ADVERTISEMENT

"Not even a smidgen of corruption"

Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:


The Inspector General has been investigating this issue (missing emails) since June or July of last year. There has always been the potential for criminal activity. You keep saying something recently has changed. Nothing has changed. It's the same investigation that has been going on since last summer.

It's not ME that's saying the criminal investigation is new -- it's many different news sources. So you think all of these news agencies are wrong? I've already linked a number of them - and it's easy to find more. But I don't get why you're clinging to the idea that nothing has changed.

IRS Opens Criminal Inquiry into 'Lost' Lois Lerner Emails Newsmax.com

Lerner's lost emails prompted a new round of scrutiny by Congress, and a new investigation by the inspector general's office. ABC news

ACLJ Calls For Independent Prosecutor As IRS Inspector General Reveals Criminal Investigation Now Underway In IRS Targeting Scheme Yahoo News
Yes, I think they are wrong. Or you don't understand them. Show me in the ABC article where it says there is a new investigation.

Or show me any kind of official statement by TIGTA that they have started a criminal investigation that is separate from the ongoing investigation that has been taking place since last summer. It seems like all there is is Camus just saying there is potential for criminal activity.
 
Originally posted by gusto79:

Yes, I think they are wrong. Or you don't understand them. Show me in the ABC article where it says there is a new investigation.

Or show me any kind of official statement by TIGTA that they have started a criminal investigation that is separate from the ongoing investigation that has been taking place since last summer. It seems like all there is is Camus just saying there is potential for criminal activity.
Do you have any background with investigations at the federal level?
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:


The backup are of the server. The backups are from Nov 2012. They need backups from before June 2011. That is where over a year comes from.
Saying the backups are "from Nov 2012" doesn't mean anything. What time period are they supposed to have covered? They clearly aren't one month's worth of backups. And isn't the new Lois Lerner email supposed to be from those backup tapes? (it was written in June 2011)



This post was edited on 3/1 8:03 AM by Metuo Accipiter
No, this email is not from the backups. This was presented during the hearing by one of the congressmen. TIGTA hasn't given any emails to the committee yet. Oversight has had this email for some time and must be one proved earlier by IRS.

The backups would contain Lerner's entire email inbox as of Nov 2012. They had 5 different backups from 5 sequential weeks from Nov and Dec of 2012. They said they had emails going back to 2001. The whole issue with the missing emails is that they were emails that were moved off the server to Lerner's local hard drive. That is what the IRS has said they can't produce. Her hard drive crashed in June 2011. The missing emails would have been moved off the server to her local computer before June 2011. That's why I'm saying these backups wouldn't have the missing emails. These are backups of her account after the emails had been removed. Does that make sense?

I wouldn't be surprised if they find emails from these backups that hadn't previously been provided by the IRS. I bet there will be emails that were deleted at some point and not saved to her local computer that they find. Something like if she got an email in Nov 2012 and deleted it in Jan 2013. Although that might be out of the time frame they are looking for. But what they won't find is the emails missing because of her computer crash.
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:

Yes, I think they are wrong. Or you don't understand them. Show me in the ABC article where it says there is a new investigation.

Or show me any kind of official statement by TIGTA that they have started a criminal investigation that is separate from the ongoing investigation that has been taking place since last summer. It seems like all there is is Camus just saying there is potential for criminal activity.
Do you have any background with investigations at the federal level?
No, but I watch a lot of Law & Order. Can you show me in your ABC article where there is a new investigation?
 
Originally posted by gusto79:


The backups would contain Lerner's entire email inbox as of Nov 2012. They had 5 different backups from 5 sequential weeks from Nov and Dec of 2012. They said they had emails going back to 2001. The whole issue with the missing emails is that they were emails that were moved off the server to Lerner's local hard drive. That is what the IRS has said they can't produce. Her hard drive crashed in June 2011. The missing emails would have been moved off the server to her local computer before June 2011. That's why I'm saying these backups wouldn't have the missing emails. These are backups of her account after the emails had been removed. Does that make sense?

