BREAKING: E-mails Show Lois Lerner Intentionally Sought to Hide Information from Cong

[Jarhead]

Fact: According to Federal Law, none of the Tea Party groups should have received 501 c 4 status.

OK....lets assume your "fact" is fact.....which it is not....but for debate purposes, lets assume it is.

Then why were they not denied status...and, instead, strung along for years?

You are aware, I am sure, that it is best to be denied and given the right to make adjustments to your model and reapply....then to not get an answer at all and simply sit around for 3 years doing absolutely nothing.

 

[Oldstyle]

so we're back to assumptions and not facts - is that it?

seems you're in some circular logic too. the reason you know that lerner knew of camps letter and that it was about the targeting of conservatives is because she crashed her hard drive, and the reason we know that she crashed her hard drive is because of Camp's letter...

Let me get this straight...you actually think that Lois Lerner WOULDN'T have been apprised of the letter from Camp as soon as it was received by the IRS? How could she NOT have been? Gee, the Chairman of the Ways & Means (the group that approves funding for government organizations) is pissed off and wants answers about what's happening in the Exempt Organizations Division but you don't think the Director of that division would have gotten a call? Really? Where is the "logic" in that!

As for my "circular logic"? When an inquiry is made and the hard drives of Lois Lerner, the Director of Exempt Organizations Division...Nikole Flax, the Chief of Staff for the IRS Commisioner...Michelle Eldridge, the IRS National Media Relations Chief...and four of the IRS agents working in the Exempt Organizations office...all crash in a short period of time...thus destroying the email communications between the parties...how is my logic "circular" that this is a "cause and effect" of the Camp letter being received?

your proof that she was appraised and concerned about the letter is that she caused the hard drive crashes, and your proof that she caused the hard drive crashes is concern over the letter.

how much more circular can it get?

Are you contending that she DIDN'T know? That nobody at the IRS called the Director of Exempt Organizations after receiving the Camp letter? That they just laughed it off and went out for after work drinks at Fridays?

You know as well as I do that Lerner would have either received a call about the Camp letter immediately after it was received or shortly thereafter.

As to whether she would have been "concerned" about it? Well, you'd have to be rather naive to believe that those 7 people's computer hard drives all crashed in a giant coincidence and amazingly none of them got backup of their data or had hard copies of them as they were required to have by law.

So I think it's logical to conclude that Lois Lerner was "concerned" about the Camp letter. I think it's logical to conclude that the Camp letter started a LANDSLIDE of "concern" in the Exempt Organizations Division!

 

[ogibillm]

Let me get this straight...you actually think that Lois Lerner WOULDN'T have been apprised of the letter from Camp as soon as it was received by the IRS? How could she NOT have been? Gee, the Chairman of the Ways & Means (the group that approves funding for government organizations) is pissed off and wants answers about what's happening in the Exempt Organizations Division but you don't think the Director of that division would have gotten a call? Really? Where is the "logic" in that!

As for my "circular logic"? When an inquiry is made and the hard drives of Lois Lerner, the Director of Exempt Organizations Division...Nikole Flax, the Chief of Staff for the IRS Commisioner...Michelle Eldridge, the IRS National Media Relations Chief...and four of the IRS agents working in the Exempt Organizations office...all crash in a short period of time...thus destroying the email communications between the parties...how is my logic "circular" that this is a "cause and effect" of the Camp letter being received?

your proof that she was appraised and concerned about the letter is that she caused the hard drive crashes, and your proof that she caused the hard drive crashes is concern over the letter.

how much more circular can it get?

Are you contending that she DIDN'T know? That nobody at the IRS called the Director of Exempt Organizations after receiving the Camp letter? That they just laughed it off and went out for after work drinks at Fridays?

You know as well as I do that Lerner would have either received a call about the Camp letter immediately after it was received or shortly thereafter.

As to whether she would have been "concerned" about it? Well, you'd have to be rather naive to believe that those 7 people's computer hard drives all crashed in a giant coincidence and amazingly none of them got backup of their data or had hard copies of them as they were required to have by law.

So I think it's logical to conclude that Lois Lerner was "concerned" about the Camp letter. I think it's logical to conclude that the Camp letter started a LANDSLIDE of "concern" in the Exempt Organizations Division!

okay. you can believe that that's a logical assumption. just be clear that it is an assumption, all of it, and not established fact.

the fact is neither of us know what she knew about Camp's letter, or how its requests for information were relayed to her.

 

[Siete]

I've tried to ignore this thread based on the title.

