• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

IRS Lost More Emails

Mike

Well-known member
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The IRS says it has lost emails from five more workers who are part of congressional investigations into the treatment of conservative groups that applied for tax exempt status.

The tax agency said in June that it could not locate an untold number of emails to and from Lois Lerner, who headed the IRS division that processes applications for tax-exempt status. The revelation set off a new round of investigations and congressional hearings.

On Friday, the IRS said it has also lost emails from five other employees related to the probe, including two agents who worked in a Cincinnati office processing applications for tax-exempt status.

The agency blamed computer crashes for the lost emails. In a statement, the IRS said it found no evidence that anyone deliberately destroyed evidence.

© 2014 The Associated Press
 

W.T

Well-known member
Yea right!!!!!!

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=HN.608014893752518870&w=300&h=300&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Brad S said:
Hey OT, as a law enforcement professional, what does your spidy sense tell you about these missing emails?


You are asking the wrong person- as I have less computer knowledge than about everyone... But from the history I've had of getting computers hacked or virus's completely frying my whole computer (or now a brand new scanner that won't function on anything but my wifes computer since she used it one day :roll: ) I think anything is possible....

It seems rather convenient-- altho I haven't followed the issue that close as I have long been one that believed more investigation needed to be given to groups requesting "tax exempt" status- think "tax exempt status" has long been badly abused- and see nothing new or surprising in the fact that the party in control gave itself an advantage ... Its long been one of the perks of being the party in control of the Executive branch...
 

iwannabeacowboy

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Brad S said:
Hey OT, as a law enforcement professional, what does your spidy sense tell you about these missing emails?


You are asking the wrong person- as I have less computer knowledge than about everyone... But from the history I've had of getting computers hacked or virus's completely frying my whole computer (or now a brand new scanner that won't function on anything but my wifes computer since she used it one day :roll: ) I think anything is possible....

It seems rather convenient-- altho I haven't followed the issue that close as I have long been one that believed more investigation needed to be given to groups requesting "tax exempt" status- think "tax exempt status" has long been badly abused- and see nothing new or surprising in the fact that the party in control gave itself an advantage ... Its long been one of the perks of being the party in control of the Executive branch...

Come on now OT, you don't have to have that much computer knowledge to know something isn't right.

If you really want to present a second or third side of the issue and be taken seriously, you have to call a spade a spade. We can argue theory all day long, but when facts start piling up, you can't ignore them because they're inconvenient.

Call it a spade and lets move on.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
You understand there are laws requiring backup servers that didn't lose anyone else's emails but the targets of the investigation.

I'm not sure where the tax exempt line should be drawn either, that's a fair analysis. I can name a bunch of tax exempt groups that are complete leftist supporters, frankly the left has better utilized this scheme whether it's aflcio, nea, Sierra club, npr, and on and on for ever. I'd damn sure be with ya, abolish all of the tax exempts, cause I know that would hurt the freedom stealers more than freedom protectors. If you are correct that everyone does it, then hell yes we should abolish the tax exempts just to clean up tyranny.

As for your equivalency argument, you know I won't let that go. Ya Nixon tried some of that crap and that was a big part of his party flushing him. Klinton probably did some, but his mischief respected our intelligence enough that it was pretty well obfuscated. Can you name any previous IRS persecution that was anything like this Obama scheme? Do you know how many times the head of the IRS met with Obama? So Obama trots out the "story" it was to meet about Obama care. When he only met with head of HHS a few times? Does any of this tweek your spidey sense?


I'm totally with you, just abolish tax exempts. Hell, I'd almost be willing to forget about the IRS theft of liberty (I understand that charge should illicit the contemplation of arms against tyranny) if we could adopt a flat tax and tell the criminals at the IRS that walmart needs their services, but hard working Americans no longer have any use for their disease.
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Brad S said:
Hey OT, as a law enforcement professional, what does your spidy sense tell you about these missing emails?