I wouldn't be surprised if they find emails from these backups that hadn't previously been provided by the IRS. I bet there will be emails that were deleted at some point and not saved to her local computer that they find. Something like if she got an email in Nov 2012 and deleted it in Jan 2013. Although that might be out of the time frame they are looking for. But what they won't find is the emails missing because of her computer crash.
No - it doesn't make sense. You make it sound like they only made backups of the server after emails were removed. All along during this investigation IT folks have been screaming 'bullshit' to the claim the IRS only had the emails saved on local computers. The very purpose of the backup tapes is to provide a permanent record. It's irrelevant if the servers are periodically wiped as they backup tapes already captured the data.
 
Originally posted by gusto79

No, but I watch a lot of Law & Order. Can you show me in your ABC article where there is a new investigation?
This is what I linked -- what else do you want???? I've linked the same info from various news sources.


Lerner's lost emails prompted a new round of scrutiny by Congress, and a new investigation by the inspector general's office.
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:


The backups would contain Lerner's entire email inbox as of Nov 2012. They had 5 different backups from 5 sequential weeks from Nov and Dec of 2012. They said they had emails going back to 2001. The whole issue with the missing emails is that they were emails that were moved off the server to Lerner's local hard drive. That is what the IRS has said they can't produce. Her hard drive crashed in June 2011. The missing emails would have been moved off the server to her local computer before June 2011. That's why I'm saying these backups wouldn't have the missing emails. These are backups of her account after the emails had been removed. Does that make sense?

I wouldn't be surprised if they find emails from these backups that hadn't previously been provided by the IRS. I bet there will be emails that were deleted at some point and not saved to her local computer that they find. Something like if she got an email in Nov 2012 and deleted it in Jan 2013. Although that might be out of the time frame they are looking for. But what they won't find is the emails missing because of her computer crash.
No - it doesn't make sense. You make it sound like they only made backups of the server after emails were removed. All along during this investigation IT folks have been screaming 'bullshit' to the claim the IRS only had the emails saved on local computers. The very purpose of the backup tapes is to provide a permanent record. It's irrelevant if the servers are periodically wiped as they backup tapes already captured the data.
You are absolutely wrong about the purpose of the backup tapes being a permanent copy. IRS procedure for a permanent copy at that time was to print out the email (that may have changed since then). The backup tapes are for disaster recovery. I don't know what you are talking about in regards to the servers being periodically wiped. They don't do that. And I'm absolutely not saying they only made backups of the server after the emails were removed. I'm saying the backups that TIGTA found were after the emails were removed (again, the earliest they found were from Nov 2012). They haven't been able to find backups from before June 2011. Maybe there will be in these other 400 some tapes they recently found. Hopefully they are.

There probably were a lot of IT folks screaming bs. And I'm sure you lapped it all up. I remember you telling us all about RAID and why that mean this all was impossible. The thing is, what the IRS said happened is plausible. It might be a horrible practice and seem absolutely retarded, but it is plausible. A place I used to work did the exact same thing.
 
Originally posted by gusto79:

No, this email is not from the backups. This was presented during the hearing by one of the congressmen. TIGTA hasn't given any emails to the committee yet. Oversight has had this email for some time and must be one proved earlier by IRS.
.
Why don't you start linking sources to back up all this information you are claiming to have? I'd like to read it from someone other than you.

As for the 'new' Lois Lerner email - I know it was presented at the hearing. But it's being reported by various sources that the email came from the new group of 32,744 emails they have recovered recently. So please show me your proof this wasn't recently recovered




"To date, we have found 32,744 unique emails that were backed up from Lois Lerner's email box. We are in the process of comparing these emails to what the IRS has already produced to Congress to determine if we did in fact recover any new emails," Camus said, according to the Washington Times.

In one of the new emails, Lerner apparently wrote, "No one will ever believe that both your hard drive and mine crashed within a week of each other."
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79

No, but I watch a lot of Law & Order. Can you show me in your ABC article where there is a new investigation?
This is what I linked -- what else do you want???? I've linked the same info from various news sources.


Lerner's lost emails prompted a new round of scrutiny by Congress, and a new investigation by the inspector general's office.
Ok, that's what I figured but wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something else. This is what I was referring to when I said you didn't understand it. That line isn't referring to something new. The new investigation they are talking about is the TIGTA investigation prompted by the Senate Finance committee starting back in June 2014. Read the article again. That line is from the background portion. It's not saying there is a new investigation starting now.
 
