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

[xBiffx]

No, you didn't get that right either. You guys really need to get your facts straight. Lerner's apology came after she was notified of the keyword targeting, two years after her drive crash. Further, her apology wasn't based on anything she did wrong, but what she'd learned her staff had done. Remember, Lerner is the one who ordered the Tea Party BOLO stopped.

Also remember that both TIGTA and the Senate investigation found no evidence of partisan intent in this targeting.

So Lerner is still working for the IRS because of her upstanding behavior here. After all she was trying to stop it.

 

[Bowfinger]

So Lerner is still working for the IRS because of her upstanding behavior here. After all she was trying to stop it.

You're not really that dumb, so I'm going to assume you're being willfully dishonest. Lerner had become a liability at best, and was bringing incredible heat to the IRS. She had to go. The point is this all happened two to three years AFTER her drive crash.

 

[werepossum]

Then it should be quite easy for your to quote the comments supporting your tales. I won't hold my breath.

Repeating the same disinformation doesn't make it magically true. The IRS used special recovery hardware that accessed the drive directly, bypassing all of the interface and OS error processing that might confuse your Windows PC. They were still unable to put the drive into a state where it could accept commands, thus exposing a "critical electronic or mechanical failure." This was in spite of trying two replacement controllers and a replacement head stack. You are out of your league here.

Why should I spend my time supporting my refutation of your unsupported claim? Quote the comments that support your claim.

As far as "special recovery hardware that accessed the drive directly", the only way to recover data from a physically damaged platter is to crack the case and dismount the platter. Clearly this was not done because the tech recommended it be sent out to be done and was overruled.

And for the umpteenth time, hard drive failure includes a lot of things, most of which do not result in lost data. Everyone here knows this. You are pretending that a failure rate equals all data lost, which is simply dishonest. And on a tech site, it's simply stupid. All of us here have suffered bad drives. On most of those bad drives - for me, the vast majority - most of the data is recoverable without any specialized equipment. Hell, I haven't had any specialized equipment since MFM days.

 

[werepossum]

You're not really that dumb, so I'm going to assume you're being willfully dishonest. Lerner had become a liability at best, and was bringing incredible heat to the IRS. She had to go. The point is this all happened two to three years AFTER her drive crash.

Lerner had become a liability in spite of the fact that she was doing everything correctly with the best of intentions, as any reasonable person could see. Right . . .

That also explains why she repeatedly exercised her Constitutional right against self-incrimination, huh? 'Cause we all know nothing incriminates you like following the law.

 

[Jhhnn]

Really? Because she couldn't have wanted to conceal her tracks for any reason other than the Camp letter? None? Her behavior was inappropriate. SHE KNEW THAT. It doesn't have to be conspiracy to recognize that.

Sorry, just because that letter fits your little warped narrative doesn't means shit. It is a red herring. But I don't expect you to drop it.

Your pal, werepossum, says you're a moron-

Camp's letter was unrelated to Lerner's activity only if one is a complete moron. One could so claim only if one is a complete moron or if one is totally dishonest. Everyone knows this. Literally everyone.

As far as Lerner needing "some mysterious feat of technical legerdemain undetectable by the IRS's expert technicians) to destroy the evidence requested in Camp's letter, that too requires either the mental ability of a moron or a complete technical ignorance to believe. I suggest that rather than a tech site, you should peddle such theories on quilting sites. Well, maybe not - the popularity of computerized sewing machines likely means those ladies also would see right through you.

He & others have dragged forth the "it can't be coincidence!" routine wrt Camp's letter & the drive crash repeatedly throughout this thread. But now that's it's been shown to be hogwash, repeatedly, you say it doesn't matter & therefore the drive crash was suspicious anyway, even though it occurred many months before any other sign of problems.

How desperate are you to believe that there's something more to this than what has already been admitted & corrected, anyway? Do you have trouble staying warm w/o that bit of persecution & conspiracy burning in your belly, or what?

 

[werepossum]

Your pal, werepossum, says you're a moron-

He & others have dragged forth the "it can't be coincidence!" routine wrt Camp's letter & the drive crash repeatedly throughout this thread. But now that's it's been shown to be hogwash, repeatedly, you say it doesn't matter & therefore the drive crash was suspicious anyway, even though it occurred many months before any other sign of problems.

How desperate are you to believe that there's something more to this than what has already been admitted & corrected, anyway? Do you have trouble staying warm w/o that bit of persecution & conspiracy burning in your belly, or what?