You are asking the wrong person- as I have less computer knowledge than about everyone... But from the history I've had of getting computers hacked or virus's completely frying my whole computer (or now a brand new scanner that won't function on anything but my wifes computer since she used it one day :roll: ) I think anything is possible....

It seems rather convenient-- altho I haven't followed the issue that close as I have long been one that believed more investigation needed to be given to groups requesting "tax exempt" status- think "tax exempt status" has long been badly abused- and see nothing new or surprising in the fact that the party in control gave itself an advantage ... Its long been one of the perks of being the party in control of the Executive branch...

You say you can't make a decision, I can guarantee you you never did if it was to do with BUSH

Your tax exempt statement has nothing to do with lost emails, NOTHING
You also fail to acknowledge that it was Conservative groups targeted. I sure can't remember Bush being accused of targeting liberals by the IRS

Your answer said nothing other than you Hypocriticaly judge conservatives
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Brad S said:
You understand there are laws requiring backup servers that didn't lose anyone else's emails but the targets of the investigation.

I'm not sure where the tax exempt line should be drawn either, that's a fair analysis. I can name a bunch of tax exempt groups that are complete leftist supporters, frankly the left has better utilized this scheme whether it's aflcio, nea, Sierra club, npr, and on and on for ever. I'd damn sure be with ya, abolish all of the tax exempts, cause I know that would hurt the freedom stealers more than freedom protectors. If you are correct that everyone does it, then hell yes we should abolish the tax exempts just to clean up tyranny.

As for your equivalency argument, you know I won't let that go. Ya Nixon tried some of that crap and that was a big part of his party flushing him. Klinton probably did some, but his mischief respected our intelligence enough that it was pretty well obfuscated. Can you name any previous IRS persecution that was anything like this Obama scheme? Do you know how many times the head of the IRS met with Obama? So Obama trots out the "story" it was to meet about Obama care. When he only met with head of HHS a few times? Does any of this tweek your spidey sense?


I'm totally with you, just abolish tax exempts. Hell, I'd almost be willing to forget about the IRS theft of liberty (I understand that charge should illicit the contemplation of arms against tyranny) if we could adopt a flat tax and tell the criminals at the IRS that walmart needs their services, but hard working Americans no longer have any use for their disease.

Brad- I agree many more-both left and right need to be investigate if we keep the tax-exempts-- and agree with you on a flat tax... I've long been a proponent of Montana going to a flat sales tax- and get away from income and property taxes...

I'm not sure of any individual Presidents involving the IRS- but that has long been the perk of any administrative branch (President, Governor, etc)-- The sitting party gets to manage how the bureaucracies are run- and they definitely are going to put more attention into helping themselves rather then hurting themselves ...

I'm not even sure if it violates a law... Discussion's within the IRS to put priorities on certain types to look out for :???: ... Especially when some of these right wing groups (Patriot/Tea Party/Militia) were alleged to be tied to domestic terrorist, racist, or anarchist (secession) groups... :???:
Wasn't there a major effort put into investigating a bunch of Muslim churchs/groups nonprofit status right after 9/11? And some lost their status because of terrorist connections - which a few I believe regained when they took it to court or appealed it...
 

Brad S

Well-known member
Come on sheriff, do ya spose we'd get closer to knowing about breaking the laws if emails didn't keep illegally vanishing?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Brad S said:
You understand there are laws requiring backup servers that didn't lose anyone else's emails but the targets of the investigation.

I'm not sure where the tax exempt line should be drawn either, that's a fair analysis. I can name a bunch of tax exempt groups that are complete leftist supporters, frankly the left has better utilized this scheme whether it's aflcio, nea, Sierra club, npr, and on and on for ever. I'd damn sure be with ya, abolish all of the tax exempts, cause I know that would hurt the freedom stealers more than freedom protectors. If you are correct that everyone does it, then hell yes we should abolish the tax exempts just to clean up tyranny.