Originally posted by gusto79:


You are absolutely wrong about the purpose of the backup tapes being a permanent copy. IRS procedure for a permanent copy at that time was to print out the email (that may have changed since then). The backup tapes are for disaster recovery. I don't know what you are talking about in regards to the servers being periodically wiped. They don't do that. And I'm absolutely not saying they only made backups of the server after the emails were removed. I'm saying the backups that TIGTA found were after the emails were removed (again, the earliest they found were from Nov 2012). They haven't been able to find backups from before June 2011. Maybe there will be in these other 400 some tapes they recently found. Hopefully they are.

There probably were a lot of IT folks screaming bs. And I'm sure you lapped it all up. I remember you telling us all about RAID and why that mean this all was impossible. The thing is, what the IRS said happened is plausible. It might be a horrible practice and seem absolutely retarded, but it is plausible. A place I used to work did the exact same thing.
What exactly do you think these backup tapes are supposed to be making records of? And are these backup tapes not permanent records in your mind?

And those paper printouts weren't meant to be the only records obviously. But with the lack of short-term storage - that was to way to keep copies easily accessible for any potential audit, litigation, etc (so that they didn't have to go through the expensive and lengthy process of retrieving the info from backup tapes).
 
Originally posted by gusto79:

Ok, that's what I figured but wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something else. This is what I was referring to when I said you didn't understand it. That line isn't referring to something new. The new investigation they are talking about is the TIGTA investigation prompted by the Senate Finance committee starting back in June 2014. Read the article again. That line is from the background portion. It's not saying there is a new investigation starting now.
I've been linking article after article stating the criminal investigation is a new aspect in the IRS probe -- and you think you are proving something by potentially picking out something in ONE??? Seriously?
 
Originally posted by gusto79:



Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:


Do you have any background with investigations at the federal level?
No, but I watch a lot of Law & Order.
I have. In my work with the military I've assisted in investigations with the DOJ, IG, AFOSI and CID - as well as with FLIPL's, Reports of Survey, command inquiries, command directed, etc. And I know one thing for absolutely certain -- oversight/audit investigations change when evidence of criminal conduct is uncovered. And that's what has happened here. I see no history of this IG previously finding any evidence of criminal conduct - if you can find any report the IG was investigating criminal conduct - then provide that info. Prove your claims.
This post was edited on 3/1 9:13 AM by Metuo Accipiter
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:

No, this email is not from the backups. This was presented during the hearing by one of the congressmen. TIGTA hasn't given any emails to the committee yet. Oversight has had this email for some time and must be one proved earlier by IRS.
.
Why don't you start linking sources to back up all this information you are claiming to have? I'd like to read it from someone other than you.

As for the 'new' Lois Lerner email - I know it was presented at the hearing. But it's being reported by various sources that the email came from the new group of 32,744 emails they have recovered recently. So please show me your proof this wasn't recently recovered




"To date, we have found 32,744 unique emails that were backed up from Lois Lerner's email box. We are in the process of comparing these emails to what the IRS has already produced to Congress to determine if we did in fact recover any new emails," Camus said, according to the Washington Times.

In one of the new emails, Lerner apparently wrote, "No one will ever believe that both your hard drive and mine crashed within a week of each other."
Most of this information is from the testimony. Camus said several times during the testimony that no emails had been turned over yet. They are waiting for software needed to compare their 32,000 emails with what has already been turned over to remove duplicates. Apparently there is a licensing issue with the software vendor, but he said they should have it soon. I'd say the sources that are saying this is a new email are absolutely wrong.
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:


You are absolutely wrong about the purpose of the backup tapes being a permanent copy. IRS procedure for a permanent copy at that time was to print out the email (that may have changed since then). The backup tapes are for disaster recovery. I don't know what you are talking about in regards to the servers being periodically wiped. They don't do that. And I'm absolutely not saying they only made backups of the server after the emails were removed. I'm saying the backups that TIGTA found were after the emails were removed (again, the earliest they found were from Nov 2012). They haven't been able to find backups from before June 2011. Maybe there will be in these other 400 some tapes they recently found. Hopefully they are.

