Lois Lerner’s Hard Drive Crashed, So Did the Hard Drives of Everyone She Emailed and Everyone Who Might Have Heard of Her

smashy

If this gets big enough, Obama’s hard drive just might crash.

IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel Thomas Kane said in transcribed congressional testimony that more IRS officials experienced computer crashes, bringing the total number of crash victims to “less than 20,” and also said that the agency does not know if the lost emails are still backed up somewhere.

The new round of computer crash victims includes David Fish, who routinely corresponded with Lois Lerner, as well as Lerner subordinate Andy Megosh, Lerner’s technical adviser Justin Lowe, and Cincinnati-based agent Kimberly Kitchens.

The IT asset managers? They also crashed.

Ordering the destruction of a hard drive and documenting that process would be handled by trained, certified IT asset managers, according to IAITAM. But the group’s records show that at least three IRS IT asset managers were shuffled out of their positions around the time of the May 2013 inspector general’s report that detailed the agency’s targeting practices.

IAITAM said investigators need to “determine if these in-house IT asset managers were removed from the picture as the IRS email investigation heated up.”

But don’t worry, there’s no conspiracy here. Just routine computer error.

Hard drives crash all the time and statistics show that they are much more likely to crash in the vicinity of subpoenas due to a quantum entanglement between the subpoena, Obama, his subordinates and the molecules of the hard drive.

It’s just plain science.

  • JR Kipling

    I just finished this article and my computer …what the ..? Whats that noise,?
    smoke? …. I never met Ms…..zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt

    • CowboyUp

      Your computer and internet connection will run slow from now on because it’s doing double or triple duty, lol.

  • kevinstroup

    Wonder what would happen if I used this excuse should the IRS ever audit me?

    • CowboyUp

      You’ll find different rules apply. Funny how that works.

    • imsteph

      you can try…

    • ExRepug

      Look up Internal Revenue Code sections 274(d), 6001, and 6662(a) and (b).

  • Gaius_Suetonius_Tranquillus

    Caught lying shamelessly about their illegal, unconstitutional, nefarious activities, the lefties scurry to destroy the evidence. It won’t work. There are too many ways to find this stuff, and too many people of good conscience who won’t play along. Someone somewhere is going to provide Trey or Darryl with the evidence they need to hang this cabal of ethically-challenged troglodytes.

    “O, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.”

    • Douglas J. Bender

      True, true. But what about the second and third and fourth and fifth, etc., practices?

  • bobro

    Great scientific explanation. Having been in the computer business for 30 some years, I can tell you that a hard disk “crash” seldom destroys all the data on the drive. They must have been 401(c)(4) drives that don’t have to reveal their sources.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      They’re lying because not only is it statistically implausible, it’s impossible for client computer crashes to destroy data stored on RAID drives.

      They’re just digging themselves deeper.

      • simmonsdiane22

        Jordyn . true that Donald `s blog is flabbergasting… yesterday I got a great Subaru Impreza when I got my check for $5138 this-last/five weeks and over ten/k last month . this is actually the best-job I’ve had . I actually started 5 months ago and straight away started to bring home at least $80.. per hour . Read More Here
        ========>>>>> http://WWW.MONEYKIN.COM

    • ExRepug

      Psssst. Section 401 governs qualified pension, profit-sharing and stock bonus plans.

  • CowboyUp

    How many hard drives crashed and were destroyed with no backup files? As many as necessary.

    It just slipped management’s mind to inform congress how many that was when they first started asking for those files. It had nothing to do with how obvious it would look if it all came out at once.

    That said, the administration is making first class fools of the GOP congress critters investigating this. It’s not like crucial hard drives and their backups haven’t disappeared from a democrat run White House before, yet they were taken by surprise. Even lowly me knew we’d be seeing the dp do everything they got away with again. As with many issues, the dp/msm/left run the same scams over and over and the GOP falls for them every time. They show no ability, much less desire to catch up to the disappearing evidence trail either.

    It’s hard to believe that the GOP is not only that incompetent, but that incapable of learning. I have to wonder if they aren’t on the take. The same folks who abused the Treasury(IRS, FBI, ATF) and Justice Dept. before, and to the extent they have this time, would have no problem with blackmail.

    • DanielTourtillott

      The old part of GOP is incapable of learning, I have hope for the new guys.

