IRS Required by Federal Judge to Explain Under Oath Where Lois Lerner’s Email Went

IRS - Copy

Is this the beginning of the unraveling of the IRS scandal?  Finally someone takes the side of the People.  The IRS must explain under oath how it “lost” Lois Lerner’s email. In addition, a federal judge has appointed a “federal magistrate” to investigate whether any of her email can be recovered.

Thank goodness for Judicial Watch and Judge Emmet G. Sullivan!

A federal judge on Thursday ordered the IRS to explain under oath how it lost a trove of emails to and from a central figure in the agency’s tea party controversy.

U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan gave the tax agency a month to submit the explanation in writing. Sullivan said he is also appointing a federal magistrate to see whether the lost emails can be obtained from other sources.

Sullivan issued the order as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group. He said the IRS declaration must be signed, under oath, by the appropriate IRS official.

“I’m going to hold tight to that Aug. 10 declaration,” Sullivan said.

We shall see. Now, maybe other judges will get the courage to follow Judge Sullivan’s lead. Will Judicial Watch ask the federal magistrate to look into the instant messaging system at the IRS, too? See here and here for insight into that new issue.

#####

Advertisements

89 responses to “IRS Required by Federal Judge to Explain Under Oath Where Lois Lerner’s Email Went

  1. GONE….. with the WIND….SLIPPING…? never noticed it B-4 ?
    MENTALLY… a BRAT in adult clothing… GET HIM RE-MOVED SOON !

    http://www.wnd.com/2014/07/forensic-profiler-obama-slipping-mentally/

  2. HOLDER…. IT’S NOT GOING 2 WORK …any LONGER… NOW-WHAT?
    what is your NEXT…. TRICK U can PLAY ON USA??? ON US!

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/212082-holder-sees-racial-animus-in-opposition

  3. Ldgreen Jr · Top Commenter ….2/20/14 .. (IS THIS TRUE?)
    I was studying the Bible looking for the origin of the Anglo-Saxon & Caucasian racial animus in their religious thinking but the answer is in the Latin or history of the Roman Catholic church. Papalbuls that ushered in the so called Christian age of discovery.
    My findings leave little doubt in my mind that it was the Roman Catholics, Templars, and Freemasons that appears to have created this Racial Animus from the foundation of the Black Christ crucified. The fact that the origin of the word is Latin points to the true history that was WhiteWashed out during the renaissance period. Racial strife in the U.S. & South Africa continued well into the 20th century & remains institutionalized in the criminal justice system despite having a ….bi-racial President/usurper
    & an African American Attorney General/(as a friend)….???

    • Anglo-Saxon & Caucasian racial animus in religious thinking? Black Christ crucified?

      First, this person needs to determine what “race” the various players are. Christ was black? Who knew? I thought he was Caucasian.

      Not all “whites” are Anglo-Saxon (or even Caucasian). Angles and Saxons were tribes within what some call the Caucasian “race”. (Where, then, do the Turks fall? Or Arabs or Jews?)

      How about the Iberians? Not Anglo-Saxon AT ALL.

      It’s this kind of lumping together of people into factions that causes all the trouble. Where does s/he get off saying that there’s racial animus in religious thinking, meaning, I suppose, Christian religion? (Or maybe s/he means Jews, too, since they also follow the Bible.)

      Most people would probably deduce that “racial animus” in the U.S. and South Africa stems from the slave trade in black Africans (initiated by Arabs with help from various tribes of blacks) to South Africa and the Americas. Certainly the Bible predates that particular slave trade, although there was plenty of slavery going on in the Bible, most of which had nothing to do with blacks (although there were black slaves, as well as white GERMANIC SLAVES, in Rome and Egypt).

      This person has an agenda and a conclusion for which s/he’s looking to find “proof”.

      The “origin of” WHAT word is Latin? Animus? The origin of the word SLAVE comes from the name for white people who WERE, at one time slaves, so that their very tribal name became synonymous with that condition of life. Some researcher.