There probably were a lot of IT folks screaming bs. And I'm sure you lapped it all up. I remember you telling us all about RAID and why that mean this all was impossible. The thing is, what the IRS said happened is plausible. It might be a horrible practice and seem absolutely retarded, but it is plausible. A place I used to work did the exact same thing.
What exactly do you think these backup tapes are supposed to be making records of? And are these backup tapes not permanent records in your mind?

And those paper printouts weren't meant to be the only records obviously. But with the lack of short-term storage - that was to way to keep copies easily accessible for any potential audit, litigation, etc (so that they didn't have to go through the expensive and lengthy process of retrieving the info from backup tapes).
These backups aren't suppose to be making records of anything. These backups were for disaster recovery, not data retention. IIRC, the print outs were suppose to be the permanent records. Employees were instructed to print out any emails that meant to be kept permanently.
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:

Ok, that's what I figured but wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something else. This is what I was referring to when I said you didn't understand it. That line isn't referring to something new. The new investigation they are talking about is the TIGTA investigation prompted by the Senate Finance committee starting back in June 2014. Read the article again. That line is from the background portion. It's not saying there is a new investigation starting now.
I've been linking article after article stating the criminal investigation is a new aspect in the IRS probe -- and you think you are proving something by potentially picking out something in ONE??? Seriously?
There was nothing saying this is a new aspect. But I'm tired of arguing this. The final report will be out soon enough.
 
Originally posted by gusto79:
These backups aren't suppose to be making records of anything. These backups were for disaster recovery, not data retention.
??? And what exactly is the dis aster recovery for? What do you recover?
 
Originally posted by Funky Bunch:
Gusto, are you a fed?
No. I work in IT so I started following the story more closely when the HD crash info happened. I've watched a lot of the hearings on this and it is amazing how stupid some of our congressmen are. I think my favorite things have been when one congressman showed a picture of a hard drive that had been in a computer during a house fire and offered that as proof that Lerner couldn't have lost emails. Another one asked why we can't just go to staples and buy an external hard drive for a couple hundred dollars to backup the IRS email servers with. It also amazes me how often media reports are wrong about this stuff. I've read several things related to the recent hearing that are just flat out completely wrong. It's ridiculous.
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:
These backups aren't suppose to be making records of anything. These backups were for disaster recovery, not data retention.
??? And what exactly is the dis aster recovery for? What do you recover?
Disaster recover is meant to recover from a disaster. It's pretty evident from the name. Let's say you have a fire or tornado take out all your servers. That is why you have your disaster recovery backups. They were not meant for permanent records so that is why they were rotating tapes. Some people may use this as a method for permanent records, but that is not what the IRS was using them for.
 
Originally posted by gusto79:

Originally posted by Funky Bunch:
Gusto, are you a fed?
No. I work in IT so I started following the story more closely when the HD crash info happened. I've watched a lot of the hearings on this and it is amazing how stupid some of our congressmen are. I think my favorite things have been when one congressman showed a picture of a hard drive that had been in a computer during a house fire and offered that as proof that Lerner couldn't have lost emails. Another one asked why we can't just go to staples and buy an external hard drive for a couple hundred dollars to backup the IRS email servers with. It also amazes me how often media reports are wrong about this stuff. I've read several things related to the recent hearing that are just flat out completely wrong. It's ridiculous.
I must have had you confused with another fed on here. I thought maybe you were an IRS employee because most of what you posted is spot on.
 
Originally posted by gusto79:
Disaster recover is meant to recover from a disaster. It's pretty evident from the name. Let's say you have a fire or tornado take out all your servers. That is why you have your disaster recovery backups. They were not meant for permanent records so that is why they were rotating tapes. Some people may use this as a method for permanent records, but that is not what the IRS was using them for.
You didn't fully the question. What do you recover on the tapes?

This post was edited on 3/1 11:20 AM by Metuo Accipiter
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:
Disaster recover is meant to recover from a disaster. It's pretty evident from the name. Let's say you have a fire or tornado take out all your servers. That is why you have your disaster recovery backups. They were not meant for permanent records so that is why they were rotating tapes. Some people may use this as a method for permanent records, but that is not what the IRS was using them for.
You didn't fully the question. What do you recover on the tapes?