As for your equivalency argument, you know I won't let that go. Ya Nixon tried some of that crap and that was a big part of his party flushing him. Klinton probably did some, but his mischief respected our intelligence enough that it was pretty well obfuscated. Can you name any previous IRS persecution that was anything like this Obama scheme? Do you know how many times the head of the IRS met with Obama? So Obama trots out the "story" it was to meet about Obama care. When he only met with head of HHS a few times? Does any of this tweek your spidey sense?


I'm totally with you, just abolish tax exempts. Hell, I'd almost be willing to forget about the IRS theft of liberty (I understand that charge should illicit the contemplation of arms against tyranny) if we could adopt a flat tax and tell the criminals at the IRS that walmart needs their services, but hard working Americans no longer have any use for their disease.

Brad- I agree many more-both left and right need to be investigate if we keep the tax-exempts-- and agree with you on a flat tax... I've long been a proponent of Montana going to a flat sales tax- and get away from income and property taxes...

I'm not sure of any individual Presidents involving the IRS- but that has long been the perk of any administrative branch (President, Governor, etc)-- The sitting party gets to manage how the bureaucracies are run- and they definitely are going to put more attention into helping themselves rather then hurting themselves ...

I'm not even sure if it violates a law... Discussion's within the IRS to put priorities on certain types to look out for :???: ... Especially when some of these right wing groups (Patriot/Tea Party/Militia) were alleged to be tied to domestic terrorist, racist, or anarchist (secession) groups... :???:
Wasn't there a major effort put into investigating a bunch of Muslim churchs/groups nonprofit status right after 9/11? And some lost their status because of terrorist connections - which a few I believe regained when they took it to court or appealed it...

Why can't you just tell the phucking truth? There were no 501(c)(3)(4) applications in these investigations that were tied to terrorism, etc.

You know good and well that Lois & her bunch is lying and covering up. NO ONE pleads the 5th if they are squeaky clean.

You're sickening me by trying to defend Liberals/Progressives on every front.

:roll:
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Mike said:
Why can't you just tell the phucking truth? There were no 501(c)(3)(4) applications in these investigations that were tied to terrorism, etc.

You know good and well that Lois & her bunch is lying and covering up. NO ONE pleads the 5th if they are squeaky clean.

You're sickening me by trying to defend Liberals/Progressives on every front.

:roll:

Indeed. And why does he use these stupid emoticons :???: :???: :???: all the time? :???:

Rest assured. If this was an IRS under Bush targeting liberal groups, Fatsquasch would be screaming here about that precious constitution on a daily basis.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
Oldtimer said:
Brad S said:
You understand there are laws requiring backup servers that didn't lose anyone else's emails but the targets of the investigation.

I'm not sure where the tax exempt line should be drawn either, that's a fair analysis. I can name a bunch of tax exempt groups that are complete leftist supporters, frankly the left has better utilized this scheme whether it's aflcio, nea, Sierra club, npr, and on and on for ever. I'd damn sure be with ya, abolish all of the tax exempts, cause I know that would hurt the freedom stealers more than freedom protectors. If you are correct that everyone does it, then hell yes we should abolish the tax exempts just to clean up tyranny.

As for your equivalency argument, you know I won't let that go. Ya Nixon tried some of that crap and that was a big part of his party flushing him. Klinton probably did some, but his mischief respected our intelligence enough that it was pretty well obfuscated. Can you name any previous IRS persecution that was anything like this Obama scheme? Do you know how many times the head of the IRS met with Obama? So Obama trots out the "story" it was to meet about Obama care. When he only met with head of HHS a few times? Does any of this tweek your spidey sense?


I'm totally with you, just abolish tax exempts. Hell, I'd almost be willing to forget about the IRS theft of liberty (I understand that charge should illicit the contemplation of arms against tyranny) if we could adopt a flat tax and tell the criminals at the IRS that walmart needs their services, but hard working Americans no longer have any use for their disease.

Brad- I agree many more-both left and right need to be investigate if we keep the tax-exempts-- and agree with you on a flat tax... I've long been a proponent of Montana going to a flat sales tax- and get away from income and property taxes...

