If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   IRS tells GOP to go to China to buy back Lerner's disk drive   (foxnews.com) divider line 191
    More: Followup, Lois Lerner, GOP, IRS, Sen. Orrin Hatch, Senate Finance Committee, House committees, self-incriminations, House Ways and Means Committee  
•       •       •

2530 clicks; posted to Politics » on 19 Jun 2014 at 2:09 PM (22 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



191 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-19 11:57:51 AM  
"The IRS was able to recover 24,000 Lerner emails from 2009 to 2011 because Lerner had copied in other IRS employees. The agency said it pieced together the emails from the computers of 83 other IRS employees."

But they're totally not trying and it's a cover-up.
 
2014-06-19 12:09:48 PM  
BENGHAZI!
 
2014-06-19 12:27:14 PM  
If this isn't a cover-up, then this whole thing has unveiled some startling incompetency in one of our government's most powerful and important agencies. It's not good either way.
 
2014-06-19 12:38:27 PM  
So, TFA uses the word scandal.

What is the actual scandal here? Is the IRS actually scrutinizing what are ostensibly political organization's requests for tax-exempt status before improperly rubberstamping them the scandal? Because, rubber stamp aside, shouldn't organizations like JOES REPUBLICAN TEA PARTY FOR BEATING DEMOCRAT COMMIES really political, and not social welfare orgs?

I'm certain that they should all be considered farking political and only political operations. Open a goddamn soup kitchen and donate shiat to poor people or maybe provide some reasonable health counseling or something, ANYTHING, if you want to be considered a social welfare org. Dumb shiats.
 
2014-06-19 12:43:55 PM  

dr_blasto: So, TFA uses the word scandal.

What is the actual scandal here? Is the IRS actually scrutinizing what are ostensibly political organization's requests for tax-exempt status before improperly rubberstamping them the scandal? Because, rubber stamp aside, shouldn't organizations like JOES REPUBLICAN TEA PARTY FOR BEATING DEMOCRAT COMMIES really political, and not social welfare orgs?

I'm certain that they should all be considered farking political and only political operations. Open a goddamn soup kitchen and donate shiat to poor people or maybe provide some reasonable health counseling or something, ANYTHING, if you want to be considered a social welfare org. Dumb shiats.


Well, now the scandal is that the IRS hasn't been properly complying with it's record retention policy, probably as a result of advancing technology, mostly stationary law, insufficient funding, and stupid policy writing that ineffectively tries to bridge the gaps between those.
 
2014-06-19 01:39:36 PM  

incendi: dr_blasto: So, TFA uses the word scandal.

What is the actual scandal here? Is the IRS actually scrutinizing what are ostensibly political organization's requests for tax-exempt status before improperly rubberstamping them the scandal? Because, rubber stamp aside, shouldn't organizations like JOES REPUBLICAN TEA PARTY FOR BEATING DEMOCRAT COMMIES really political, and not social welfare orgs?

I'm certain that they should all be considered farking political and only political operations. Open a goddamn soup kitchen and donate shiat to poor people or maybe provide some reasonable health counseling or something, ANYTHING, if you want to be considered a social welfare org. Dumb shiats.

Well, now the scandal is that the IRS hasn't been properly complying with it's record retention policy, probably as a result of advancing technology, mostly stationary law, insufficient funding, and stupid policy writing that ineffectively tries to bridge the gaps between those.


So you're saying that we should de-fund the IRS in order to make them comply, right?
 
2014-06-19 01:41:28 PM  

kronicfeld: So you're saying that we should de-fund the IRS in order to make them comply, right?


No, clearly the solution is to cut taxes for the rich, in order to lighten their workload.
 
2014-06-19 01:47:09 PM  

dr_blasto: What is the actual scandal here?


President = near
 
2014-06-19 01:52:58 PM  
GOP fury

All the headline needed pretty much ever.
 
2014-06-19 02:13:39 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: BENGHAZI!


EMAILGAZI!
 
