If it was only the IRS there wouldn’t be an issue. It’s that he’s had problems pop up in many departments, and in all cases he was unaware of the problems until he read about them in the media that has destroyed his credibility.
What? There’s more? You mean hiring a crappy website developer? Yeah, that’s something Lincoln would never have done. Troubles with the VA? That’s a legitimate gripe. I swear, people think that just because the government employs tens of thousands of people that the president doesn’t have time to personally vet each and every employee and check with them hourly to make sure they’re doing their job.
You’re spouting political phrases like “political capital” and “lame duck” like you’re a Mark-Halperinesque hack, but you don’t seem to have any idea what they actually mean.
Now it’s Palinesque gibberish. Just because the voices in your head are constantly interpreting every piece of news as “Obama bad; Obama’s fault” doesn’t mean you have to post about it.
Pardon me, but I thought he’s a lame duck because he’s serving out the final years in an office wherein term limits preclude him from running for re-election.
Update: It’s now being reported that the IRS disposed of the hard drive on Lerner’s computer. This is looking more & more like an obvious coverup, and if this report is true then I’d have to lay odds that somebody will end up in prison.
Get ready to hear some entertaining apologetics. Let the sputtering and the raveling of the Gordion Knots commence!
But they don’t. Haven’t you been following the VA scandal? The government doesn’t buy new computer systems for unpopular departments. One of the VA people testified that there ‘appointment software’ booked it’s first appointment in the '80’s and it hadn’t been significantly upgraded since then.
Heck even your average office computer is probably not ‘top of the line’ stuff. No, it was lower shelf stuff from 5 years ago. I do temp work and the last place I worked my workstation ran on Windows XP. They had three computers, one for the boss, one for the supervisor and one for the temp and they were not going to upgrade the temp station anytime soon.
The IRS is underfunded. This is done so it can’t go after huge companies who have tons of lawyers.
I think a logical explanation is that IRS computers contain a lot of sensitive material and that destroying hard drives of outdated computers is someone’s full time job. If the hard drive had not been destroyed and was stolen and there was a rash of identity theft, there’d be outrage that such an elementary precaution as destroying hard drives was not done.
We’re still looking at a “scandal” that harmed absolutely nobody.
More bad reporting. The article says both discarded and recycled, cannot be both.
It is a standard practice to destroy hard drives when the computer is discarded. The hard drive could still have sensitive data that could be recovered by an unauthorized party if not properly destroyed.
When people leave a company, it is common practice to re-image a computer for the next user. This is done when the computer is still functioning but the operating system is out of date. The re-image is removing all software on a computer and reinstalling everything. Everything from the previous user would be wiped out.
In my company, though, the computer and\or hard drive would kept if there were any hint that it contained data that might be subpoenaed or otherwise needed for any legal proceeding. That it wasn’t does seem suspicious to me, like they are hiding something…
If the hard drive doesn’t work, though (and after you’ve tried all manner of data recovery, without success) then you have rather more than a hint that it will be useless in any kind of legal proceeding. Does your company keep hard drives that it KNOWS are unreadable and will be unresponsive in event of subpoena? (What’s on the drive doesn’t matter if you can’t get it off the drive.)
Short answer, yes. If it may requested in any kind of legal procedure, even if damaged beyond repair, we could still produce the drive.
“Here is is! Good luck getting anything off of it!”
Why wouldn’t you hold on to it? It costs you nothing to hold on to it. You lose no money. You do not lose credibility. It doesn’t take up much space. You can comply with a court order. As opposed to destroying it…you lose credibility. I don’t know how much work the legal team would have to do, if any.
Let me say that I am Democrat. The excuses given by the IRS arouse suspicion. Sure, it’s possible that the hard drive crashed, and crashed to a point where nothing could be recovered. It’s possible the only records were on that one and only computer. Its possible that the IT department just tossed it. I could easily accept that ONE of these three things happened. All three, I… gotta call bullshit.
You understand that my main criticism has been of you and your obnoxious accusations of hypocrisy; as long as you continue to make the thread about that, you’ll make it not be about what actually happened. Is that your intent, to distract from what’s actually happening?
For myself, that’s a pretty disturbing update.
HA!. You might want to go back to Page 1 and review, paying particular attention to your ridiculous, asinine response to my initial observation and comment, Post #16. You can continue on from there and be entertained by your astounding confusion as to what constitutes a claim, a question, and a hypothetical. Not to mention your attempt to shift said burden to me to count posts in some past thread. Until you realized that that thread didn’t even exist? EGAD, man! As they say, at some point, you put down the shovel and stop digging. I thought that might have dawned on you but here you are again, shovel in hand. :rolleyes:
Given this activity by you, I’m sure you can understand that I’m more than a little reluctant to be giving one scintilla of credence to anything you may or may not find disturbing.
So I mean, not to pick on you, but if you’re going to keep harping on my not knowing the difference between a claim and a question, I’ll go all third grade teacher on you and suggest next time that you end questions with, y’know, a question mark. Not that that would have turned it into an actual question–I know a rhetorical question when I see one–but at least it would’ve been grammatically correct then.
Seriously? I mean, seriously? Your point was that there’d be a thread on the topic with many thousands of posts. And now you’re acting like the nonexistence of the thread is a point against me. Duuuuuude.
Posts like this are why using your irony meter on the Internet voids its warranty.
Meanwhile, Stop the presses!
Club for Growth is a 501(c)(4) organization–exactly the sort of organization that was waltzing up to that line between issues advocacy and campaigning. Lo and behold, they’d crossed the line, as had other groups.
Quelle surprise.
Neither did the Watergate break in. Do you have such a flippant attitude towards that scandal?
What about a politician who takes bribes in return for a “victimless” vote in Congress? Are you once again so flippant about those scandals?
The Watergate break in was an effort to change an election; the only reason it didn’t harm the nation was because it failed.
This scandal does not appear to have been an effort to change an election; it appears to have been an incompetent attempt to address a very real and very harmful problem. The most it could harm anyone was to send them unpleasant letters: nobody had their status denied, and everyone affected by it was able to continue conducting business exactly as usual. It takes “harmless” to a new level.
Again, those aren’t harmless in the way that the IRS’s actions here were harmless.
This is not an apt analogy. What you have described are actual crimes, punishable by jail. If someone breaks into your house, even if they steal nothing, are not harmed?
Extra scrutiny from an IRS official based on political leanings is not criminal. It is reprehensible and cause for dismissal, but not criminal.
Out of curiosity, is this correct? My (admittedly very limited) understanding is that if it were actually an attempt to use the IRS’s office to influence an election through intimidation or denial of status, that was a crime. The reason nobody’s been prosecuted is because nobody’s been shown to have committed deliberate political bias, instead trying in an incompetent way to address the real problem that WI prosecutors are now addressing in a much more competent fashion.
The only scandal here is Darrell Issa and crew spending millions of dollars for nothing but a partisan attack on the president. The only reason the congressional hearings have gone on for over a year is the same reason Benghazi has dragged on and on and on: pin the tail on the donkey.
The GOP national committee should have to foot the bill for all these phony scandals. Issa should be hung.