The dishonesty remains yours. As you, yourself noted just a few posts earlier, Lerner's attorney later corrected this, saying he misunderstood and that Lerner had printed some email. In other words, while Lerner's attorney didn't understand IRS policy, it's a sure bet that a senior leader like Lerner did. The open question remains how well did Lerner follow that policy for that subset of email that qualified as official records.
Probably because Lerner's lawyer, presumably not a federal employee, wasn't familiar with this IRS policy. This isn't difficult to understand ... for anyone truly interested in comprehension.
It depends on how much of a pack rat Lerner was, but I suspect the number is relatively small. The IRS was able to recover all of Lerner's missing emails except for those not copied to anyone else in the IRS. One would expect most of her official mail would be copied to others in the IRS. Not necessarily all official mail, I agree, but most. But this is only speculation. Neither of us knows for sure.
You know, if you ever bothered to read these threads instead of barging in, squeezing out a couple of steaming talking points, and prancing away, you would know that non-story has already been refuted. You don't even have to read the whole thread, just the last page or so. As usual, Judicial Watch lied about the super secret backup system. And as usual, the nutter media ran with it anyway, not bothering to do even rudimentary fact-checking. And as usual, the gullible rubes swallowed it whole and spread the lies. Good boy.The shilling is stupendous around here!
Oh..This just in: The IRS had the emails along..but were trying to delete everything
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ted-lois-lerners-lost-emails-were-backed-up/#
Hysterical?
A) This happened
B) Nixon was impeached for less
C) Stuff like this should never happen
D) There will be repercussions
This isn't Nazi Germany
It will never be either.No matter how much some douchebags want it to.
God bless the USA.
Nice try.
Hysterical?
A) This happened
B) Nixon was impeached for less
C) Stuff like this should never happen
D) There will be repercussions
This isn't Nazi Germany
It will never be either.No matter how much some douchebags want it to.
God bless the USA.
Nice try.
Fair enough. I thought that was probably the case, but wanted to be sure I hadn't missed some new development or a different story. There's no point in me addressing 'A' if you were talking about 'B'.
All those stories are based on the same comment from Fitton, from that one interview on Fox. I also don't think the number of Justice Department lawyers is material, other than offering a corroborating witness if Issa gets his shorts in a bunch and calls them all into his kangaroo court to explain this "shocking" revelation.
On the contrary, as I pointed out, the administration claim is supported by a great deal of sworn testimony and official evidence. It is Fitton that raised the new allegation contradicting all this evidence. He therefore bears the burden of proof. He offered none.
Of course they did. Fitton made a false claim that set the nutter world on fire ... again. The Justice Department had to refute that claim, politely telling Fox that Fitton was full of it ... again. Such is the current state of America, that some will feast on garbage if it fits their partisan agenda, and will insist it's the real deal unless it's quickly refuted (and will often continue to insist it's true even after they're shown they've been duped yet again -- zombie lies).
Settle down. In your comment to which I responded, you didn't mention Justice Department once. I wanted to be sure we were talking about the same thing.
Speaking of projecting...
As discussed, the administration has sworn testimony and evidence to support it. Fitton started a rumor based on anonymous hearsay. Unless he can offer credible evidence of some sort, his rumor has been refuted.
Oh, you mean just like Fitton's guy and the Justice Department lawyer(s) he was talking with are not IT experts? I wonder how that could possibly lead to confusion or technical misunderstandings.
Sniff. Let the butt-hurt flow, honey.
First and foremost, you're continuing to accept Fitton's hearsay as an accurate summary of the Justice Department attorneys' statements. That is not a safe assumption at all. It's quite possible he simply invented it to make his tale more "shocking".
It was Fox, which I clearly stated when I posted the quote. Re. the rest of your prattle, get over yourself. One reason I frost you so badly is because I so consistently use facts and data to poke holes in your faith.
We definitely need clarity on exactly what was backed up and where. I can remember years ago reading a story about the system Fitton seems to be describing. The claim was that every single email, order, and official transaction for the entire federal government was backed up every night, so that for example if the IRS headquarters in destroyed at noon on 8/29/14 there exists a rebuildable record up to close of business on 8/28/14. It's virtually a requirement; otherwise if the IRS computers and paper records are destroyed with an Oklahoma City or 9-11 type attack, all pending IRS business disappears and the IRS would have literally no idea who owed what. A nuclear bomb in D.C. and the federal government would be starting from near zero if its business is not backed up, as even rules agreements would suddenly disappear. That kind of record would indeed be onerous to search, as you would have to rebuild the entire IRS database for the years in question to search it. But from what we've seen, it's entirely possible that the IRS really is that incompetent and its records are totally unduplicated even this long after 9-11.
Facebook
Twitter