2014-06-19 02:13:51 PM  
Yeah, Republicans hate recycling.
 
2014-06-19 02:15:24 PM  
I get a kick out of the 500MB mailbox limit which forces people to find other things to do with email they need to keep.  The old "put it into an archive folder on your hard drive" trick.  My company informally endorses this technique too, much to my protestations.

Or you could store email on a server designed to store email.  Radical idea.
 
2014-06-19 02:16:24 PM  

Nabb1: If this isn't a cover-up, then this whole thing has unveiled some startling incompetency in one of our government's most powerful and important agencies. It's not good either way.


Oddly enough, programs that aren't properly funded, and have powerful idiots trying to stop them from doing their job at every turn, don't work well.

Film at 11.
 
2014-06-19 02:17:42 PM  
What government agency keeps the emails on the local client hard drive, instead of on the email server, anyway?
 
2014-06-19 02:18:33 PM  

incendi: dr_blasto: So, TFA uses the word scandal.

What is the actual scandal here? Is the IRS actually scrutinizing what are ostensibly political organization's requests for tax-exempt status before improperly rubberstamping them the scandal? Because, rubber stamp aside, shouldn't organizations like JOES REPUBLICAN TEA PARTY FOR BEATING DEMOCRAT COMMIES really political, and not social welfare orgs?

I'm certain that they should all be considered farking political and only political operations. Open a goddamn soup kitchen and donate shiat to poor people or maybe provide some reasonable health counseling or something, ANYTHING, if you want to be considered a social welfare org. Dumb shiats.

Well, now the scandal is that the IRS hasn't been properly complying with it's record retention policy, probably as a result of advancing technology, mostly stationary law, insufficient funding, and stupid policy writing that ineffectively tries to bridge the gaps between those.


They haven't even been complying with the policy they require of the rest of us.  But if it makes Democrats feel better to go on warbling about Republicans being stupid, then please have fun.  I can't wait to see the results of the Democrat Party DEFENDING one of the most hated institutions in this country.
 
2014-06-19 02:18:50 PM  
"Official records, like the e-mails of a prominent official, don't just disappear without a trace unless that was the intention."

Hey Issa maybe you need to investigate this then:

Bush White House email controversy

The Bush White House email controversy surfaced in 2007, during the controversy involving the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys. Congressional requests for administration documents while investigating the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys required the Bush administration to reveal that not all internal White House emails were available, because they were sent via a non-government domain hosted on an email server not controlled by the federal government. Conducting governmental business in this manner is a possible violation of the Presidential Records Act of 1978, and the Hatch Act.[1] Over 5 million emails may have been lost or deleted.[2][3] Greg Palast claims to have come up with 500 of the Karl Rove lost emails, leading to damaging allegations.[4] In 2009, it was announced that as many as 22 million emails may have been deleted.[5]
 
2014-06-19 02:18:54 PM  
This may be the only way to get Issa out of the country. TAKE IT!
 
2014-06-19 02:19:23 PM  

Nabb1: If this isn't a cover-up, then this whole thing has unveiled some startling incompetency in one of our government's most powerful and important agencies. It's not good either way.


It actually a bigger scandal that the IRS cannot retrieve emails from 2011 from such a high ranking officer.  If a company could not reproduce these they would be facing extensive fines and most likely criminal prosecution.

I just don't see how it was possible in 2011 that IRS policy was to store email locally on a Desktop\Laptop.  The overhead both in physical storage space and users time is unfathomable.

This from an org who's IT budget in 2012 was $1.8Billion
http://www.irs.gov/PUP/newsroom/FY%202014%20Budget%20in%20Brief.pdf
 
2014-06-19 02:19:49 PM  

glassa: I can't wait to see the results of the Democrat Party DEFENDING one of the most hated institutions in this country.


What congress?
 
2014-06-19 02:20:13 PM  

SoupGuru: I get a kick out of the 500MB mailbox limit which forces people to find other things to do with email they need to keep.  The old "put it into an archive folder on your hard drive" trick.  My company informally endorses this technique too, much to my protestations.

