We don't know Lerner's side of the story. She choose the 5th. There have been many times where people have come to me about apparent contradictions in my IT/work-related statements, and there are perfectly valid explanations. Often because English is vague or I used a slightly wrong or poorly chosen word to describe something.
And those apparent contradictions are not directly related to biased filtering for exemption requests, but merely "side" administrative issue.
Also note this from the link: "We gave the IRS the weekend to provide a response. A spokeswoman said the agency was not able to offer an explanation for Lerner's remarks in time for our deadline."
A weekend for bigass gov't agency to answer questions? About as realistic as a quiet toddler.
Note also the reader comments:
"...seem at least to have read the TIGTA report, but you seem to be disingenuous in your attacks on Lois Lerner, at least with respect to "doubling" of 501(c)(4) applications. She seems to have taken her figures from the TIGTA report itself, which, as you give the report credence, you should allow her to do also. The chart in the report tells us that applications doubled in the time period. Yes this is a fiscal year chart, but isn't Lois Lerner allowed to think and speak in terms of fiscal years?"
Thanks for the link, though, I appreciate it, partisan angst aside.
Because we as a nation are ALREADY meddling, we owe assistance to those displaced by conflicts we've meddled in. But, that's not a reason to continue meddling.
It may be a matter of not sticking ones nose in another country's business: fix our own backyard first.
Meddling in the Middle East just seems to make things worse. If they wanna be medieval and keep resisting modernization, there should come a point where we give up trying to modernize them and instead focus on issues closer to home.
Here is an article on the topic that explains the "Tea Party" tax exempt filing situation. I must disclose it's from a left-leaning source, but it gives you nuggets of info to cross-check in other ways.
But those tea party groups were still waiting, some are [still waiting]
Probably because they are dodgy: they claim to be a non-political organization in order to get tax breaks, when in fact they ARE political orgs playing games to hide their political angle.
If they are non-political, why are you even calling them "tea party groups"?
There's no evidence she knowingly did such. There are things that perhaps she should have been more curious about in terms of the secrecy, but this is a grey area.
It's fair to apply Hanlon's Razor at this stage. Hillary didn't pause to smell the paperclips.
And there should have been an active review board at State Department rather rely on employees to police themselves. A good many mistakes I see at work are institutional: if you don't have good processes in place, human laziness and bias does its magic.
The legal system tends to interpret certain words certain ways. It becomes "case history", which establishes conventions in the legal industry. Whether that's good or bad is another matter.
The 3.5" DD ones weren't so bad, but the HD ones were terrible.
Agreed. The 1.44 MB format was EXTREMELY unreliable. I kept trying different brands, and they all sucked.
I started reformatting them to down 720 KB to make the "bits fatter'.
In general with floppies, I always tried to make backups on 2 different disks for anything important. It became a habit. It's probably good advice for any backup medium. Shit happens.
Some in the industry have argued that cutting the cord doesn't actually save you money if you subscribe to a bunch of streaming services like Netflix, HBO, and so on.
Well, of course, the cable co's try to shove bundling up your bundle because it's more profitable for them.
A good many people, including me, want to ONLY pay for the specific content and channels we want. Bundling has been a crappy deal for us.
The IRS did target organizations based on key words and phrase that had political meaning.
That's because the IRS were doing their job. You have to be NON-political to get a tax exemption. If you have political words in your title or documents, you MAY be lying about not being political (requiring further investigation).
Actually the deletion of email was enough "evidence" of guilt because legally it can be assumed that doing so is evidence of guilt.
She only deleted those deemed "personal". It's true some non-personal ones actually also got deleted, but there's no evidence it was intentional.
Electronically recovered versions of the "mis-deleted" ones showed no signs of a pattern to hide, but rather sloppiness/laziness in filtering, being the "skipped" ones had trivial topics. Comey said it appeared that whoever filtered the emails for personal-vs-work only read the title and maybe the first few lines rather than the entire message to see if it were work-related.
Again, there is clear evidence of sloppiness, but NOT of "intent" to hide.
If anything, there's the opposite because those electronically recovered after the fact did not reveal any "secret pattern" to the deletion. It's true they couldn't recover all the emails, but those who deleted them wouldn't know which of the personal-deleted set would wind up being eventually recovered in the lab.
Thus, there is actually counter-evidence of intentional hiding, because the FBI got to sample some of those intentionally deleted (for allegedly being "personal" when in fact they were not).
There is no evidence she KNOWINGLY sent or received classified info. Thus, it's not a "lie". Lies require intent.
Sloppy and "incurious", perhaps, but that's a diff issue.
Also, the State Dept. screwed up by not sending her to Security Class. That's not directly her fault (unless it can be shown she played hooky.)
Regarding IRS, your own source:
FBI investigation
In January 2014, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) announced that it had found no evidence warranting the filing of federal criminal charges in connection with the scandal. The FBI stated it found no evidence of "enemy hunting" of the kind that had been suspected, but that the investigation did reveal the IRS to be a mismanaged bureaucracy enforcing rules that IRS personnel did not fully understand. The officials indicated, however, that the investigation is continuing.[161][162][163][164]
DOJ investigation
In October 2015, the Justice Department notified Congress that there would be no charges against the former IRS official Lois Lerner or against anyone else in the IRS. The investigation found no evidence of illegal activity or the partisan targeting of political groups and found that no IRS official attempted to obstruct justice. The DOJ investigation did find evidence of mismanagement and Lerner's poor judgement in using her IRS account for personal messages but said "...poor management is not a crime."[165][166][167]
Other sources do show "bad practices", but that's not the same as intent of political favoritism.