  4. John (magnum) • 2 hours ago ~ Truth kills Obamabots !!
    ~ ~ The Corruption and Lies of KING Obama ~ ~
    Obamas IRS destroying evidence ~ DACA Amnesty ~ Common Core
    Opening border to gang members and drug dealers
    VA intentional deaths of veterans
    Negotiating with terrorists ~ Fast & Furious ~ SEAL Team 6
    Obama-care would save the avg family $2500 per year
    Forcing businesses to violate their religious beliefs
    Violating the rights and sanctity of our Churches
    Obama-care web site-cronyism
    NSA acting as Obama Gestapo ~ 17 Trillion in debt ~
    Lies about Benghazi ~ Voter fraud
    Intentionally trying to hurt Americans during the sequester
    Intentionally trying to hurt Americans during govt shutdown
    Blocking veterans from seeing their own memorials
    Allowing illegals on mall during govt shutdown
    Shutting down ‘The Peoples House’ tours
    We can keep our insurance if we like it
    We can keep our doctors if we like them
    Military not getting their votes counted
    Supporting the Muslim Brotherhood with arms and money
    DOJ spying on the free press

    >>>>>>>> NOT ~ SECURING ~ OUR ~ BORDERS ~ <<<<<<<<<

    Spying on Americans on American soil with drones
    SOLYNDRA
    Picking winners and losers
    IRS targeting conservatives
    IRS targeting the Tea Party
    Millions losing health care coverage
    Increasing welfare rolls ~ Increasing disability rolls ~ Countless party’s
    Countless exorbitant vacations ~ Releasing illegal’s from prison
    Unconstitutional recess appointment
    NO budget for 5 years ~ Clapper lying to congress
    Holder lying to congress
    Failing to prosecute the New Black Panther Reading our e-mail
    War on women ~ Promoting race war
    War between makers and takers ~ A123 Systems ~ Cash for clunkers

  5. Yes he did!!! 😆

  6. http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/IRS-Minute-Order-07.10.14.pdf

    That’s a link to the Judge’s order, for review. On August 10, nearly at the last minute, the IRS “responded” to the judge’s order. http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/IRS-Minute-Order-07.10.14.pdf

    “… The agency submitted five sworn declarations from IRS officials in an attempt to explain the missing emails. …

    In the declarations, agency technology officials insisted they did everything they could to fix and recover data from the hard drive of Lerner, who is a central figure in the investigation into the agency’s targeting of conservative groups. However, they said their efforts were fruitless, and some of Lerner’s emails were lost.

    A pair of IRS technicians said under oath that they tried unsuccessfully to recover data from former agency official Lois Lerner’s hard drive, according to new court documents released Monday.

    The two technicians who said they personally worked on Lerner’s hard drive, also declared that they didn’t see any signs of external physical damage on the hard drive.

    Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton said in a statement Monday that the agency’s explanations were unsatisfactory.

    “These sworn declarations delivered to the court today were to discuss what happened to Lois Lerner’s ‘lost’ emails and any other computer records reportedly lost by the IRS. This latest IRS filing seems to treat as a joke Judge Sullivan’s order requiring the IRS to produce details about Lois Lerner’s “lost” emails and any efforts to retrieve and produce them to Judicial Watch as required under law. Frankly, it seems the cover-up continues.”

    Judicial Watch has been authorized by Judge Sullivan to submit a request for limited discovery into the missing IRS records after September 10.

    On Fox News Business, Tuesday, Stuart Varney and Liz MacDonald discussed what the next move should [be] in the investigation.

    “The emails were sent out” before they were destroyed, Varney pointed out. “They’re on somebody else’s server or hard drive.”

    MacDonald said, “You ask for the Department of Justice hard drives, the Federal Election Commission hard drives…”

    “Well hasn’t the judge asked for that?” asked Varney.

    “That’s the question, MacDonald answered. She noted that the “idea has been out there” among Republicans in congress to “subpoena these agencies to fork over their hard drives. That’s where the push – you would think – would be.” …”

    There’s still Magistrate Judge John M. Facciola who was assigned by the judge to work WITH the IRS AND Judicial Watch to try to recover the email. No information on the status of that effort. I read the affidavits and none of the technicians talked at all about trying to RESTORE the email to her NEW hard drive from any backup tapes. They didn’t mention trying to go back to any backups CONCURRENTLY with trying to fix her hard drive. At that time, there SHOULD HAVE BEEN contemporaneous email on the servers and/or the backup tapes that they WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE to restore to her drive. They simply didn’t even mention a thing about it. They didn’t offer any rationale for WHY they didn’t go to the backups to retrieve her data. Now, either they documents were NOT email (were personal documents as she said in one of the email they did find) OR they were told NOT to get the email off the backups for some reason that we can guess OR they were too stupid to know where to get the email off the backups, which I don’t believe. The FACT that no mention was made of trying to do it at all probably is because they don’t want to admit that an order was given OR they don’t want to perjure themselves.