Or you could store email on a server designed to store email.  Radical idea.


To be fair, I'm sure the IRS handles a mind-bogglingly massive amount of email on a daily basis.  If Congress wants the IRS to have reliable long-term storage for that load, they're going to have to shell out for it.
 
2014-06-19 02:20:19 PM  

KeatingFive: Nabb1: If this isn't a cover-up, then this whole thing has unveiled some startling incompetency in one of our government's most powerful and important agencies. It's not good either way.

Oddly enough, programs that aren't properly funded, and have powerful idiots trying to stop them from doing their job at every turn, don't work well.

Film at 11.


Yes give them more money so they can pay out even more bonuses to their employees who commit tax fraud

At least they weren't getting paid extra for killing people at this agency
 
2014-06-19 02:20:27 PM  

Nicholas D. Wolfwood: What government agency keeps the emails on the local client hard drive, instead of on the email server, anyway?


Ones without enough email storage capacity on their email server.  A server doesn't have this infinite amount of space, and when you pile as many employees as the IRS has onto a single server (or group of servers), that space depletes quickly.  I'm not saying they should get a pass for not buying more equipment if they had the budget to do so, but I am saying I completely understand that balance between technological needs and wants.
 
2014-06-19 02:20:34 PM  

incendi: "The IRS was able to recover 24,000 Lerner emails from 2009 to 2011 because Lerner had copied in other IRS employees. The agency said it pieced together the emails from the computers of 83 other IRS employees."

But they're totally not trying and it's a cover-up.


Yeah, its the emails between Lerner and the white house that contain the silver bullet.  The GOP doesn't care about the emails between Lerner and IRS employees.  They want the emails between Lerner and the White House.

The IRS can recover your grandparents old task return, determine they owe the IRS money, use that information to track YOU down, and ask YOU pay up, but they can't recover Lerner's emails from 2011.

This isn't an administration.  This is a criminal enterprise.

Not even a smidgeon.
 
2014-06-19 02:20:44 PM  

TheManMythLegend: Nabb1: If this isn't a cover-up, then this whole thing has unveiled some startling incompetency in one of our government's most powerful and important agencies. It's not good either way.

It actually a bigger scandal that the IRS cannot retrieve emails from 2011 from such a high ranking officer.  If a company could not reproduce these they would be facing extensive fines and most likely criminal prosecution.

I just don't see how it was possible in 2011 that IRS policy was to store email locally on a Desktop\Laptop.  The overhead both in physical storage space and users time is unfathomable.

This from an org who's IT budget in 2012 was $1.8Billion
http://www.irs.gov/PUP/newsroom/FY%202014%20Budget%20in%20Brief.pdf


Well the Bush whitehouse stored them on non-government private servers.
 
2014-06-19 02:22:18 PM  

SoupGuru: I get a kick out of the 500MB mailbox limit which forces people to find other things to do with email they need to keep.  The old "put it into an archive folder on your hard drive" trick.  My company informally endorses this technique too, much to my protestations.

Or you could store email on a server designed to store email.  Radical idea.


It saves money to buy each user bigger hard drives to store data instead of having de-duplicated on a common email datastore.
 
2014-06-19 02:24:04 PM  

TheManMythLegend: It saves money to buy each user bigger hard drives to store data instead of having de-duplicated on a common email datastore.


It all depends on your data-retention policy. Depending on what it is you might not be needing to buy them bigger drives. Because you max out their storage and the user must delete what he thinks he should.
 
2014-06-19 02:24:55 PM  

SoupGuru: I get a kick out of the 500MB mailbox limit which forces people to find other things to do with email they need to keep.  The old "put it into an archive folder on your hard drive" trick.  My company informally endorses this technique too, much to my protestations.

Or you could store email on a server designed to store email.  Radical idea.


what about those BACKUP thingies ?
or .... Gmail for businesses ??
 
