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

[Care4all]

Congress asked for the emails.

The IRS said they have been lost.

Lets be real......they can be found. But congress cant look for them. Only the IRS or a DoJ investigator. Doesn't seem either one is interested in finding them.

SO I again ask.....how did the investigator for the President deem no crime was committed when she did not have access to any emails of the subject of the investigation for the 2 years she was investigating?

Shouldn't the result of the investigation have been "inconclusive due to missing federal records"?

I guess I just don't share your conclusion that congress can't look for them or get them....I don't comprehend those words of "can not"....never have in my life and never will....

If I were one of these congress critters investigating, and did the research, as I have done here, and I knew there were copies on the dahdadah servers for all emails according to the rules and regs memo of the IRS, then I would tell this to the IRS dudes in the meeting and show them their rules and regs, and subpena those servers....

No way Jose' would I throw up my hands and say "Wahhhhh, I can't get to them"....

so either the servers with back ups don't exist (which is unlikely imo), or the Congress Critters truly do not want to get to the bottom of this, at least not in any kind of timely manner....and if this is the case, that would be for political posturing for the upcoming election.

BTW, what do they expect to find in the hard drive crashed emails, that would not have been continued in the emails after that point if it involved specific cases?

What do you think is in these hard drive crashed emails and is there any evidence, other than the email's evaporating, that supports your speculations of what is in them? Any other outside evidence?

Do you think Learner was being told by Obama to do this to the Tea Party groups and this would have shown up in the emails???

Or conversations between these people conniving to break the law for political purposes only?

What is it that you are looking for, to show up in Learner's emails? What am I missing as far as evidence so far?

Excuse me.....those congress critters did exactly that.

They can only subpoena. They can not enter the IRS and take things. They can not charge anyone with obstruction.

I have been watching the hearings. They continually ask for everything and they get nothing.

You have your mind made up......and that is fine.

I spent God knows how much time showing you how you were misreading the law...because your partisan glasses wouldn't allow you to see what is black and white. You did everything in your power to show me how I was wrong with the law...and I finally had to lay it out for you. And once you had nothing left to argue, you started to talk about how silly the law is.

So lets see how it pans out. No more of this. Waste of time.

I am listening to the hearings, as of 10 minutes ago, and so far it still is a bunch of grandstanding by the Republicans on the committee with a bunch accusations that are meaningless and not backed up......

 

[Care4all]

Jebus, so the lady bosserman (SP), who the lying republicans said is in charge of the DoJ investigation and has donated to Obama, IS NOT IN CHARGE of the investigation.....

Why do you guys have to LIE, WHY?

 

[Jarhead]

I guess I just don't share your conclusion that congress can't look for them or get them....I don't comprehend those words of "can not"....never have in my life and never will....

If I were one of these congress critters investigating, and did the research, as I have done here, and I knew there were copies on the dahdadah servers for all emails according to the rules and regs memo of the IRS, then I would tell this to the IRS dudes in the meeting and show them their rules and regs, and subpena those servers....

No way Jose' would I throw up my hands and say "Wahhhhh, I can't get to them"....

so either the servers with back ups don't exist (which is unlikely imo), or the Congress Critters truly do not want to get to the bottom of this, at least not in any kind of timely manner....and if this is the case, that would be for political posturing for the upcoming election.

BTW, what do they expect to find in the hard drive crashed emails, that would not have been continued in the emails after that point if it involved specific cases?

What do you think is in these hard drive crashed emails and is there any evidence, other than the email's evaporating, that supports your speculations of what is in them? Any other outside evidence?

Do you think Learner was being told by Obama to do this to the Tea Party groups and this would have shown up in the emails???

Or conversations between these people conniving to break the law for political purposes only?

What is it that you are looking for, to show up in Learner's emails? What am I missing as far as evidence so far?

Excuse me.....those congress critters did exactly that.

They can only subpoena. They can not enter the IRS and take things. They can not charge anyone with obstruction.

I have been watching the hearings. They continually ask for everything and they get nothing.

You have your mind made up......and that is fine.

I spent God knows how much time showing you how you were misreading the law...because your partisan glasses wouldn't allow you to see what is black and white. You did everything in your power to show me how I was wrong with the law...and I finally had to lay it out for you. And once you had nothing left to argue, you started to talk about how silly the law is.

So lets see how it pans out. No more of this. Waste of time.

I am listening to the hearings, as of 10 minutes ago, and so far it still is a bunch of grandstanding by the Republicans on the committee with a bunch accusations that are meaningless and not backed up......

interesting seeing as I am watching them as well and have not heard any accusations. Simply questions that wont be answered.

You are watching through partisan eyes....you just don't realize it.