  7. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/08/white-house-caught-in-another-lie-lerners-emails-are-backed-up-but-doj-refuses-to-retrieve-them/

    “The Obama White House was just caught in another lie today according to Judicial Watch.

    Lois Lerner’s emails were not lost as was reported. All of her emails were backed up by the federal government. …”

    PEOPLE WHO KNOW, KNOW, AND HAVE KNOWN ALL ALONG. It’s basic technological procedure. They simply LIED by omission. We always knew that. I’ve been trying to find out what they told Judge Emmett Sullivan on Friday, the 22nd. So far, this is the first thing I saw. They just say it’s “too hard” to get them. Koskinen said as much, as I recall, and nobody called them on it. THEY’VE BEEN LYING ALL ALONG.

  8. http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2014/08/25/judicial-watch-claims-irs-attorneys-admit-missing-lois-lerners-emails-exist/

    “Department of Justice attorneys for the Internal Revenue Service told Judicial Watch on Friday that Lois Lerner’s emails, indeed all government computer records, are backed up by the federal government in case of a government-wide catastrophe.

    Fitton went on to say that those same attorneys have indicated that finding the emails would be too difficult but that the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) is investigating. …”

    So more of the same stonewalling and RUNNING OUT OF THE CLOCK. Of what use are backups if they’re not used to recover data UNDER SUBPOENA BY THE CONGRESS AND THE COURTS?

    This Judge Sullivan needs to seize those backups and appoint a special prosecutor to oversee getting the email off them, BEFORE THEY CONVENIENTLY “LOSE” THEM, TOO.

    • http://www.earnedmedia.org/judw0825.htm

      Judicial Watch’s statement on the “discovery” of backups. Excerpt:

      “The Obama administration attorneys said that this back-up system would be too onerous to search. The DOJ attorneys also acknowledged that the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) is investigating this back-up system.

      We obviously disagree that disclosing the emails as required would be onerous, and plan to raise this new development with Judge Sullivan.

      This is a jaw-dropping revelation. The Obama administration had been lying to the American people about Lois Lerner’s missing emails. There are no “missing” Lois Lerner emails — nor missing emails of any of the other top IRS or other government officials whose emails seem to be disappearing at increasingly alarming rate. All the focus on missing hard drives has been a diversion. The Obama administration has known all along where the email records could be — but dishonestly withheld this information. You can bet we are going to ask the court for immediate assistance in cutting through this massive obstruction of justice.”

      • http://www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/jw-v-irs-01559-executed-declarations/

        The depositions from the IRS that were required to be delivered to the judge on Friday.

        • http://observer.com/2014/08/irs-shocker-filing-reveals-lerner-blackberry-destroyed/

          “The IRS filing in federal Judge Emmet Sullivan’s court reveals shocking new information. The IRS destroyed Lerner’s Blackberry AFTER it knew her computer had crashed and after a Congressional inquiry was well underway. As an IRS official declared under the penalty of perjury, the destroyed Blackberry would have contained the same emails (both sent and received) as Lois Lerner’s hard drive. …”

          Surely that’s just another coincidence, huh? That’s not how things work in state government. Equipment is warehoused and nearly impossible to dispose of. What? The Blackberry was so out of date that they just destroyed it? They couldn’t have tried to sell it to get some value back for the taxpayers who bought it? Spoliation of evidence. That’s a CRIME.

          Now we need a tech expert to answer questions about Microsoft Outlook. The emails were on her Blackberry. They were also on her laptop (and some were allegedly lost). They were also on the server for a time, until SHE herself downloaded them to her laptop and/or Blackberry and deleted the version on the server to save space because, allegedly, the IRS servers were short on space.

          But when they put the new hard drive into her laptop, as soon as she connected to the server all her current email would be loaded to the new hard drive on her laptop. Then wouldn’t she have been able to somehow go to her Blackberry and synchronize/recover the missing emails, or would those not have been on her Blackberry? I would think they’d be there, unless she ALSO deleted them deliberately from her Blackberry.

          Doesn’t the software synchronize the email on all the various devices a person uses? Do Blackberrys STORE email, like laptops can and do, or do they only exist on the server and not on the Blackberry unless connected to the server? IOW, is it possible to “work offline” on email on a Blackberry?

          The sworn statement of the IRS tech guy (Manning) says that sent and received emails are stored on the server and on the Blackberry. He also says that drafts can exist on the Blackberry and not on the server until they are sent. So it does appear that one can work offline on a Blackberry.

          Is it likely that they never went to backups to restore email because none have ever really been “lost” until they hit on the idea to use the hard drive crash as a smokescreen for either not turning over the email or to cover for the fact that they are already deleted/destroyed to avoid Congress seeing them?