2014-06-19 02:25:03 PM  
hub.tv-ark.org.uk

OBAMA TAKES A CRAP AND DOESN'T PUT THE TOILET SEAT BACK DOWN! REPUBLICANS CALL FOR IMPEACHMENT FOR TOILETGATEGAZI.

NEXT: IOWA MAN CLAIMS OBAMA DOESN'T WASH HANDS AFTER PEEING. WHAT WILL THIS MEAN FOR THE STOCK MARKET? FOLLOWED BY CANCER: YOU HAVE IT, A SPECIAL REPORT BY GERALDO RIVERA.
 
2014-06-19 02:25:04 PM  
Witch hunt not going as planned, Republicans?

Boo hoo.
 
2014-06-19 02:25:26 PM  

Phoenix87ta: SoupGuru: I get a kick out of the 500MB mailbox limit which forces people to find other things to do with email they need to keep.  The old "put it into an archive folder on your hard drive" trick.  My company informally endorses this technique too, much to my protestations.

Or you could store email on a server designed to store email.  Radical idea.

To be fair, I'm sure the IRS handles a mind-bogglingly massive amount of email on a daily basis.  If Congress wants the IRS to have reliable long-term storage for that load, they're going to have to shell out for it.


Oh, I'm totally with you on that.  If you want to be able to ensure that you have emails available down the road, you've got to have the infrastructure to do so.  It doesn't sound like they did when they limited employees to a 500MB mailbox.
 
2014-06-19 02:25:37 PM  

Nabb1: If this isn't a cover-up, then this whole thing has unveiled some startling incompetency in one of our government's most powerful and important agencies. It's not good either way.


Good backup solutions cost money. You want to be the one who has to ask for a budget increase for the least popular agency, ever, so they can get an adequate backup system?
 
2014-06-19 02:26:00 PM  
FTFADarrell Issa

eatdrinkbetter.com
 
2014-06-19 02:26:41 PM  

Tomahawk513: Nicholas D. Wolfwood: What government agency keeps the emails on the local client hard drive, instead of on the email server, anyway?

Ones without enough email storage capacity on their email server.  A server doesn't have this infinite amount of space, and when you pile as many employees as the IRS has onto a single server (or group of servers), that space depletes quickly.  I'm not saying they should get a pass for not buying more equipment if they had the budget to do so, but I am saying I completely understand that balance between technological needs and wants.


good thing that disk space keeps getting more and more expensive.
no wait, that doesnt sound right

/dont get me started about enterprise storage versus desktop storage
 
2014-06-19 02:26:58 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: FTFA:  Darrell Issa

[eatdrinkbetter.com image 640x425]


Darrell Issa is one of those people that if he got raped by a wolf I wouldn't feel sorry for him.
 
2014-06-19 02:27:25 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: FTFA:  Darrell Issa

[eatdrinkbetter.com image 640x425]


Darrell Issa is like Captain Ahab in search of a scandal.  Normally I wouldn't care, but I help fund his perpetually fruitless expeditions.
 
2014-06-19 02:27:34 PM  
"Comments are currently closed for this article "

What point is there to link to a Fox News site, if only to read its comment section?
 
2014-06-19 02:27:40 PM  

Corvus: TheManMythLegend: Nabb1: If this isn't a cover-up, then this whole thing has unveiled some startling incompetency in one of our government's most powerful and important agencies. It's not good either way.

It actually a bigger scandal that the IRS cannot retrieve emails from 2011 from such a high ranking officer.  If a company could not reproduce these they would be facing extensive fines and most likely criminal prosecution.

I just don't see how it was possible in 2011 that IRS policy was to store email locally on a Desktop\Laptop.  The overhead both in physical storage space and users time is unfathomable.

This from an org who's IT budget in 2012 was $1.8Billion
http://www.irs.gov/PUP/newsroom/FY%202014%20Budget%20in%20Brief.pdf

Well the Bush whitehouse stored them on non-government private servers.