I am under the assumption those emails were missing, yet those emails reveal the guilt of Learner.

how does that work?

 

[The Rabbi]

You said it was a fact she stated it.

Yes. She did state it.


She says "everyone was up in arms about it (CU)." Now, were Republicans up in arms about it? Were Conservatives up in arms about it? Or were liberals and Democrats up in arms about it? And if the latter, were they putting pressure on her to squelch liberal groups?

In that clip? Nope. She never claimed she was under tremendous pressure to "do something" about conservative groups.

Testimony: In 2010, Justice Department Sought Lois Lerner?s Help to Prosecute Tax Exempt Groups Engaging in Politics | Committee on Oversight & Government Reform

When she said she was under pressure, what do you suppose she was under pressure to do?

 

[The Rabbi]

your proof that she was appraised and concerned about the letter is that she caused the hard drive crashes, and your proof that she caused the hard drive crashes is concern over the letter.

how much more circular can it get?

Are you contending that she DIDN'T know? That nobody at the IRS called the Director of Exempt Organizations after receiving the Camp letter? That they just laughed it off and went out for after work drinks at Fridays?

You know as well as I do that Lerner would have either received a call about the Camp letter immediately after it was received or shortly thereafter.

As to whether she would have been "concerned" about it? Well, you'd have to be rather naive to believe that those 7 people's computer hard drives all crashed in a giant coincidence and amazingly none of them got backup of their data or had hard copies of them as they were required to have by law.

So I think it's logical to conclude that Lois Lerner was "concerned" about the Camp letter. I think it's logical to conclude that the Camp letter started a LANDSLIDE of "concern" in the Exempt Organizations Division!

okay. you can believe that that's a logical assumption. just be clear that it is an assumption, all of it, and not established fact.

the fact is neither of us know what she knew about Camp's letter, or how its requests for information were relayed to her.

Since she's never denied seeing Camp's letter it's pretty obvious she did see it.
Next.

 

[Jarhead]

I've tried to ignore this thread based on the title.

I am under the assumption those emails were missing, yet those emails reveal the guilt of Learner.

how does that work?

Here....allow me to explain it to you.

1) Taking the 5th in itself is innocent and an Americans right
2) having a hard drive crash in itself innocent and happens to all of us
3) Having co workers hard drive crash at the same time is innocent and can happen, but most networks have safeguards to prevent it...but it can happen, so in itself is innocent
4) Asking questions about the possibility of IM data being saved and retrievable is innocent in itself...although who would ever ask that question if they had nothing to hide. But assumptions aside...innocent in itself

Now.....

Put all 4 together and they seem a little coincidental....but still no proof of guilt.

However....

1) an attorney appointed by the White House investigated the situation but was not aware of the missing Lois Lerner emails. Kind of strange seeing as one would think an investigator would have asked for those emails.

2) That attorney found no criminal action...despite having never asked for emails or the hard drive....emails and hard drives more often than not are the first things an investigator looks at in ANY criminal investigation.

Now....when we put this all together....does it prove guilt?

Absolutely not.

Does it warrant further investigation?

Absolutely.

Yet the WH and the left overall say it is a waste of tax payer money.

Really?

Why?

 

[ogibillm]

Are you contending that she DIDN'T know? That nobody at the IRS called the Director of Exempt Organizations after receiving the Camp letter? That they just laughed it off and went out for after work drinks at Fridays?

You know as well as I do that Lerner would have either received a call about the Camp letter immediately after it was received or shortly thereafter.

As to whether she would have been "concerned" about it? Well, you'd have to be rather naive to believe that those 7 people's computer hard drives all crashed in a giant coincidence and amazingly none of them got backup of their data or had hard copies of them as they were required to have by law.

So I think it's logical to conclude that Lois Lerner was "concerned" about the Camp letter. I think it's logical to conclude that the Camp letter started a LANDSLIDE of "concern" in the Exempt Organizations Division!

okay. you can believe that that's a logical assumption. just be clear that it is an assumption, all of it, and not established fact.

the fact is neither of us know what she knew about Camp's letter, or how its requests for information were relayed to her.

Since she's never denied seeing Camp's letter it's pretty obvious she did see it.
Next.

oh i see.
i've never denied seeing the queen of england's underwear, so i must have seen it.

and i didn't realize that you like watching disney cartoons while slathered in bacon grease. i mean you've never denied it, so it must be true.

