IRS Bombshell

[Skylar]

Oh wait.....now I remember...you played that childish game with me once before....

Go put your big boy pants on. Until then, Im putting you and your childish games on ignore.

Good day then. Would anyone else like to take up the question that sent Jarhead aflutter.

"So where is the 'bombshell'? Remember, there is zero indication that anything in the emails implicates anyone of any crime. "

Anyone?

Koskinen and others testified there were no copies, the hard drives had been shredded. No one had any backups.
That was all a lie. How did you miss that?

That was mistaken, apparently. But since this particular location in West Virginia wasn't asked if there were copies, there's zero evidence that Koskinen knew that such copies existed at that location. And he'd have to know of such copies to 'lie' about there being none.

The issue appears to be a due diligence question. Which is rarely if ever a criminal matter.

And of course, there's zero evidence of any criminal wrong doing in the emails. And this after years of conservative promises that the 'smoking gun' was 'hidden' within them.

So how'd that work out again?

So Koskinen was incompetent?

He clearly didn't check at that facility for those records. That, so far, is what we know.

So that's it? That's the 'bombshell'?

I don't think 'bombshell' means what you think it means.

 

[depotoo]

You see, you keep hoping to smother this with a question that has no answer yet when documents are still to be found and read. Guess what? Not until then will there be an answer, no sooner, no later. So take your fallacious question and..., realize there will be an answer only after all evidence is forthcoming, and you aren't fooling anyone.

Oh wait.....now I remember...you played that childish game with me once before....

Go put your big boy pants on. Until then, Im putting you and your childish games on ignore.

Good day then. Would anyone else like to take up the question that sent Jarhead aflutter.

"So where is the 'bombshell'? Remember, there is zero indication that anything in the emails implicates anyone of any crime. "

Anyone?

 

[depotoo]

And you know this how? Were you with him, when he didn't check with the IT staff or their supervisors?

Oh wait.....now I remember...you played that childish game with me once before....

Go put your big boy pants on. Until then, Im putting you and your childish games on ignore.

Good day then. Would anyone else like to take up the question that sent Jarhead aflutter.

"So where is the 'bombshell'? Remember, there is zero indication that anything in the emails implicates anyone of any crime. "

Anyone?

Koskinen and others testified there were no copies, the hard drives had been shredded. No one had any backups.
That was all a lie. How did you miss that?

That was mistaken, apparently. But since this particular location in West Virginia wasn't asked if there were copies, there's zero evidence that Koskinen knew that such copies existed at that location. And he'd have to know of such copies to 'lie' about there being none.

The issue appears to be a due diligence question. Which is rarely if ever a criminal matter.

And of course, there's zero evidence of any criminal wrong doing in the emails. And this after years of conservative promises that the 'smoking gun' was 'hidden' within them.

So how'd that work out again?

So Koskinen was incompetent?

He clearly didn't check at that facility for those records. That, so far, is what we know.

So that's it? That's the 'bombshell'?

I don't think 'bombshell' means what you think it means.

 

[Jarhead]

Oh wait.....now I remember...you played that childish game with me once before....

Go put your big boy pants on. Until then, Im putting you and your childish games on ignore.

Good day then. Would anyone else like to take up the question that sent Jarhead aflutter.

"So where is the 'bombshell'? Remember, there is zero indication that anything in the emails implicates anyone of any crime. "

Anyone?

Koskinen and others testified there were no copies, the hard drives had been shredded. No one had any backups.
That was all a lie. How did you miss that?

That was mistaken, apparently. But since this particular location in West Virginia wasn't asked if there were copies, there's zero evidence that Koskinen knew that such copies existed at that location. And he'd have to know of such copies to 'lie' about there being none.

The issue appears to be a due diligence question. Which is rarely if ever a criminal matter.

And of course, there's zero evidence of any criminal wrong doing in the emails. And this after years of conservative promises that the 'smoking gun' was 'hidden' within them.

So how'd that work out again?

So Koskinen was incompetent? Is that your defense?
Remember, he was supposed to make a thorough investigation of this. Thorough would be figuring out what backups the IRS had in place. He either didnt do that or intentionally misled Congress.
So is Koskinen incompetent? Or he is criminal?

How about that attorney Obama hired on the tax payer dime to investigate the situation....in 3 days she reported back that there was nothing illegal or unethical done. 3 days.

Yet...

She never asked for emails
Had no idea emails were missing
had not interviewed a single complaintant

But she found that nothing done was inappropriate.

And we paid her? How much? Anyone know?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Oh wait.....now I remember...you played that childish game with me once before....

Go put your big boy pants on. Until then, Im putting you and your childish games on ignore.

Good day then. Would anyone else like to take up the question that sent Jarhead aflutter.

"So where is the 'bombshell'? Remember, there is zero indication that anything in the emails implicates anyone of any crime. "

Anyone?