This post was edited on 3/1 11:20 AM by Metuo Accipiter
The servers. What do you think is backed up? I assume you're looking for me to say the emails are recovered. So what is your point?
 
Originally posted by gusto

The servers. What do you think is backed up? I assume you're looking for me to say the emails are recovered. So what is your point?
My point is why you making such a big deal about it? Who cares what the primary purpose of tha backup tapes is? For the purpose of this investigation it's irrelevant. The thing that matters is how much data can be recovereDon't for investigatory purposes.
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:

Originally posted by gusto

The servers. What do you think is backed up? I assume you're looking for me to say the emails are recovered. So what is your point?
My point is why you making such a big deal about it? Who cares what the primary purpose of tha backup tapes is? For the purpose of this investigation it's irrelevant. The thing that matters is how much data can be recovereDon't for investigatory purposes.
You said backup tapes were to provide a permanent record so I assumed you meant that they should have records of all emails on backup tapes. If that isn't what you mean, my mistake.

I agree that it doesn't matter the purpose of the backup tapes. My whole point has been a backup from Nov 2012 won't have the missing emails.

Let me give you an example. On your computer at home you have a word document. You decide to delete the document because you no longer need it. Then a year later you decide you should backup your computer. You buy an external hard drive and setup time machine and make a backup of your computer. A few years later you decide you need that word document. Do you think it will be in your time machine backup?
 
Originally posted by gusto79:


You said backup tapes were to provide a permanent record so I assumed you meant that they should have records of all emails on backup tapes. If that isn't what you mean, my mistake.

I agree that it doesn't matter the purpose of the backup tapes. My whole point has been a backup from Nov 2012 won't have the missing emails.

Let me give you an example. On your computer at home you have a word document. You decide to delete the document because you no longer need it. Then a year later you decide you should backup your computer. You buy an external hard drive and setup time machine and make a backup of your computer. A few years later you decide you need that word document. Do you think it will be in your time machine backup?
From Camus' testimony:

The backup tapes consisted of five sets of tapes. These five backup tapes were created in sequential weeks from November 20, 2012 through December 25, 2012. The five backup sets were expected to produce a total of five separate copies Lois Lerner's e-mail boxes, or one copy for each week of the backup.

We hand carred three of the five sets of these backup tapes to the industry expert for data recovery and extraction and after their examination and extraction of data, they provided TIGTA with Exchange Database files from this set of tapes. On November 13, 2014, TIGTA searched the database files and identified the first Lois Lerner e-mail box. This mailbox contained Lois Lerner e-mails that date back as far as 2001. The result of this effort validated that the tapes have not been over written and that they contained e-mails that are relevant to the requested time range search for e-mails.


Oversight Hearing
This post was edited on 3/1 1:48 PM by Metuo Accipiter
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:


You said backup tapes were to provide a permanent record so I assumed you meant that they should have records of all emails on backup tapes. If that isn't what you mean, my mistake.

I agree that it doesn't matter the purpose of the backup tapes. My whole point has been a backup from Nov 2012 won't have the missing emails.

Let me give you an example. On your computer at home you have a word document. You decide to delete the document because you no longer need it. Then a year later you decide you should backup your computer. You buy an external hard drive and setup time machine and make a backup of your computer. A few years later you decide you need that word document. Do you think it will be in your time machine backup?
From Camus' testimony:

The backup tapes consisted of five sets of tapes. These five backup tapes were created in sequential weeks from November 20, 2012 through December 25, 2012. The five backup sets were expected to produce a total of five separate copies Lois Lerner's e-mail boxes, or one copy for each week of the backup.

We hand carred three of the five sets of these backup tapes to the industry expert for data recovery and extraction and after their examination and extraction of data, they provided TIGTA with Exchange Database files from this set of tapes. On November 13, 2014, TIGTA searched the database files and identified the first Lois Lerner e-mail box. This mailbox contained Lois Lerner e-mails that date back as far as 2001. The result of this effort validated that the tapes have not been over written and that they contained e-mails that are relevant to the requested time range search for e-mails.