You know, you're the one person on this forum that I can believe is honestly too stupid to read and comprehend a clearly written post. At least if it interferes with your core dysfunction; you can make a reasonable point on the occasional points of interception between your world and reality. But otherwise you really cannot read and comprehend.

My point was that Camp's letter was addressing an integral part of the activity that Lerner was directing. xBiffx's point was that Lerner knew her behavior was illegal REGARDLESS of Camp's letter. One can easily and logically accept his point without any conflict with mine, as the contents of Camp's letter are clearly not dependent on Lerner's knowledge of his letter, and Lerner's knowledge of her own behavior is clearly not dependent on her knowledge of his letter.

 

[Jhhnn]

You know, you're the one person on this forum that I can believe is honestly too stupid to read and comprehend a clearly written post. At least if it interferes with your core dysfunction; you can make a reasonable point on the occasional points of interception between your world and reality. But otherwise you really cannot read and comprehend.

My point was that Camp's letter was addressing an integral part of the activity that Lerner was directing. xBiffx's point was that Lerner knew her behavior was illegal REGARDLESS of Camp's letter. One can easily and logically accept his point without any conflict with mine, as the contents of Camp's letter are clearly not dependent on Lerner's knowledge of his letter, and Lerner's knowledge of her own behavior is clearly not dependent on her knowledge of his letter.

xbiffx's point is based on pure supposition & a will to believe.

Your entire point revolves around Lerner having knowledge of Camp's letter & destroying her hard drive to cover her tracks. You have repeatedly asserted that as her supposed rationale for doing so, but now say that doesn't matter.

In that, you're correct, because it was bullshit in the first place. That, or meet the criteria I laid out in post #2184.

 

[xBiffx]

xbiffx's point is based on pure supposition & a will to believe.

Your entire point revolves around Lerner having knowledge of Camp's letter & destroying her hard drive to cover her tracks. You have repeatedly asserted that as her supposed rationale for doing so, but now say that doesn't matter.

In that, you're correct, because it was bullshit in the first place. That, or meet the criteria I laid out in post #2184.

You really are that dumb. How do I have to believe anything to observe the fact that the letter from Camp is independent of Lerner's behavior? Where is the supposition again?

One thing has absolutely nothing to do with the other. For the last time, its a red herring. Werepossum was right, you are too stupid to read and comprehend. Also, if anyone has a will to believe anything, its you, not me.

 

[Jhhnn]

You really are that dumb. How do I have to believe anything to observe the fact that the letter from Camp is independent of Lerner's behavior? Where is the supposition again?

One thing has absolutely nothing to do with the other. For the last time, its a red herring. Werepossum was right, you are too stupid to read and comprehend. Also, if anyone has a will to believe anything, its you, not me.

If Camp's letter is independent, then why does werepossum assert it as the reason for Lerner's alleged conduct?

Why would Lerner do such a thing otherwise when there was no sign of trouble at the time?

Did she know that her drive was the only repository for her email?

Did she even have the technical understanding to render her drive completely inoperable?

Why & how would she do that?

The answer is that she didn't, or certainly nobody has the slightest bit of proof that she did. The drive crashed. It was unrecoverable. Documented & backed by sworn testimony. That's that.

Or, you're trying to drink whiskey from a bottle of wine.

 

[xBiffx]

If Camp's letter is independent, then why does werepossum assert it as the reason for Lerner's alleged conduct?

Why would Lerner do such a thing otherwise when there was no sign of trouble at the time?

Did she know that her drive was the only repository for her email?

Did she even have the technical understanding to render her drive completely inoperable?

Why & how would she do that?

The answer is that she didn't, or certainly nobody has the slightest bit of proof that she did. The drive crashed. It was unrecoverable. Documented & backed by sworn testimony. That's that.

Or, you're trying to drink whiskey from a bottle of wine.

Let me slow it down for you. Werepossum's argument is that the letter is what tipped Lerner off that she was being looked at and needed to worry about what she had been doing. I can't disagree, of course the letter did that. My argument is that the letter isn't what started her inappropriate behavior, nor is it the reason for the hard drive crash (assuming this wasn't just perfect timing for her luck), at least not directly.

Even a child at at early age figures out how to conceal behavior that they shouldn't be engaging in. They even sometimes come up with ways to explain the behavior should they be caught. Now, I don't think that Lerner is the smartest person on the planet but I still give her more credit than to think she didn't even exercise even a childlike version of self preservation here. Let me slow it down for you. She was engaging in illegal/inappropriate behavior long before the letter from Camp came along. Considering my previous statement, its not a stretch to think that she had a plan or an excuse to conceal said behavior in the event she was found out. So the letter is sent, she find out that the gig is up and executes whatever plan she had.