I'm not sure of any individual Presidents involving the IRS- but that has long been the perk of any administrative branch (President, Governor, etc)-- The sitting party gets to manage how the bureaucracies are run- and they definitely are going to put more attention into helping themselves rather then hurting themselves ...

I'm not even sure if it violates a law... Discussion's within the IRS to put priorities on certain types to look out for :???: ... Especially when some of these right wing groups (Patriot/Tea Party/Militia) were alleged to be tied to domestic terrorist, racist, or anarchist (secession) groups... :???:
Wasn't there a major effort put into investigating a bunch of Muslim churchs/groups nonprofit status right after 9/11? And some lost their status because of terrorist connections - which a few I believe regained when they took it to court or appealed it...

Why can't you just tell the phucking truth? There were no 501(c)(3)(4) applications in these investigations that were tied to terrorism, etc.

You know good and well that Lois & her bunch is lying and covering up. NO ONE pleads the 5th if they are squeaky clean.

You're sickening me by trying to defend Liberals/Progressives on every front.

:roll:

Like I said- what laws were broken?...
Just like federal/state prosecutors have discretionary powers over what cases they investigate and or prosecute-- I also believe government administrators (including the President) have broad discretion on setting priorities of what they investigate/prosecute and what they don't...
Without that discretion- the size of government would need to be 10 times what it is to handle all the issues..
And the party in power gets to lead in the decision making...

Chief Law Enforcement Officer. The President has the sole constitutional obligation to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed,"17 and this grants him broad discretion over federal law enforcement decisions. He has not only the power, but also the responsibility to see that the Constitution and laws are interpreted correctly.18 In addition, the President has absolute prosecutorial discretion in declining to bring criminal indictments. As in the exercise of any other constitutional power, one may argue that a particular President is "abusing his discretion," but even in such a case, he cannot be compelled to prosecute any criminal charges.

Head of the Executive Branch. The Framers debated and rejected the creation of a plural executive. They selected a "unitary executive" and determined that he alone would be vested with "[t]he executive power" of Article II. After much debate, the Framers also determined that the President would nominate and appoint (with the Senate's consent in some cases) all officers in the executive branch. With very few exceptions, all appointed officials who work in the executive branch serve at the will and pleasure of the President, even if Congress has specified a term of years for a particular office.19 All of this was designed to ensure the President's control over officials in the executive branch20 and to promote "energy in the executive."21

---------------------------------

When the President is lawfully exercising one of these functions,22 the scope of his power to issue written directives is exceedingly broad. In short, he may issue or execute whatever written directives, orders, guidelines (such as prosecutorial guidelines or nondiscriminatory enforcement policies), communiqués, dispatches, or other instructions he deems appropriate.

The President also may issue directives in the exercise of his statutorily delegated authority, unless Congress has specified in law that the statutory power may be exercised only in a particular way. A few examples of Congress's conditional grant of statutory authority are mentioned herein, but as previously explained, there are limits to how far Congress can go in an attempt to micromanage even the President's statutorily delegated authority.23 For example, Congress can grant the President (or his Attorney General) the authority to deport certain illegal aliens, but it cannot attempt to retain a veto over the final decision as it tried to do in the Immigration and Nationality Act.24

In sum, a President has broad discretion to use written directives when he is lawfully exercising one of his constitutional or statutorily delegated powers. Any broad power or discretion can be abused, but it would be wrong to confuse such potential or real abuse with the many legitimate uses.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2001/02/the-use-and-abuse-of-executive-orders-and-other-presidential-directives


I'm definitely not that knowledgeable about federal law- but like I'm not sure if the actions are a criminal act... Maybe politically embarassing- but like I said before, I've long been a believer that IRS needed to better scrutinize and limit the tax exemptions they hand out- so it was not that upsetting to me...Especially when all these new supposedly "politically exempt" groups were coming out of everywhere...
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Just one problem Judge.