Slashdot Mirror
We don't know Lerner's side of the story. She choose the 5th. There have been many times where people have come to me about apparent contradictions in my IT/work-related statements, and there are perfectly valid explanations. Often because English is vague or I used a slightly wrong or poorly chosen word to describe something.
And those apparent contradictions are not directly related to biased filtering for exemption requests, but merely "side" administrative issue.
Also note this from the link: "We gave the IRS the weekend to provide a response. A spokeswoman said the agency was not able to offer an explanation for Lerner's remarks in time for our deadline."
A weekend for bigass gov't agency to answer questions? About as realistic as a quiet toddler.
Note also the reader comments:
"...seem at least to have read the TIGTA report, but you seem to be disingenuous in your attacks on Lois Lerner, at least with respect to "doubling" of 501(c)(4) applications. She seems to have taken her figures from the TIGTA report itself, which, as you give the report credence, you should allow her to do also. The chart in the report tells us that applications doubled in the time period. Yes this is a fiscal year chart, but isn't Lois Lerner allowed to think and speak in terms of fiscal years?"
Thanks for the link, though, I appreciate it, partisan angst aside.
Because we as a nation are ALREADY meddling, we owe assistance to those displaced by conflicts we've meddled in. But, that's not a reason to continue meddling.
It may be a matter of not sticking ones nose in another country's business: fix our own backyard first.
Meddling in the Middle East just seems to make things worse. If they wanna be medieval and keep resisting modernization, there should come a point where we give up trying to modernize them and instead focus on issues closer to home.
Blasphemy!
In other words, the 1% can afford to spend on 1% odds of disaster.
Addendum
Here is an article on the topic that explains the "Tea Party" tax exempt filing situation. I must disclose it's from a left-leaning source, but it gives you nuggets of info to cross-check in other ways.
http://www.theatlantic.com/pol...
Probably because they are dodgy: they claim to be a non-political organization in order to get tax breaks, when in fact they ARE political orgs playing games to hide their political angle.
If they are non-political, why are you even calling them "tea party groups"?
There's no evidence she knowingly did such. There are things that perhaps she should have been more curious about in terms of the secrecy, but this is a grey area.
It's fair to apply Hanlon's Razor at this stage. Hillary didn't pause to smell the paperclips.
And there should have been an active review board at State Department rather rely on employees to police themselves. A good many mistakes I see at work are institutional: if you don't have good processes in place, human laziness and bias does its magic.
Do you have direct evidence of this, or is this personal speculation?
Projection! You guys claim other people lie but offer zero evidence. It's political impressionism.
I suspect clubby partisan moderation is going on here. This topic has been corrupted.
Now what the goddam hell did I do to get "-1, Flamebait"!?
Goddam stoned moderators. Wake the hell up! Jesus Gates Christ!
Evidence of "lie" please.
The legal system tends to interpret certain words certain ways. It becomes "case history", which establishes conventions in the legal industry. Whether that's good or bad is another matter.
Agreed. The 1.44 MB format was EXTREMELY unreliable. I kept trying different brands, and they all sucked.
I started reformatting them to down 720 KB to make the "bits fatter'.
In general with floppies, I always tried to make backups on 2 different disks for anything important. It became a habit. It's probably good advice for any backup medium. Shit happens.
Well, of course, the cable co's try to shove bundling up your bundle because it's more profitable for them.
A good many people, including me, want to ONLY pay for the specific content and channels we want. Bundling has been a crappy deal for us.
Please elaborate.
That's because the IRS were doing their job. You have to be NON-political to get a tax exemption. If you have political words in your title or documents, you MAY be lying about not being political (requiring further investigation).
A briefing is not a "class".
When specifically did that happen? "Fox implied it" is not good enough. This is slashdot, NOT fox.
Project much?
Details Matter.
She only deleted those deemed "personal". It's true some non-personal ones actually also got deleted, but there's no evidence it was intentional.
Electronically recovered versions of the "mis-deleted" ones showed no signs of a pattern to hide, but rather sloppiness/laziness in filtering, being the "skipped" ones had trivial topics. Comey said it appeared that whoever filtered the emails for personal-vs-work only read the title and maybe the first few lines rather than the entire message to see if it were work-related.
Again, there is clear evidence of sloppiness, but NOT of "intent" to hide.
If anything, there's the opposite because those electronically recovered after the fact did not reveal any "secret pattern" to the deletion. It's true they couldn't recover all the emails, but those who deleted them wouldn't know which of the personal-deleted set would wind up being eventually recovered in the lab.
Thus, there is actually counter-evidence of intentional hiding, because the FBI got to sample some of those intentionally deleted (for allegedly being "personal" when in fact they were not).
Note "willfully". That's right back the giant "intent" issue.
The existing federal laws generally don't make it a crime to be merely careless with gov't info and secrets.
There are a few exceptions, but it appears those who actually got jailed for "carelessness" are those with bad/cheap lawyers.
OJ's, Hillary's, and Cheney's don't have cheap lawyers.
There is no evidence she KNOWINGLY sent or received classified info. Thus, it's not a "lie". Lies require intent.
Sloppy and "incurious", perhaps, but that's a diff issue.
Also, the State Dept. screwed up by not sending her to Security Class. That's not directly her fault (unless it can be shown she played hooky.)
Regarding IRS, your own source:
Other sources do show "bad practices", but that's not the same as intent of political favoritism.
There's a lot of talking there. Do you have a specific quote(s) to demonstrate a specific sinister action by a specific person(s)?
No intentional wrong-doing was ever found at IRS. Sloppiness, perhaps.
I don't know what the 2nd link has to do with anything.
Congress should write better laws. The existing laws are crap: vague and outdated. Vague laws give too much room for powerful lawyers to dig around.
Link?
I see they automated trolls.