Lerner would have known that her hard drive was key in trying to conceal behavior. You don't work for that long and send that many emails year after year under that retention policy without finding out how much is and isn't retained. Plus, she knows about the policy to print out emails, so its safe to assume that she knows her hard drive contains some of the only copies of certain emails.

It's not rocket science to make a drive inoperable. You don't need special skills or special training to do so. One can learn enough from a Google search even. A well placed thump would be enough. Also, it doesn't have to be Lerner's doing either.

 

[fskimospy]

I am frankly baffled by the amount of conspiracy theorizing that had gone on in this thread. It rivals the treyvon martin one.

You guys have no idea what happened and are making enormous leaps of logic based on functionally zero knowledge of the individual or the situation. Simple fact.

 

[Bowfinger]

Why should I spend my time supporting my refutation of your unsupported claim? Quote the comments that support your claim.

As I predicted.

As far as "special recovery hardware that accessed the drive directly", the only way to recover data from a physically damaged platter is to crack the case and dismount the platter. Clearly this was not done because the tech recommended it be sent out to be done and was overruled.

Thus demonstrating yet again your ignorance of this story as well as your consistent failure to read posts before you rush to jerk your [ knee ] in sputtering self-gratification. The senior IRS tech did, in fact, "crack the case" to install a new head stack. This has not only been well documented in this thread, I pointed it out again in the very post to which you responded.

And no, the tech did not "recommend" sending the drive out. That's just more of the propaganda fed to the rubes. He simply noted it would be the only other measure to try, if Lerner wanted to pursue it.

No matter how wildly you try to shift the goal posts, the fact remains that Lerner made a substantial effort to have her drive recovered, even sending it to an IRS forensics technician with specialized recovery equipment. This is not the action of someone trying to destroy evidence. Your loopy conspiracy theories are a Hail Mary smear by the party faithful, dead-enders who need a scandal, any scandal, to keep them properly enraged.

And for the umpteenth time, hard drive failure includes a lot of things, most of which do not result in lost data. Everyone here knows this. You are pretending that a failure rate equals all data lost, which is simply dishonest. And on a tech site, it's simply stupid. All of us here have suffered bad drives. On most of those bad drives - for me, the vast majority - most of the data is recoverable without any specialized equipment. Hell, I haven't had any specialized equipment since MFM days.

Congratulations. You've finally caught up to where I was two months ago, as I repeatedly explained this to the other dead-enders. And no, as usual, I'm not pretending anything of the sort. I was responding directly to a comment with the data we have. Far from a "plethora" of drive failures, there are now reported to be only 6 (out of at least 83) that resulted in at least some loss of email. That's a fact, no matter what your knee thinks.

 

[Bowfinger]

I am frankly baffled by the amount of conspiracy theorizing that had gone on in this thread. It rivals the treyvon martin one.

You guys have no idea what happened and are making enormous leaps of logic based on functionally zero knowledge of the individual or the situation. Simple fact.

It's all they have. Their scandals keep disintegrating, and Lerner's email is the only scrap they have left.

The Senate has now weighed in, corroborating the key findings in the first TIGTA report. We have another TIGTA report coming soon, and an FBI investigation is also underway. I'm confident if there was actual wrongdoing (as opposed to this purely partisan scandal-mongering), it will be exposed and people will be punished appropriately. Until them, the RNC faithful need something to rage about.

 

[Jhhnn]

Let me slow it down for you. Werepossum's argument is that the letter is what tipped Lerner off that she was being looked at and needed to worry about what she had been doing. I can't disagree, of course the letter did that. My argument is that the letter isn't what started her inappropriate behavior, nor is it the reason for the hard drive crash (assuming this wasn't just perfect timing for her luck), at least not directly.

Even a child at at early age figures out how to conceal behavior that they shouldn't be engaging in. They even sometimes come up with ways to explain the behavior should they be caught. Now, I don't think that Lerner is the smartest person on the planet but I still give her more credit than to think she didn't even exercise even a childlike version of self preservation here. Let me slow it down for you. She was engaging in illegal/inappropriate behavior long before the letter from Camp came along. Considering my previous statement, its not a stretch to think that she had a plan or an excuse to conceal said behavior in the event she was found out. So the letter is sent, she find out that the gig is up and executes whatever plan she had.