 

[Jarhead]

okay. you can believe that that's a logical assumption. just be clear that it is an assumption, all of it, and not established fact.

the fact is neither of us know what she knew about Camp's letter, or how its requests for information were relayed to her.

Since she's never denied seeing Camp's letter it's pretty obvious she did see it.
Next.

oh i see.
i've never denied seeing the queen of england's underwear, so i must have seen it.

Immature attempt at a response.

If you were in the public eye and people were saying that you saw the queens underwear and, through your attorney who has been responding to allegations against you, you did not deny it...

It would be proper to assume you saw the queens underwear.

 

[ogibillm]

Since she's never denied seeing Camp's letter it's pretty obvious she did see it.
Next.

oh i see.
i've never denied seeing the queen of england's underwear, so i must have seen it.

Immature attempt at a response.

If you were in the public eye and people were saying that you saw the queens underwear and, through your attorney who has been responding to allegations against you, you did not deny it...

It would be proper to assume you saw the queens underwear.

what's immature is believing that because someone hasn't denied something it means they've done it.

who has asked lerner if she was given camp's letter?

 

[Oldstyle]

your proof that she was appraised and concerned about the letter is that she caused the hard drive crashes, and your proof that she caused the hard drive crashes is concern over the letter.

how much more circular can it get?

Are you contending that she DIDN'T know? That nobody at the IRS called the Director of Exempt Organizations after receiving the Camp letter? That they just laughed it off and went out for after work drinks at Fridays?

You know as well as I do that Lerner would have either received a call about the Camp letter immediately after it was received or shortly thereafter.

As to whether she would have been "concerned" about it? Well, you'd have to be rather naive to believe that those 7 people's computer hard drives all crashed in a giant coincidence and amazingly none of them got backup of their data or had hard copies of them as they were required to have by law.

So I think it's logical to conclude that Lois Lerner was "concerned" about the Camp letter. I think it's logical to conclude that the Camp letter started a LANDSLIDE of "concern" in the Exempt Organizations Division!

okay. you can believe that that's a logical assumption. just be clear that it is an assumption, all of it, and not established fact.

the fact is neither of us know what she knew about Camp's letter, or how its requests for information were relayed to her.

The IRS Scandal: Timeline - Discover the Networks

Why don't you read that timeline and see if you still want to maintain that Lerner didn't know what was in the Camp letter and wasn't concerned about it. It provides a nice snap shot of what was going on at the IRS and how the coverup of what was taking place started early and involved the Justice Department and the White House.

 

[Jarhead]

oh i see.
i've never denied seeing the queen of england's underwear, so i must have seen it.

Immature attempt at a response.

If you were in the public eye and people were saying that you saw the queens underwear and, through your attorney who has been responding to allegations against you, you did not deny it...

It would be proper to assume you saw the queens underwear.

what's immature is believing that because someone hasn't denied something it means they've done it.

who has asked lerner if she was given camp's letter?

Sorry friend.

Not playing that game with you.

SO I will make it easy.

No one directly asked her.

No one asked her if she did anything illegal, but she said she didn't when she waived her right tot take the 5th.

But whatever.

It is nothing but a witch hunt. Feel better?

Not worth my time debating this with you.

 

[The Rabbi]

oh i see.
i've never denied seeing the queen of england's underwear, so i must have seen it.

Immature attempt at a response.

If you were in the public eye and people were saying that you saw the queens underwear and, through your attorney who has been responding to allegations against you, you did not deny it...

It would be proper to assume you saw the queens underwear.

what's immature is believing that because someone hasn't denied something it means they've done it.

who has asked lerner if she was given camp's letter?

There is a reasonable expectation she would have seen it, and since she never denied seeing it she must have.

I can only conclude the lefties here are so terrified of what Lerner knows they will go to any length to spin, twist, fabricate, distort and do whatever they can to defend her and the administration.
The same group that screams Bush knew about 9/11 and let it happen, despite any proof, now demands video proof in triplicate for any statement made.
Sad, just sad.

 

[ogibillm]

Are you contending that she DIDN'T know? That nobody at the IRS called the Director of Exempt Organizations after receiving the Camp letter? That they just laughed it off and went out for after work drinks at Fridays?

You know as well as I do that Lerner would have either received a call about the Camp letter immediately after it was received or shortly thereafter.

As to whether she would have been "concerned" about it? Well, you'd have to be rather naive to believe that those 7 people's computer hard drives all crashed in a giant coincidence and amazingly none of them got backup of their data or had hard copies of them as they were required to have by law.