That's not the issue. The issue is that they lied, under oath. Its like the Bill Clinton thingy... yeah, blowjobs aren't illegal. But lying under oath is illegal. The argument that he should have never been asked about it is irrelevant.. you don't get to pick what you get to tell the truth about when you are under oath.

 

[depotoo]

"they told a congressional oversight committee that IRS employees had not asked computer technicians for the tapes, as directed by a subpoena from House oversight and other investigating committees."

They had been directed, by subpoena, to ask IT, yet they never did.

 

[The Rabbi]

Oh wait.....now I remember...you played that childish game with me once before....

Go put your big boy pants on. Until then, Im putting you and your childish games on ignore.

Good day then. Would anyone else like to take up the question that sent Jarhead aflutter.

"So where is the 'bombshell'? Remember, there is zero indication that anything in the emails implicates anyone of any crime. "

Anyone?

Koskinen and others testified there were no copies, the hard drives had been shredded. No one had any backups.
That was all a lie. How did you miss that?

That was mistaken, apparently. But since this particular location in West Virginia wasn't asked if there were copies, there's zero evidence that Koskinen knew that such copies existed at that location. And he'd have to know of such copies to 'lie' about there being none.

The issue appears to be a due diligence question. Which is rarely if ever a criminal matter.

And of course, there's zero evidence of any criminal wrong doing in the emails. And this after years of conservative promises that the 'smoking gun' was 'hidden' within them.

So how'd that work out again?

So Koskinen was incompetent?

He clearly didn't check at that facility for those records. That, so far, is what we know.

So that's it? That's the 'bombshell'?

I don't think 'bombshell' means what you think it means.

You think he just forgot to check under the sofa? You think no one knew the emails were there, that no one knew COngress was looking for them, that no one knew their boss had testified they didnt exist?
It was a deliberate coverup.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

 

[deltex1]

I didn't steal their lede, they stole mine

People, this is going to lead back to the White House.... Trust me.

The question is now, who will fall on their sword for the Liar in Chief? Anybody?

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
  IRS BOMBSHELL: Thousands of Lerner emails recovered in targeting probe
  INVESTIGATORS RECOVER 32,000 emails to and from former IRS exempt organizations director Lois Lerner, top left, related to targeting of conservative groups, and tell the House oversight committee that employees did not ask for backup tapes, contradicting testimony of IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, bottom left.

Holy moly Batman...32000 smidgens!

 

[Skylar]

You see, you keep hoping to smother this with a question that has no answer yet when documents are still to be found and read. Guess what? Not until then will there be an answer, no sooner, no later. So take your fallacious question and..., realize there will be an answer only after all evidence is forthcoming, and you aren't fooling anyone.

Oh wait.....now I remember...you played that childish game with me once before....

Go put your big boy pants on. Until then, Im putting you and your childish games on ignore.

Good day then. Would anyone else like to take up the question that sent Jarhead aflutter.

"So where is the 'bombshell'? Remember, there is zero indication that anything in the emails implicates anyone of any crime. "

Anyone?

If the content of the emails were the bombshell....wouldn't the 'bombshell' come AFTER you found the content you were looking for. And not before?

That's why my question isn't fallacious. As the entire premise of the thread is based on a big bucket of nothing. There's still no evidence of any criminal wrong doing. There's still no evidence that the emails, lost found or otherwise, contain any evidence of criminal wrong doing.

Yet folks in this thread have come up with elaborate conclusions. As you've pointed out, there's no documents to review. So there's no evidence to affirm or support ANY of the elaborate conclusions being offered.

Which is exactly my point.

 

[depotoo]

Oh, please. That doesn't hold water and you know it.
Besides, they are also waiting for forensics to be done on some of the tapes.

You see, you keep hoping to smother this with a question that has no answer yet when documents are still to be found and read. Guess what? Not until then will there be an answer, no sooner, no later. So take your fallacious question and..., realize there will be an answer only after all evidence is forthcoming, and you aren't fooling anyone.

Oh wait.....now I remember...you played that childish game with me once before....

Go put your big boy pants on. Until then, Im putting you and your childish games on ignore.

Good day then. Would anyone else like to take up the question that sent Jarhead aflutter.

"So where is the 'bombshell'? Remember, there is zero indication that anything in the emails implicates anyone of any crime. "

Anyone?

If the content of the emails were the bombshell....wouldn't the 'bombshell' come AFTER you found the content you were looking for. And not before?

That's why my question isn't fallacious. As the entire premise of the thread is based on a big bucket of nothing. There's still no evidence of any criminal wrong doing. There's still no evidence that the emails, lost found or otherwise, contain any evidence of criminal wrong doing.

Yet folks in this thread have come up with elaborate conclusions. As you've pointed out, there's no documents to review. So there's no evidence to affirm or support ANY of the elaborate conclusions being offered.

Which is exactly my point.

 

[Skylar]

"they told a congressional oversight committee that IRS employees had not asked computer technicians for the tapes, as directed by a subpoena from House oversight and other investigating committees."