Lerner would have known that her hard drive was key in trying to conceal behavior. You don't work for that long and send that many emails year after year under that retention policy without finding out how much is and isn't retained. Plus, she knows about the policy to print out emails, so its safe to assume that she knows her hard drive contains some of the only copies of certain emails.

It's not rocket science to make a drive inoperable. You don't need special skills or special training to do so. One can learn enough from a Google search even. A well placed thump would be enough. Also, it doesn't have to be Lerner's doing either.

Hee hee. So now Camp's letter *does* matter. Except that you can't prove she even knew of its existence at the time. You then add further speculative embellishments as if they were fact. Which makes it all conspiracy theory rehash.

 

[sportage]

Actually the IRS is targeting everyone.
Tea members just happen to fall in the category as everyone, just like most of the rest of us.
The IRS went thru a massive computer update during 2010.
Now, they can and have the ability to go back years to review every personal tax return.
They can do that now with this new system.
Look for things they could not catch before,
And since the rich can hire expensive lawyers and fight the IRS for years, the average tax payer can not. Or, doesn't have the massive resources at hand to challenge the IRS.
So everyone is the target. Every middle class taxpayer going back years and years.
The tea party just happens to fall in that boat.
Nothing personal tea baggers. You like most everyone else are in their sights.

 

[Jhhnn]

Actually the IRS is targeting everyone.
Tea members just happen to fall in the category as everyone, just like most of the rest of us.
The IRS went thru a massive computer update during 2010.
Now, they can and have the ability to go back years to review every personal tax return.
They can do that now with this new system.
Look for things they could not catch before,
And since the rich can hire expensive lawyers and fight the IRS for years, the average tax payer can not. Or, doesn't have the massive resources at hand to challenge the IRS.
So everyone is the target. Every middle class taxpayer going back years and years.
The tea party just happens to fall in that boat.
Nothing personal tea baggers. You like most everyone else are in their sights.

Actually, the IRS is targeting tax cheats & people who have mistakenly underpaid their taxes, also people who failed to report offshore accounts.

It's part of the job. The vast, vast majority of honest & straightforward taxpayers are completely unaffected.

 

[xBiffx]

Hee hee. So now Camp's letter *does* matter. Except that you can't prove she even knew of its existence at the time. You then add further speculative embellishments as if they were fact. Which makes it all conspiracy theory rehash.

No, it doesn't. That's what your failed brain can't comprehend. The letter changed absolutely nothing. She was doing everything independent of the letter. All the letter did was make a deadline on the behavior, or more specifically what she was going to do about said behavior.

 

[Jhhnn]

No, it doesn't. That's what your failed brain can't comprehend. The letter changed absolutely nothing. She was doing everything independent of the letter. All the letter did was make a deadline on the behavior, or more specifically what she was going to do about said behavior.

Prove she knew about the letter at the time her drive became non-recoverable.

If you can't, you ain't got shit.

Even werepossum figured that out.

 

[werepossum]

As I predicted.


Thus demonstrating yet again your ignorance of this story as well as your consistent failure to read posts before you rush to jerk your [ knee ] in sputtering self-gratification. The senior IRS tech did, in fact, "crack the case" to install a new head stack. This has not only been well documented in this thread, I pointed it out again in the very post to which you responded.

And no, the tech did not "recommend" sending the drive out. That's just more of the propaganda fed to the rubes. He simply noted it would be the only other measure to try, if Lerner wanted to pursue it.

No matter how wildly you try to shift the goal posts, the fact remains that Lerner made a substantial effort to have her drive recovered, even sending it to an IRS forensics technician with specialized recovery equipment. This is not the action of someone trying to destroy evidence. Your loopy conspiracy theories are a Hail Mary smear by the party faithful, dead-enders who need a scandal, any scandal, to keep them properly enraged.


Congratulations. You've finally caught up to where I was two months ago, as I repeatedly explained this to the other dead-enders. And no, as usual, I'm not pretending anything of the sort. I was responding directly to a comment with the data we have. Far from a "plethora" of drive failures, there are now reported to be only 6 (out of at least 83) that resulted in at least some loss of email. That's a fact, no matter what your knee thinks.

As I said, the only way to recover data from a physically damaged platter is to crack the case and dismount the platter. If the platter is scratched - and the tech said it was - then replacing the head stack will not make the drive readable because the media is damaged. At that point the only way to read the data is to dismount the platter and install it on a machine designed to do just that, a machine which rotates very slowly and measures residual magnetic charge, then rebuild the drive image.