Oversight Hearing
This post was edited on 3/1 1:48 PM by Metuo Accipiter
Do you think this proves anything? I posted as much earlier that emails were going back to 2001. And of course her email box from Nov 2012 will contain emails that are relevant to the requested time range. I thought I gave a good explanation in my previous post. Does it not make sense?

The backup is a snapshot of what her email box was on Nov 20th, 2012. Do you think an email that she had moved from her inbox to her local computer in May of 2011 would be on the backup?
 
Originally posted by gusto79:Do you think this proves anything? I posted as much earlier that emails were going back to 2001. And of course her email box from Nov 2012 will contain emails that are relevant to the requested time range. I thought I gave a good explanation in my previous post. Does it not make sense?

The backup is a snapshot of what her email box was on Nov 20th, 2012. Do you think an email that she had moved from her inbox to her local computer in May of 2011 would be on the backup?
I think you're greatly over-emphasizing the importance of her individual computer given any single individual email record very possibly could exist in other places. (other individual computers/server hard drives/backup tapes). You made the blanket assertion that the backup tapes won't have "the missing emails" -- you can't make that statement. They may very well contain emails that haven't been previously recovered/turned over. It really makes no sense to assume thousands of emails are not going to contain at least a few emails that were previously not turned over or missed.

The question isn't if there are emails from the time in question - it's if they contain any new/relevant information pertaining to Lerner's activities.


This post was edited on 3/1 3:40 PM by Metuo Accipiter
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:Do you think this proves anything? I posted as much earlier that emails were going back to 2001. And of course her email box from Nov 2012 will contain emails that are relevant to the requested time range. I thought I gave a good explanation in my previous post. Does it not make sense?

The backup is a snapshot of what her email box was on Nov 20th, 2012. Do you think an email that she had moved from her inbox to her local computer in May of 2011 would be on the backup?
I think you're greatly over-emphasizing the importance of her individual computer given any single individual email record very possibly could exist in other places. (other individual computers/hard drives/backup tapes). The IRS has repeatedly testified before Congress claiming they couldn't recover the backups - but we're finding out now that it appears the IRS wasn't forthcoming.

You made the blanket assertion that the backup tapes won't have "the missing emails" -- you can't make that statement. They may very well contain emails that haven't been previously recovered/turned over. It really makes no sense to assume thousands over emails are not going to contain at least a few new strings.

The question isn't if there are emails from the time in question - it's if they contain any new/relevant information.








This post was edited on 3/1 2:51 PM by Metuo Accipiter
This post was edited on 3/1 3:02 PM by Metuo Accipiter
The individual computer is what prompted the TIGTA investigation. When Koskinen testified that they couldn't recover backups, he was talking about the backups that could contain the emails that went missing when Lerner's HD crashed. These backup aren't the same backups that Koskinen said weren't recoverable. I think that is a fairly important distinction.
 
Originally posted by gusto79:
The individual computer is what prompted the TIGTA investigation. When Koskinen testified that they couldn't recover backups, he was talking about the backups that could contain the emails that went missing when Lerner's HD crashed. These backup aren't the same backups that Koskinen said weren't recoverable. I think that is a fairly important distinction.
It wasn't just the failure to recover the hard drive from Lerner's individual computer that prompted the TIGTA investigation. It's the broader/systematic lack of response by the IRS and the mysterious nature of the crash that ultimately led to Congress asking for TIGTA to get involved. Camus' statement seems to clearly outline the parameters of the investigation.

As for Koskinen - why is that distinction important? What are you claiming?




This post was edited on 3/1 4:37 PM by Metuo Accipiter
 
Originally posted by gusto79:

Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:
These backups aren't suppose to be making records of anything. These backups were for disaster recovery, not data retention.
??? And what exactly is the dis aster recovery for? What do you recover?
Disaster recover is meant to recover from a disaster. It's pretty evident from the name. Let's say you have a fire or tornado take out all your servers. That is why you have your disaster recovery backups. They were not meant for permanent records so that is why they were rotating tapes. Some people may use this as a method for permanent records, but that is not what the IRS was using them for.
Link?
 
