the IRS was required to backup all email.

Either way, until someone goes through all of those documents, you don't know. This is also not a hard concept to grasp, and I'm not in the least bit worried about looking bright and honest. Compared to you, I'm a sun.