 

[Jhhnn]

As I said, the only way to recover data from a physically damaged platter is to crack the case and dismount the platter. If the platter is scratched - and the tech said it was - then replacing the head stack will not make the drive readable because the media is damaged. At that point the only way to read the data is to dismount the platter and install it on a machine designed to do just that, a machine which rotates very slowly and measures residual magnetic charge, then rebuild the drive image.

Which is a meaningless duh-version in context.

 

[xBiffx]

Prove she knew about the letter at the time her drive became non-recoverable.

If you can't, you ain't got shit.

Even werepossum figured that out.

Why would I need to prove it? It doesn't matter if she did or she didn't. She was already guilty of engaging in inappropriate behavior. The letter, for the last time, doesn't change that.

Basically what's left to argue is if you think she was stupid enough to do what she was doing without an excuse or explanation for her behavior. That's debateable, but really we are just arguing if she is an idiot or not, or to what extent she was. I think its safe to say she wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed.

 

[Bowfinger]

Which is a meaningless duh-version in context.

It's also factually wrong, but that's never deterred him. Having a head crash does not, in and of itself, render the entire platter unreadable. It will make the damaged are unreadable, and may damage one or more heads. Replacing the heads will often allow reading undamaged areas of the platters.

But you are right it is a meaningless duhversion on two counts. First, from a technical perspective, the symptoms reported even with specialized recovery hardware are evidence of a more serious problem. Second, of course, he completely ignores all the context and timing, the other inaccurate claims he's made, and the fact that Lerner made an earnest effort to get her files back. When rational people consider the whole picture, his conspiracy is a ridiculous as anything Stewox has given us.

As others have noted, Werepossum consistently demonstrates intellectual dishonesty when corned with inconvenient facts. He invariably ignores them, either changing the subject or just pretending they don't exist. Notice how of the several points I raised in that one post, he ignored everything and circled back to one irrelevant nit he tried to float earlier. He is not a person of integrity.

 

[Bowfinger]

Why would I need to prove it? It doesn't matter if she did or she didn't. She was already guilty of engaging in inappropriate behavior. The letter, for the last time, doesn't change that.

Basically what's left to argue is if you think she was stupid enough to do what she was doing without an excuse or explanation for her behavior. That's debateable, but really we are just arguing if she is an idiot or not, or to what extent she was. I think its safe to say she wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed.

That is the position YOU want to argue, based on your initial propaganda-fueled presumption of guilt independent of honest evidence. The rest of us are left to argue just how much factual evidence it would take to get you (collectively) to reconsider that presumption of guilt.

I've now read more of the internal emails between Lerner and others in her management. All are consistent in supporting the official narrative, that a few low-level people used bad judgment but were not acting with partisan intent. It is possible, of course, that it was all staged in anticipation of the emails being discovered. If so, it has to be one of the most extensive, precalculated, and well executed conspiracies ever staged. The amount of highly-detailed advanced planning required, number of people in on it, and consistency over several years is inconceivable. If that's really the Issa camp's theory, they need to drop the whole canard about incompetent government bureaucrats, because these guys were amazing.

 

[xBiffx]

That is the position YOU want to argue, based on your initial propaganda-fueled presumption of guilt independent of honest evidence. The rest of us are left to argue just how much factual evidence it would take to get you (collectively) to reconsider that presumption of guilt.

I've now read more of the internal emails between Lerner and others in her management. All are consistent in supporting the official narrative, that a few low-level people used bad judgment but were not acting with partisan intent. It is possible, of course, that it was all staged in anticipation of the emails being discovered. If so, it has to be one of the most extensive, precalculated, and well executed conspiracies ever staged. The amount of highly-detailed advanced planning required, number of people in on it, and consistency over several years is inconceivable. If that's really the Issa camp's theory, they need to drop the whole canard about incompetent government bureaucrats, because these guys were amazing.

So the IRS apologized for inappropriate targeting and Lerner's employment was terminated all because of propaganda?

And, no, this wouldn't make for the most extensive, precalculated, and well executed conspiracies ever. First of all, it wasn't well executed, and to date, we aren't talking about extensive, we are talking about a single division and a handful of employees. The underlings don't even have to be part of it, all they have to do is what they are told and need to know little more.

If this were so well executed and precalcuated then we wouldn't even be talking about it. I don't even know why you continue to label it a conspiracy. It was an individual's or maybe a few individuals' bad behavior and poor judgment. That's not a conspiracy, its was just stupid political nonsense.

 

[unclefred]

Hard drives and emails break and disappear at a strangely apt time for our IRS friends and the administration they serve. Gee, to suspect that is loopy. Yeah, so says the DNC.