They had been directed, by subpoena, to ask IT, yet they never did.

Oh, please. That doesn't hold water and you know it.
Besides, they are also waiting for forensics to be done on some of the tapes.

You see, you keep hoping to smother this with a question that has no answer yet when documents are still to be found and read. Guess what? Not until then will there be an answer, no sooner, no later. So take your fallacious question and..., realize there will be an answer only after all evidence is forthcoming, and you aren't fooling anyone.

Oh wait.....now I remember...you played that childish game with me once before....

Go put your big boy pants on. Until then, Im putting you and your childish games on ignore.

Good day then. Would anyone else like to take up the question that sent Jarhead aflutter.

"So where is the 'bombshell'? Remember, there is zero indication that anything in the emails implicates anyone of any crime. "

Anyone?

If the content of the emails were the bombshell....wouldn't the 'bombshell' come AFTER you found the content you were looking for. And not before?

That's why my question isn't fallacious. As the entire premise of the thread is based on a big bucket of nothing. There's still no evidence of any criminal wrong doing. There's still no evidence that the emails, lost found or otherwise, contain any evidence of criminal wrong doing.

Yet folks in this thread have come up with elaborate conclusions. As you've pointed out, there's no documents to review. So there's no evidence to affirm or support ANY of the elaborate conclusions being offered.

Which is exactly my point.

Sure it 'holds water'. And by your own standards. You can't be basing any conclusion that said documents contain evidence of a crime....when you don't have access to the documents. No evidence is no evidence.

Oh, you can speculate. You can imagine. You can make up whatever fanciful conclusion you want based on whatever standards you wish to invent. As this thread demonstrates.

And baseless speculation isn't a 'bombshell'. Its not even particularly interesting.

 

[Edgetho]

You wonder why dimocraps are so stupid?

They don't watch the 'news' they watch the DISGUSTING FILTH in the Lame Stream Media -- Propaganda. Censorship through omission or lies. Either way, the DISGUSTING FILTH in the LSM is nothing more than the propaganda arm of the DNC.

Just that fucking simple....

I don't watch the lying scum, but I strongly suspect they barely covered the new IRS email discovery, if at all.

Networks Spend Nearly Six Minutes on Runaway Llamas, But Nothing on Clinton Ethics Story

After ABC and NBC failed to cover a front-page story in The Washington Post on Thursday morning about ethics questions surrounding the Clinton Foundation, their evening news counterparts continued the blackout by showing no interest in this story.

Though CBS This Morning gave the story a brief, 32-second item on Thursday morning, the CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley ignored it.

The scant network coverage of The Post story between Thursday morning and evening stands in comparison to the nearly six minutes spent on a case of two runaway llamas in Arizona on the network evening newscasts alone.

The nearly 1800-word story reported, in part, that the Clinton Foundation took in donations from seven foreign governments while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State with “one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration.” Here’s more from the article: -

See more at: Networks Spend Nearly Six Minutes on Runaway Llamas But Nothing on Clinton Ethics Story

Being stupid is a choice with dimocraps.

 

[Skylar]

You wonder why dimocraps are so stupid?

Perhaps you and I have a very different idea of what a 'bombshell' is.

Um, buddy....this ain't it. Its just another attempt to manufacture outrage on a story that has no meat. We're 3 investigations, 4 hears and 20 million dollars into this clusterfuck of an investigation. And your ilk have still found exactly jackshit. No indication of any criminal wrong doing.

But this time its different, huh?

 

[Wildman]

^^^^^^
it is also the reason we have a death penalty for treason !!

 

[deltex1]

You wonder why dimocraps are so stupid?

They don't watch the 'news' they watch the DISGUSTING FILTH in the Lame Stream Media -- Propaganda. Censorship through omission or lies. Either way, the DISGUSTING FILTH in the LSM is nothing more than the propaganda arm of the DNC.

Just that fucking simple....

I don't watch the lying scum, but I strongly suspect they barely covered the new IRS email discovery, if at all.

Networks Spend Nearly Six Minutes on Runaway Llamas, But Nothing on Clinton Ethics Story

After ABC and NBC failed to cover a front-page story in The Washington Post on Thursday morning about ethics questions surrounding the Clinton Foundation, their evening news counterparts continued the blackout by showing no interest in this story.

Though CBS This Morning gave the story a brief, 32-second item on Thursday morning, the CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley ignored it.

The scant network coverage of The Post story between Thursday morning and evening stands in comparison to the nearly six minutes spent on a case of two runaway llamas in Arizona on the network evening newscasts alone.

The nearly 1800-word story reported, in part, that the Clinton Foundation took in donations from seven foreign governments while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State with “one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration.” Here’s more from the article: -

See more at: Networks Spend Nearly Six Minutes on Runaway Llamas But Nothing on Clinton Ethics Story

Being stupid is a choice with dimocraps.

Runaway llamas the LIBTARDS can understand. Anything more complicated leaves them befuddled.