Ok. I read through this entire exchange. Gusto, are you intentionally seeing how long you can troll him? If you are serious in your responses I have to say that this has been one of the most impressive displays of mental gymnastics that I have ever seen.
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:
The individual computer is what prompted the TIGTA investigation. When Koskinen testified that they couldn't recover backups, he was talking about the backups that could contain the emails that went missing when Lerner's HD crashed. These backup aren't the same backups that Koskinen said weren't recoverable. I think that is a fairly important distinction.
It wasn't just the failure to recover the hard drive from Lerner's individual computer that prompted the TIGTA investigation. It's the broader/systematic lack of response by the IRS and the mysterious nature of the crash that ultimately led to this aspect of the IRS investigation.

As for Koskinen - why is that distinction important? What are you claiming?
This post was edited on 3/1 4:26 PM by Metuo Accipiter
From Camus's testimony:


On June 13, 2014, in a letter to the Senate Finance Committee, the IRS reported that as it was completing its document production for Congress concerning allegations that the IRS targeted certain 501c (4) applicants, the IRS realized that the production of the e­ mails of Lois Lerner, the former director of the IRS Exempt Organizations division, had gaps in the e-mail production. The IRS reported that in its attempts to find missing e­ mails, they realized that in June 2011,
Lerner's IRS laptop computer suffered a hard drive crash, and therefore some of her e-mails could
not be recovered.

The following Monday, on June 16, 2014, TIGTA initiated an investigation into the circumstances
surrounding the missing e-mails and the hard drive crash. One week later, on June 23, 2014, TIGTA received a letter from then Chairman Ron Wyden and then Ranking Member Orrin Hatch of the Senate Finance Committee, that requested TIGTA to formally investigate the matter including "perform its own analysis of whether any data can be salvaged and produced to the committee."

As for Koskinen, people are using these tapes from 2012 a proof that he lied to congress when he said the tapes were unrecoverable. These aren't the tapes he was talking about.
 
Originally posted by Noble Hawk:

Originally posted by gusto79:

Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:
These backups aren't suppose to be making records of anything. These backups were for disaster recovery, not data retention.
??? And what exactly is the dis aster recovery for? What do you recover?
Disaster recover is meant to recover from a disaster. It's pretty evident from the name. Let's say you have a fire or tornado take out all your servers. That is why you have your disaster recovery backups. They were not meant for permanent records so that is why they were rotating tapes. Some people may use this as a method for permanent records, but that is not what the IRS was using them for.
Link?
No link. From one of the Koskinen hearings.
 
Originally posted by Noble Hawk:
Ok. I read through this entire exchange. Gusto, are you intentionally seeing how long you can troll him? If you are serious in your responses I have to say that this has been one of the most impressive displays of mental gymnastics that I have ever seen.
The missing emails were removed from the server before June 2011. The backups are from Nov 2012. I honestly don't see what the mental gymnastics I've performed.
 
Originally posted by gusto79:
From Camus's testimony:



On June 13, 2014, in a letter to the Senate Finance Committee, the IRS reported that as it was completing its document production for Congress concerning allegations that the IRS targeted certain 501c (4) applicants, the IRS realized that the production of the e­ mails of Lois Lerner, the former director of the IRS Exempt Organizations division, had gaps in the e-mail production. The IRS reported that in its attempts to find missing e­ mails, they realized that in June 2011,



Lerner's IRS laptop computer suffered a hard drive crash, and therefore some of her e-mails could not be recovered.

The following Monday, on June 16, 2014, TIGTA initiated an investigation into the circumstances
surrounding the missing e-mails and the hard drive crash. One week later, on June 23, 2014, TIGTA received a letter from then Chairman Ron Wyden and then Ranking Member Orrin Hatch of the Senate Finance Committee, that requested TIGTA to formally investigate the matter including "perform its own analysis of whether any data can be salvaged and produced to the committee."

As for Koskinen, people are using these tapes from 2012 a proof that he lied to congress when he said the tapes were unrecoverable. These aren't the tapes he was talking about.
I read this - clearly the investigation is not just about lerner's hard drive itself. Notice how it says "the circumstances surrounding the missing emails and hard drive crash"? Do you not understand that's a larger question???