          The deposition clearly does NOT answer whether or not backup tapes exist and why they didn’t AT THE TIME try to recover her email from them. My opinion is that they didn’t do it because it wasn’t NECESSARY as the emails were automatically “recovered” from either the server or the Blackberry when the new drive was first booted up. Am I thinking wrong?

          Knowing that her laptop had crashed, even so they responded to the Congress via searching only her laptop, which they KNEW was missing emails. They could have concurrently looked on her Blackberry for the missing email, but they didn’t.

          She apparently turned in that Blackberry for a different Blackberry, which was given to her on Feb. 14, 2012, according to the sworn statement. Their inspector has the newer Blackberry. Her old Blackberry was wiped and destroyed in June 2012, so 4 months after she got a new one.

          Here’s what was going on at that time: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-irs-targeting-controversy-a-timeline/

          “Jan. 25, 2012: IRS changes standard for identifying organizations that require additional scrutiny, now flagging for “political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding Government, educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, social economic reform movement,” according to the inspector general’s report.

          March 22, 2012: IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman testified the agency did not increase difficulty for politically active groups to get tax exempt status at the House Ways and Means Committee. The Ways and Means Oversight subcommittee chairman, Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La., called the hearing after he heard complaints from tea party groups about harassment from the IRS.

          May 3, 2012: Then-deputy commissioner Steven Miller was first told about the extra scrutiny for tea party groups; he made no mention of this during a House hearing on July 25.

          June 15, 2012: Boustany receives a letter from Miller who writes the agency “took steps to coordinate the handling of the case to ensure consistency.”

          July 25, 2012: Miller testified to the House Ways and Means Committee without mentioning the additional scrutiny. When Rep. Kenny Marchant, R-Texas, asked Miller about harassment complaints from politically active tax-exempt associations, Miller said the IRS “group[ed] those organizations” for “consistency” and “quality.” Neither man mentioned the tea party.”

          So looks a little fishy, huh?

          Here’s something else which is suspicious. Are they lying more by omission, again? In the text of the statement, Stephen Manning says that the second Blackberry was issued to Lerner on 2/14/2012. If you look at Exhibit A, there’s a date there for what I assume is the retirement of the old Blackberry. It says 2/14/2011. So either it’s a typo, misreading on his part, or an amazing coincidence (or I’m misreading the form).

          If the date he gave for the issuance of the second Blackberry to Lerner, which is the device that the Inspector General has, is correct, then what did Lerner use for a Blackberry device from 2/14/2011 to 2/14/2012? Is there ANOTHER Blackberry?

          What prompted her to get a new Blackberry, anyway? Was it a mass issuance of Blackberrys? Do they do it annually on Feb. 14?

          Why did they supply in an exhibit the paperwork for the first Blackberry but NOT the second one? Is this a complete listing of all Blackberrys Lerner ever had, or are these guys swearing only to the information they’re supplying and not that this is all there is to supply?

          I can’t make out the title of the box where the 2/14/2011 date is typed. Can you? There’s a box on that paperwork where they’re supposed to fill in the date disposed as well as another for the date last connected. WHY are those two boxes left blank?

          Her hard drive allegedly crashed in June 2011. It’s important to know when the old Blackberry was turned in for destruction. Either Feb. 14, 2011 OR Feb.14, 2012. Which is it?

          If 2011, and if she didn’t get a new Blackberry until the following Feb. 2012, then in June 2011 she would have no backup on any Blackberry of her missing emails from her hard drive, so they wouldn’t have been synchronized or downloaded from the Blackberry or recoverable from it.

          If she DID have a Blackberry then, then where is it if the second one noted by the sworn statements wasn’t issued until Feb. 2012 and if the first was turned in on Feb. 14, 2011 (provided I’m reading that paperwork correctly)?

          If she had a Blackberry in June 2011 that contained her email, then it seems to me that email would have just somehow been reloaded to her laptop.

          So is this a mistake or someone trying to misdirect? Or am I misreading the paperwork?

          • As if that’s not enough, I THINK (don’t know if I’m right) that there are two servers involved. One is a Blackberry server and another is the Microsoft/IRS server. Right? Blackberry is like the phone company, supplying the service. The email passes through. Right? So NSA ought to have them, as well as perhaps Blackberry. Ya think? They ought to subpoena the records. Surely the software company and phone company would welcome an opportunity to work with government and serve the PEOPLE.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s