  • Gee

    Emails are stored on email servers which must be backed up and kept for at least five years. The emails still exist

    • ExRepug

      The servers were backed up (for disaster recovery). There is no requirement that the backup tapes be retained for five years. Testimony by the National Archivist on June 24 disclosed that it is normal practice by most federal agencies to reuse backup tapes after six months.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        They can’t lawfully recycle tapes until they are made redundant by subsequent tapes! Even if it is 6 months (and I’d have to look at who is accountable past 6 months) that still means they violated the law by failing to perform a data restoration for 6 months! Yet they claimed to have attempted to recover the data from the disk itself. The story is bullshit for a number of reasons and you know it. I already see that you acknowledge the emails are stored on servers, which all use RAID arrays. No single disk can take out data on a RAID array. And multiple disk failures would have to occur in rapid sequence. But they report USER disk failures.

        IOW, there is no way for this to happen as described without massive incompetence or malice. You want to go with massive incompetence? Fine.

        There will be consequences. Keep covering for liars and broadcasting their talking points. We’ll see where it ends.

        • Otis

          I doubt there will be any real consequences. The head man and his buddy Holder will protect them.

        • ExRepug

          You cannot cite to a single “law” that mandates that server backup tapes cannot be recycled. No such law exists. Here is the Federal Records Act. Go fish for that provision you claim exists. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/44/chapter-31

          • objectivefactsmatter

            I didn’t say that backup tapes can’t be recycled.

            It shows your poor reading comprehension. In fact you missed the single most important point that I made.

            The laws deal with protecting data, not media.

          • ExRepug

            The law deals with protecting “records”, not data per se. FYI, there is no law that makes it unlawful to recycle the tapes “until they are made redundant by subsequent tapes.” There is no law that mandates a single federal agency to “perform a data restoration for 6 months.”

            So cite the law you refer to, or it doesn’t exist.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            The Computer Security Act and the
            Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 require certain protocols established by the Department of Defense to be followed. Those regulations include specific, comprehensive protocols for securing data.

            You want to call “records” something different than “data,” that’s OK. Nonetheless. the IRS is already on record showing that it can’t follow the laws and protocols because of incompetence, and possibly is also using this incompetence as a cover for obstructing investigations.

            You’ll see how very soon. The seeds have already been planted for revealing precisely what I’m talking about.

          • ExRepug

            Either you have not actually read FISMA, especially the definitions in section 3542 and the responsibilities provision of section 3544, or you aren’t understanding what you read. It doesn’t have application to the record keeping requirements imposed by the Federal Records Act, like you think it does.

            If you are referring to FISA, not FISMA, please point to the provisions applicable to the Department of Treasury, not DOD.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Here’s a clue:

            “The controls selected or planned must be documented in the System Security Plan.”

          • objectivefactsmatter

            You can create straw men if you want. The law requires that regulated agencies follow published security regulations. The IRS has already failed many audits. The question is whether it wants to use this incompetence as a cover while revealing to the public just how serious the consequences are if we decide to tolerate such gross incompetence.

            If you’re part of the confusion and incompetence, maybe you should look for a way to earn an honest living.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            So you are a lawyer or some other agent and you have fiduciary obligations to defend the IRS.

            Is that correct?

          • ExRepug

            I am a lawyer. As a private practitioner I have no duty, other than as required by the rules of professional responsibility applicable to all members of the profession, to the IRS, state departments of revenue, or any other agency. I have a fiduciary duty to my clients in certain respects, but my duties are primarily of the nature of the duty against negligence that everyone owes to the other members of society.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Nonetheless, you’re a paid partisan.

            That’s not a personal attack. I’m just pointing out that your mission right now is not to find truth or find justice from the perspective of an ordinary taxpayer or objective observer.

            Therefore you must be biased by law. You’re not in the role of judge or juror. You’re duty is to play a partisan role.

          • DanielTourtillott

            So you really believe that everyones hard drive crashed?
            C’mon man really?
            Even if you believe that, you must also believe none were recoverable, a d beyond that you must also believe all the backups are gone? And beyond that you believe e there is itching on the servers?

            The chances you are right is around 1/1000000000000

          • ExRepug

            I knew that you would not be able to find any provision in the Act, because It. Does. Not. Exist. Your deflection doesn’t fool anyone, Dan.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            It’s inferred from reading the regulations. You can’t find that kind of detail in the law itself.

          • ExRepug

            Courts don’t “Infer” meaning into regulations, but nevertheless, perhaps you could cite to the regulation that you believe this should be inferred from.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            I didn’t say they infer meaning. The law points to specific regulations detailed elsewhere. Why don’t you read it and see for yourself?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            The only acceptable answer to congress would have been “destroyed per policy” or “here you go.”