So I think it's logical to conclude that Lois Lerner was "concerned" about the Camp letter. I think it's logical to conclude that the Camp letter started a LANDSLIDE of "concern" in the Exempt Organizations Division!

okay. you can believe that that's a logical assumption. just be clear that it is an assumption, all of it, and not established fact.

the fact is neither of us know what she knew about Camp's letter, or how its requests for information were relayed to her.

The IRS Scandal: Timeline - Discover the Networks

Why don't you read that timeline and see if you still want to maintain that Lerner didn't know what was in the Camp letter and wasn't concerned about it. It provides a nice snap shot of what was going on at the IRS and how the coverup of what was taking place started early and involved the Justice Department and the White House.

that's a very nice unbiased website you have there.

 

[Oldstyle]

oh i see.
i've never denied seeing the queen of england's underwear, so i must have seen it.

Immature attempt at a response.

If you were in the public eye and people were saying that you saw the queens underwear and, through your attorney who has been responding to allegations against you, you did not deny it...

It would be proper to assume you saw the queens underwear.

what's immature is believing that because someone hasn't denied something it means they've done it.

who has asked lerner if she was given camp's letter?

She took the 5th! How do you ask someone questions, who has invoked their 5th Amendment right not to incriminate themselves? All you CAN do is assume that she was aware of Camp's letter and that she was concerned about it. You can easily glean that from simply reading the timeline I provided.

 

[ogibillm]

Immature attempt at a response.

If you were in the public eye and people were saying that you saw the queens underwear and, through your attorney who has been responding to allegations against you, you did not deny it...

It would be proper to assume you saw the queens underwear.

what's immature is believing that because someone hasn't denied something it means they've done it.

who has asked lerner if she was given camp's letter?

She took the 5th! How do you ask someone questions, who has invoked their 5th Amendment right not to incriminate themselves? All you CAN do is assume that she was aware of Camp's letter and that she was concerned about it. You can easily glean that from simply reading the timeline I provided.

so we're back to making assumptions, right?

 

[Oldstyle]

okay. you can believe that that's a logical assumption. just be clear that it is an assumption, all of it, and not established fact.

the fact is neither of us know what she knew about Camp's letter, or how its requests for information were relayed to her.

The IRS Scandal: Timeline - Discover the Networks

Why don't you read that timeline and see if you still want to maintain that Lerner didn't know what was in the Camp letter and wasn't concerned about it. It provides a nice snap shot of what was going on at the IRS and how the coverup of what was taking place started early and involved the Justice Department and the White House.

that's a very nice unbiased website you have there.

You don't agree with their timeline? What part do you question?

 

[Jarhead]

Immature attempt at a response.

If you were in the public eye and people were saying that you saw the queens underwear and, through your attorney who has been responding to allegations against you, you did not deny it...

It would be proper to assume you saw the queens underwear.

what's immature is believing that because someone hasn't denied something it means they've done it.

who has asked lerner if she was given camp's letter?

There is a reasonable expectation she would have seen it, and since she never denied seeing it she must have.

I can only conclude the lefties here are so terrified of what Lerner knows they will go to any length to spin, twist, fabricate, distort and do whatever they can to defend her and the administration.
The same group that screams Bush knew about 9/11 and let it happen, despite any proof, now demands video proof in triplicate for any statement made.
Sad, just sad.

No. They are not terrified.

President Obama said there was not a smidgen of corruption and that was all they needed to hear.

Building evidence is meaningless to them, for the President told them not to worry about it.

They believed Bush lied to them, so you would think they would be more careful about believing what a sitting president says.

Guess they have short memories.

 

[Oldstyle]

what's immature is believing that because someone hasn't denied something it means they've done it.

who has asked lerner if she was given camp's letter?

She took the 5th! How do you ask someone questions, who has invoked their 5th Amendment right not to incriminate themselves? All you CAN do is assume that she was aware of Camp's letter and that she was concerned about it. You can easily glean that from simply reading the timeline I provided.

so we're back to making assumptions, right?

Answer this one question honestly, Ogi...which do you think is more logical...that the Director of Exempt Organizations would have been informed about the Camp letter...or that the Director of Exempt Organizations would NOT have been informed?

 

[Papageorgio]

Seven computers hard drives crashed, thousands of relevant e-mails missing, IRS it's self admits they targeted conservative groups.

Yet, The idiot claims nothing is wrong, won't address the issues that would force him to admit he is a liar. I'm ogli, is getting his assed whooped and is to stupid to figure it out.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.