The white house strongly denies that the president knew anything about the IRS targeting of conservative groups.

I hope you and I live long enough to see a 'conservative IRS' ass raping liberal groups so I can watch your hysterical tongue waggling.

Of course, the country is so farked now that there never will be such a thing as a conservative IRS.
 

iwannabeacowboy

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
Oldtimer said:
Brad- I agree many more-both left and right need to be investigate if we keep the tax-exempts-- and agree with you on a flat tax... I've long been a proponent of Montana going to a flat sales tax- and get away from income and property taxes...

I'm not sure of any individual Presidents involving the IRS- but that has long been the perk of any administrative branch (President, Governor, etc)-- The sitting party gets to manage how the bureaucracies are run- and they definitely are going to put more attention into helping themselves rather then hurting themselves ...

I'm not even sure if it violates a law... Discussion's within the IRS to put priorities on certain types to look out for :???: ... Especially when some of these right wing groups (Patriot/Tea Party/Militia) were alleged to be tied to domestic terrorist, racist, or anarchist (secession) groups... :???:
Wasn't there a major effort put into investigating a bunch of Muslim churchs/groups nonprofit status right after 9/11? And some lost their status because of terrorist connections - which a few I believe regained when they took it to court or appealed it...

Why can't you just tell the phucking truth? There were no 501(c)(3)(4) applications in these investigations that were tied to terrorism, etc.

You know good and well that Lois & her bunch is lying and covering up. NO ONE pleads the 5th if they are squeaky clean.

You're sickening me by trying to defend Liberals/Progressives on every front.

:roll:

Like I said- what laws were broken?...
Just like federal/state prosecutors have discretionary powers over what cases they investigate and or prosecute-- I also believe government administrators (including the President) have broad discretion on setting priorities of what they investigate/prosecute and what they don't...
Without that discretion- the size of government would need to be 10 times what it is to handle all the issues..
And the party in power gets to lead in the decision making...

Chief Law Enforcement Officer. The President has the sole constitutional obligation to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed,"17 and this grants him broad discretion over federal law enforcement decisions. He has not only the power, but also the responsibility to see that the Constitution and laws are interpreted correctly.18 In addition, the President has absolute prosecutorial discretion in declining to bring criminal indictments. As in the exercise of any other constitutional power, one may argue that a particular President is "abusing his discretion," but even in such a case, he cannot be compelled to prosecute any criminal charges.

Head of the Executive Branch. The Framers debated and rejected the creation of a plural executive. They selected a "unitary executive" and determined that he alone would be vested with "[t]he executive power" of Article II. After much debate, the Framers also determined that the President would nominate and appoint (with the Senate's consent in some cases) all officers in the executive branch. With very few exceptions, all appointed officials who work in the executive branch serve at the will and pleasure of the President, even if Congress has specified a term of years for a particular office.19 All of this was designed to ensure the President's control over officials in the executive branch20 and to promote "energy in the executive."21

---------------------------------

When the President is lawfully exercising one of these functions,22 the scope of his power to issue written directives is exceedingly broad. In short, he may issue or execute whatever written directives, orders, guidelines (such as prosecutorial guidelines or nondiscriminatory enforcement policies), communiqués, dispatches, or other instructions he deems appropriate.

The President also may issue directives in the exercise of his statutorily delegated authority, unless Congress has specified in law that the statutory power may be exercised only in a particular way. A few examples of Congress's conditional grant of statutory authority are mentioned herein, but as previously explained, there are limits to how far Congress can go in an attempt to micromanage even the President's statutorily delegated authority.23 For example, Congress can grant the President (or his Attorney General) the authority to deport certain illegal aliens, but it cannot attempt to retain a veto over the final decision as it tried to do in the Immigration and Nationality Act.24

In sum, a President has broad discretion to use written directives when he is lawfully exercising one of his constitutional or statutorily delegated powers. Any broad power or discretion can be abused, but it would be wrong to confuse such potential or real abuse with the many legitimate uses.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2001/02/the-use-and-abuse-of-executive-orders-and-other-presidential-directives


I'm definitely not that knowledgeable about federal law- but like I'm not sure if the actions are a criminal act... Maybe politically embarassing- but like I said before, I've long been a believer that IRS needed to better scrutinize and limit the tax exemptions they hand out- so it was not that upsetting to me...Especially when all these new supposedly "politically exempt" groups were coming out of everywhere...