I take it that you were cool with it at the time?
 
2014-06-19 02:28:17 PM  
there's got to be some kind of shenanigans afoot here, obviously there was something shady going on. That said it might have nothing to do with the supposed targeting of conservative groups.
 
2014-06-19 02:28:44 PM  
Fair Tax: An ounce of prevention against tyrannical incompetence.
 
2014-06-19 02:28:55 PM  

hardinparamedic: Lee Jackson Beauregard: FTFA:  Darrell Issa

[eatdrinkbetter.com image 640x425]

Darrell Issa is one of those people that if he got raped by a wolf I wouldn't feel sorry for him.


Why a wolf? What about a pony? How have you been? :)
 
2014-06-19 02:29:03 PM  

namatad: SoupGuru: I get a kick out of the 500MB mailbox limit which forces people to find other things to do with email they need to keep.  The old "put it into an archive folder on your hard drive" trick.  My company informally endorses this technique too, much to my protestations.

Or you could store email on a server designed to store email.  Radical idea.

what about those BACKUP thingies ?
or .... Gmail for businesses ??


They're basically required to use servers the government owns, so they can't contract third parties for this purpose.
 
2014-06-19 02:29:08 PM  

Nabb1: If this isn't a cover-up, then this whole thing has unveiled some startling incompetency in one of our government's most powerful and important agencies. It's not good either way.


Just like the last time it happened. And the time before that.

There's also the fact that, though the law treats electronic records identically to paper ones, the non-law policies that agencies put in place rely on their users to know this, and to take their own steps to follow them.

A user, who wouldn't know the difference between "OST", "OSS", "OGG", and "OPP", is supposed to archive their own mailbox once it gets too big, is supposed to know where to store all their archives, and is relied on to follow these procedures without any checks whatsoever? Yeah, that's not a recipe for "Who the hell actually thought this was workable" stew.

// firsthand experience with this at DoD
 
2014-06-19 02:29:17 PM  

Richard Saunders: Fair Tax: An ounce of prevention against tyrannical incompetence.


Oh, this'll be good.

Tell us more about this Fair Tax?
 
2014-06-19 02:29:25 PM  
cdn.memegenerator.net
 
2014-06-19 02:29:55 PM  

Nicholas D. Wolfwood: What government agency keeps the emails on the local client hard drive, instead of on the email server, anyway?


Any that allows the creation of PSTs in Outlook. Like at my job. :(

/email admin
 
2014-06-19 02:30:13 PM  

Headso: supposed targeting of conservative groups.



"Supposed."
 
2014-06-19 02:30:38 PM  

Headso: there's got to be some kind of shenanigans afoot here, obviously there was something shady going on. That said it might have nothing to do with the supposed targeting of conservative groups.


If it was shenanigans, they wouldn't have bothered to piece together the emails they did. This is probably just a case of bad/incompetent IT infrastructure.
 
2014-06-19 02:30:42 PM  

qorkfiend: namatad: SoupGuru: I get a kick out of the 500MB mailbox limit which forces people to find other things to do with email they need to keep.  The old "put it into an archive folder on your hard drive" trick.  My company informally endorses this technique too, much to my protestations.

Or you could store email on a server designed to store email.  Radical idea.

what about those BACKUP thingies ?
or .... Gmail for businesses ??

They're basically required to use servers the government owns, so they can't contract third parties for this purpose.


Unless it's Republican administration using non-government servers, then it's peachy.
 
2014-06-19 02:31:12 PM  

dr_blasto: So, TFA uses the word scandal.

What is the actual scandal here?


www.boyculture.com
 
2014-06-19 02:31:22 PM  

hardinparamedic: Richard Saunders: Fair Tax: An ounce of prevention against tyrannical incompetence.

Oh, this'll be good.

Tell us more about this Fair Tax?


I have a much better and equally workable tax code, I call it Awesome Tax, we each put in 1 dollar per year and we all get 10,000,000 dollar refunds.
 
Displayed 50 of 191 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report