As for Koskinen and the 2012 tapes - allegations of deception aren't coming just from that - they are coming because it was so easy for TIGTA to find the 744 tapes from the Microsoft exchange server (the IRS was actually already holding them) -- but also that the Koskinen/the IRS never even told TIGTA the most recent 400+ tapes even existed. TIGTA figured out that a document was missing in a production request - so they demanded the IRS turn it over. It was this document that led TIGTA to discover the existence of these most recent tapes.

It's pretty clear from the testimony this document seems to have mysteriously been removed from the production of documents -- and that is also part of the criminal conduct investigation.


This post was edited on 3/1 5:25 PM by Metuo Accipiter
 
Originally posted by Metuo Accipiter:
Originally posted by gusto79:
From Camus's testimony:



On June 13, 2014, in a letter to the Senate Finance Committee, the IRS reported that as it was completing its document production for Congress concerning allegations that the IRS targeted certain 501c (4) applicants, the IRS realized that the production of the e­ mails of Lois Lerner, the former director of the IRS Exempt Organizations division, had gaps in the e-mail production. The IRS reported that in its attempts to find missing e­ mails, they realized that in June 2011,



Lerner's IRS laptop computer suffered a hard drive crash, and therefore some of her e-mails could not be recovered.

The following Monday, on June 16, 2014, TIGTA initiated an investigation into the circumstances
surrounding the missing e-mails and the hard drive crash. One week later, on June 23, 2014, TIGTA received a letter from then Chairman Ron Wyden and then Ranking Member Orrin Hatch of the Senate Finance Committee, that requested TIGTA to formally investigate the matter including "perform its own analysis of whether any data can be salvaged and produced to the committee."

As for Koskinen, people are using these tapes from 2012 a proof that he lied to congress when he said the tapes were unrecoverable. These aren't the tapes he was talking about.
I read this - clearly the investigation is not just about lerner's hard drive itself. Notice how it says "the circumstances surrounding the missing emails and hard drive crash"? Do you not understand that's a larger question???

As for Koskinen and the 2012 tapes - allegations of deception aren't coming just from that - they are coming because it was so easy for TIGTA to find the 744 tapes from the Microsoft exchange server (the IRS was actually already holding them) -- but also that the Koskinen/the IRS never even told TIGTA the most recent 400+ tapes even existed. TIGTA figured out that a document was missing in a group of information that was turned over - so they demanded the IRS turn it over. It was this document that led TIGTA to discover the existence of these most recent tapes.

It's pretty clear from the testimony this document seems to have mysteriously been removed from the production of documents -- and that is also part of the criminal conduct investigation.


This post was edited on 3/1 5:15 PM by Metuo Accipiter
I've said from the start it would make sense the IRS wouldn't do anything with these tapes if they were from after June 2011. So if they weren't the tapes the IRS needed, why would it matter that TIGTA found them so easily. Maybe the IRS determined the tapes didn't fit the need time frame and decided not to spend 4 months recovering data from them. We'll know soon enough whether the IRS screwed up by not using these tapes.

It will be interesting to see what come of these other 400 tapes. For the life of me I can't understand why nobody asked Camus what was the missing IRS document was.
 
Originally posted by gusto79:
Also want to add that Camus and George confirmed that there is evidence showing Lerner's HD crashed before they were notified of the investigation.
We have known for a long, long time that her "crash" occurred before she was formally notified an investigation was in progress...but after she knew it was going to happen.
 
I saw on Fox and Friends this weekend the email that was found where she sends it to another IRS employee saying that people would never believe that her hardrive and the other persons would crash at the same time.
 
Originally posted by montross:

I saw on Fox and Friends this weekend the email that was found where she sends it to another IRS employee saying that people would never believe that her hardrive and the other persons would crash at the same time.
In fairness to the lying scum, it is the kind of thing one might say if a coincidental crash had occurred.
 
Originally posted by Lone Clone:

Originally posted by montross:

I saw on Fox and Friends this weekend the email that was found where she sends it to another IRS employee saying that people would never believe that her hardrive and the other persons would crash at the same time.
In fairness to the lying scum, it is the kind of thing one might say if a coincidental crash had occurred.
There was another thread on this. She also added "Life is strange" which is the part that makes it sound like an acknowledgement of a coincidence. And the other person's computer that crashed didnt lose any emails as it was her second computer.
 
ADVERTISEMENT