Seriously? You're really going to say that in a country where the entirety of the system is built on checks and balances, you think the President should be able to determine if he himself should be investigated?

Even more, you love the grand jury indictment of Perry. Seems like being the party in power in Texas he should just not allow the investigation by losing all documents involved and making people sign gag orders. I'm sure you'd be all for that right?

I now understand why you say something is so comical.... you're just confused. You should spell it commie. As in, I find this IRS scandal to be so commie. Or.... This BLM land grab stuff is just so commie.

Took me a while to figure out what you were saying.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
You didn't answer the question: do you think we could better understand if laws were broken if these email documents were preserved for review as demanded by statute?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Brad S said:
You didn't answer the question: do you think we could better understand if laws were broken if these email documents were preserved for review as demanded by statute?

Sure- if someone could show what laws we would be looking at...
 

Traveler

Well-known member
http://www.teaparty.org/bombshell-revelation-blows-lid-irs-scandal-71774/#.VIdpXcP2GMA.twitter

(Judicial Watch) – Judicial Watch today released internal Department of Justice (DOJ) documents revealing that former IRS official Lois Lerner had been in contact with DOJ officials about the possible criminal prosecution of tax-exempt entities two full years before what the IRS conceded was its “absolutely inappropriate” 2012 targeting of the organizations. According to the newly obtained documents, Lerner met with top Obama DOJ Election Crimes Branch officials as early as October 2010.

“These new documents dramatically show how the Justice Department is up to its neck in the IRS scandal and can’t be trusted to investigate crimes associated with the IRS abuses that targeted Obama’s critics. And it is of particular concern that the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section, which would ordinarily investigate the IRS abuses, is now implicated in the IRS crimes. No wonder the Department of Justice under Eric Holder has done no serious investigation of the Obama IRS scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It is shameful how Establishment Washington has let slide by Obama’s abuse of the IRS and the Justice Department. Only as a result of Judicial Watch’s independent investigations did the American people learn about the IRS-DOJ prosecution discussions of Obama’s political enemies and how the IRS sent, in violation of law, confidential taxpayer information to the FBI and DOJ in 2010.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Traveler said:
http://www.teaparty.org/bombshell-revelation-blows-lid-irs-scandal-71774/#.VIdpXcP2GMA.twitter

(Judicial Watch) – Judicial Watch today released internal Department of Justice (DOJ) documents revealing that former IRS official Lois Lerner had been in contact with DOJ officials about the possible criminal prosecution of tax-exempt entities two full years before what the IRS conceded was its “absolutely inappropriate” 2012 targeting of the organizations. According to the newly obtained documents, Lerner met with top Obama DOJ Election Crimes Branch officials as early as October 2010.

“These new documents dramatically show how the Justice Department is up to its neck in the IRS scandal and can’t be trusted to investigate crimes associated with the IRS abuses that targeted Obama’s critics. And it is of particular concern that the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section, which would ordinarily investigate the IRS abuses, is now implicated in the IRS crimes. No wonder the Department of Justice under Eric Holder has done no serious investigation of the Obama IRS scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It is shameful how Establishment Washington has let slide by Obama’s abuse of the IRS and the Justice Department. Only as a result of Judicial Watch’s independent investigations did the American people learn about the IRS-DOJ prosecution discussions of Obama’s political enemies and how the IRS sent, in violation of law, confidential taxpayer information to the FBI and DOJ in 2010.

Yes, shameful indeed! I have become a member of Judicial Watch because THEY GET SOMETHING DONE and they need financial support.
 
Top