Whatever.....the fact that you see congress NOT getting answers but you see it as grandstanding...the fact that you did your best to rationalize the missing emails....the fact that you did your best to misinterpret the Federal records act.....the fact that you were UNAWARE that congress has subpoenaed the emails and told they were lost...subpoenaed the hard drive and told it was destroyed...subpoenaed the back up and told they were written over....tells me that you don't want to know what is going on...because all you want to do is say this is congress grandstanding....not even knowing the efforts they have made to get information.

You are not worthy of this conversation with me moving forward.

Cyas.

 

[Jarhead]

Jebus, so the lady bosserman (SP), who the lying republicans said is in charge of the DoJ investigation and has donated to Obama, IS NOT IN CHARGE of the investigation.....

Why do you guys have to LIE, WHY?

Thanks for proving my previous point.

She was personally appointed by the President to investigate it....she investigated it and gave in her findings within weeks....NO CRIMES COMMITTED. She is no longer involved.

Learn your facts.

Then don't get back to me.

 

[Care4all]

Issa is in love with himself....he just loves to hear himself talk...at a hearing that you would think he'd be asking questions, instead he spends 10 minutes pontificating, and saying his Accusations are what the American people think....well I got news for ya Issa, not all Americans agree with your dog and pony show....or your already preconceived, accusations of guilt....without even questioning the people you have in your hearing that you invited....

What the heck?

 

[ogibillm]

Jebus, so the lady bosserman (SP), who the lying republicans said is in charge of the DoJ investigation and has donated to Obama, IS NOT IN CHARGE of the investigation.....

Why do you guys have to LIE, WHY?

Thanks for proving my previous point.

She was personally appointed by the President to investigate it.

proof or be branded a liar.

 

[Jarhead]

Jebus, so the lady bosserman (SP), who the lying republicans said is in charge of the DoJ investigation and has donated to Obama, IS NOT IN CHARGE of the investigation.....

Why do you guys have to LIE, WHY?

Thanks for proving my previous point.

She was personally appointed by the President to investigate it.

proof or be branded a liar.

If you need proof I suggest you find another news outlet to watch.

Done with you as well.

Cyas

 

[saveliberty]

Being branded a liar by the far left is a badge of honor, please proceed.

 

[ogibillm]

Thanks for proving my previous point.

She was personally appointed by the President to investigate it.

proof or be branded a liar.

If you need proof I suggest you find another news outlet to watch.

Done with you as well.

Cyas

here are the actual facts - she was appointed by the department of justice, not personally appointed by the president. the department of justice is prohibited from considering an invdividuals political leanings in personnel decisions - and either not considering or removing her from the investigation would have been a violation of the law.

so just so we're clear - Jarhead is a ******* liar.

 

[ogibillm]

Being branded a liar by the far left is a badge of honor, please proceed.

it's not 'the left' that has problems with his statements - it's reality.

frankly you should demand better yourself. if your case is strong enough, make it on its merits, don't invent and embellish just to strengthen it. and certainly don't repeat something because you head it somewhere without looking into it yourself.

 

[saveliberty]

Being branded a liar by the far left is a badge of honor, please proceed.

it's not 'the left' that has problems with his statements - it's reality.

frankly you should demand better yourself. if your case is strong enough, make it on its merits, don't invent and embellish just to strengthen it. and certainly don't repeat something because you head it somewhere without looking into it yourself.

Lerner is gone right? The IRS is not likely to repeat the offenses any time soon. I could care less what the left thinks about the topic at this point. She probably should go to jail, but that isn't up to me.

 

[ogibillm]

Being branded a liar by the far left is a badge of honor, please proceed.

it's not 'the left' that has problems with his statements - it's reality.

frankly you should demand better yourself. if your case is strong enough, make it on its merits, don't invent and embellish just to strengthen it. and certainly don't repeat something because you head it somewhere without looking into it yourself.

Lerner is gone right? The IRS is not likely to repeat the offenses any time soon. I could care less what the left thinks about the topic at this point. She probably should go to jail, but that isn't up to me.

that i think is the downside to the whole thing. i find it pretty probable that a lot of the organizations applying for 501c4 status likely did not work primarily for the public welfare but engaged almost solely in politics.

they will never be prosecuted though, because prosecution will quickly be equated to persecution - which may be what people like issa are after

 

[The Rabbi]

it's not 'the left' that has problems with his statements - it's reality.

frankly you should demand better yourself. if your case is strong enough, make it on its merits, don't invent and embellish just to strengthen it. and certainly don't repeat something because you head it somewhere without looking into it yourself.

Lerner is gone right? The IRS is not likely to repeat the offenses any time soon. I could care less what the left thinks about the topic at this point. She probably should go to jail, but that isn't up to me.

that i think is the downside to the whole thing. i find it pretty probable that a lot of the organizations applying for 501c4 status likely did not work primarily for the public welfare but engaged almost solely in politics.

they will never be prosecuted though, because prosecution will quickly be equated to persecution - which may be what people like issa are after

No one has suggested their applications would have been denied.
ANother lie from the Left.

Jarhead, I hope you see now that arguing with CarelessNall is futile. You can literally quote the black and white law and she will find some way to misconstrue it. There is no arguing with people like that.

 

[saveliberty]

I was more interested in poking liberal bears...

Silly bears.

 

[ogibillm]

Lerner is gone right? The IRS is not likely to repeat the offenses any time soon. I could care less what the left thinks about the topic at this point. She probably should go to jail, but that isn't up to me.

that i think is the downside to the whole thing. i find it pretty probable that a lot of the organizations applying for 501c4 status likely did not work primarily for the public welfare but engaged almost solely in politics.

they will never be prosecuted though, because prosecution will quickly be equated to persecution - which may be what people like issa are after

No one has suggested their applications would have been denied.
ANother lie from the Left.

i didn't say they should have been denied either, nor did i claim that anyone else had made that claim. i'm saying that i believe they will abuse their tax exempt status, and that on review it will be clear they do not primarily engage in social welfare activities.

but any attempt to prosecute them, or collect the owed taxes will be painted as persecution.

 

[The Rabbi]

that i think is the downside to the whole thing. i find it pretty probable that a lot of the organizations applying for 501c4 status likely did not work primarily for the public welfare but engaged almost solely in politics.

they will never be prosecuted though, because prosecution will quickly be equated to persecution - which may be what people like issa are after

No one has suggested their applications would have been denied.
ANother lie from the Left.

i didn't say they should have been denied either, nor did i claim that anyone else had made that claim. i'm saying that i believe they will abuse their tax exempt status, and that on review it will be clear they do not primarily engage in social welfare activities.

but any attempt to prosecute them, or collect the owed taxes will be painted as persecution.

Since you phrased your post as a factual in the past without proof rather than a supposition of what might happen your post is irrelevant and a total fail.
It doesnt matter what they might do in the future. Any org with an exemption might violate the terms of their exemption, as the NAACP did. That isnt a reason to deny them status or lay extra scrutiny on them intended to kneecap them before a national election.

 

[ogibillm]

No one has suggested their applications would have been denied.
ANother lie from the Left.

i didn't say they should have been denied either, nor did i claim that anyone else had made that claim. i'm saying that i believe they will abuse their tax exempt status, and that on review it will be clear they do not primarily engage in social welfare activities.

but any attempt to prosecute them, or collect the owed taxes will be painted as persecution.

Since you phrased your post as a factual in the past without proof rather than a supposition of what might happen your post is irrelevant and a total fail.
It doesnt matter what they might do in the future. Any org with an exemption might violate the terms of their exemption, as the NAACP did. That isnt a reason to deny them status or lay extra scrutiny on them intended to kneecap them before a national election.

well, no, i actually did phrase it as a supposition.

you are just really dumb.

 

[The Rabbi]

i didn't say they should have been denied either, nor did i claim that anyone else had made that claim. i'm saying that i believe they will abuse their tax exempt status, and that on review it will be clear they do not primarily engage in social welfare activities.

but any attempt to prosecute them, or collect the owed taxes will be painted as persecution.

Since you phrased your post as a factual in the past without proof rather than a supposition of what might happen your post is irrelevant and a total fail.
It doesnt matter what they might do in the future. Any org with an exemption might violate the terms of their exemption, as the NAACP did. That isnt a reason to deny them status or lay extra scrutiny on them intended to kneecap them before a national election.

well, no, i actually did phrase it as a supposition.

you are just really dumb.

You believe they will abuse their tax exempt status.
That is not a supposition but a statement of fact.

 

[ogibillm]

Since you phrased your post as a factual in the past without proof rather than a supposition of what might happen your post is irrelevant and a total fail.
It doesnt matter what they might do in the future. Any org with an exemption might violate the terms of their exemption, as the NAACP did. That isnt a reason to deny them status or lay extra scrutiny on them intended to kneecap them before a national election.

well, no, i actually did phrase it as a supposition.

you are just really dumb.

You believe they will abuse their tax exempt status.
That is not a supposition but a statement of fact.

it's a fact that i believe that, but it is a prediction on my part - a supposition. it cannot be supported with evidence of it happening by its nature of being a future event.

at worst you can call it ill-informed, poorly thought out, or even nearly impossible - but it cannot be called a lie.

this isn't that hard.

 

[The Rabbi]

well, no, i actually did phrase it as a supposition.

you are just really dumb.

You believe they will abuse their tax exempt status.
That is not a supposition but a statement of fact.

it's a fact that i believe that, but it is a prediction on my part - a supposition. it cannot be supported with evidence of it happening by its nature of being a future event.

at worst you can call it ill-informed, poorly thought out, or even nearly impossible - but it cannot be called a lie.

this isn't that hard.

Ok if you call it ill informed, poorly thought out or impossible then there isnt much I can add to discredit it.