            Every other answer leads down the path to using IRS incompetence as a defense strategy.

          • Smiddywesson

            I don’t need to quote the CFR when someone tells me a improbable, self serving, and patent lie, especially multiple overlapping ones. But nice try Perry Mason.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            They’ve already discovered conflicts between the testimony provided and the audit trail.

            They are lying. It’s just not clear if they can still cover their tracks by throwing up more feigned incompetence to fuse with the absurd stupidity that’s already known.

  • Habbgun

    Is there some form of subpoena that causes heart failure? Can we start using it?

  • edlancey

    Did she have a Blackberry ? Blackberry’s work by having mirror copies made of Microsoft Exchange emails, and then sending those mirrored copies to Blackberry device.

    Unless those all crashed as well…

  • objectivefactsmatter

    So the entire organization is incompetent and unable to follow the most essential laws that we have for securing data…at the IRS?

    Obviously we need to reboot the IRS. And by reboot…I mean purge every person and scrutinize every policy and law.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    This is trivial compared to the other lies, but I also love how they just add that backup tapes are recycled after 6 months. As if you don’t restore data unless there is a congressional investigation where the data is due within 6 months of the crash…OK then.

    I mean they’ve already admitted they’ve violated the data security laws. That alone is a huge scandal. Huge. It’s the freaking IRS! And they want to expand the role of the IRS!

    Just on what we know already, this scandal should be rocking the nation. But what do we get?

    And my biggest fear is that even if we sail past this with no apparent damage to the IRS (big deal, they had their budgets cut temporarily), they’re setting a precedent for what the public will tolerate. We will never be able to successfully investigate any government organization after this if the IRS is not absolutely held accountable for every failure here.

    This is the most dangerous scandal of the republic since its birth.

    • ExRepug

      I guess you missed that hearing before the House Ways & Means Committee on June 24. Pretty much all federal agencies reuse backup tapes after six months, so it is the norm. It doesn’t violate the Federal Records Act or any other law.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        They’ve fooled you.

        It does not violate the law to recycle tapes. It violates the law to fail to retain *explicitly required* tapes.

        There are very comprehensive requirements for how data is secured. Some redundant tapes can of course be recycled. Just as some redundant hard drives can legally be destroyed. What’s relevant is which procedures are followed to secure the data. And that is where they admit they violated the law by either not retaining the *relevant* and required tapes to meet the data security laws, or by not having lawful data security policies in the first place.

        “Pretty much all federal agencies reuse backup tapes after six months, so it is the norm.”

        It’s a nutshell game they’re playing. There are different kinds of tapes. You can recycle redundant tapes. You can’t recycle them simply by age. To put it simply, you can’t lawfully recycle the last tape. Only redundant tapes.

        Backups are usually made every day. You have to be able to restore the entire system. But each day the previous day’s tape can become redundant, depending on how you structure the backup protocols. What you can’t do is recycle a tape, even after 6 months if there is no tape that has the data and if there is a pending restore project like the alleged bad disks.

        And even in theory if they had violated the retention laws by recycling every single tape after 6 months, why would any technician waste time and money restoring a hard drive (as they also describe) when it’s faster and usually cheaper to simply get the tape from the day before? Who would wait for 6 months to look for the backup tape? Nobody. Even amateurs would think after a few days at most, where is the backup tape?

        They’re lying to you. What they describe violates the law.

        You can verify what I say by reading the data security requirements for the IRS. We’re still a republic.

      • Tea for 330 million

        Don’t you love that your defense of your Democrat buddies at the IRS, FEC, and the WH is basically that destruction of evidence is normal and taking the fifth in regard to it, and another person who took the fifth in regards to receiving leaked donor lists from the IRS through a “conduit” is also the normal behavior of law abiding bureaucrats just doing their job!

        I am not sure you have left that “repugnant” thing behind you seem to be so proud of.

      • DanielTourtillott

        Are you a computer generating random political sentences?
        You just keep saying the same thing over and over.
        IT people at the IRS just stated the drives were recoverable they just didn’t do it.
        Thick much?

        • ExRepug

          I keep reading the same redundant comments over and over.

          Name one of these “IT people” you are referring to. You can’t, because Camp won’t reveal the name of this anonymous technician who allegedly made that claim. On the other hand, three IRS IT techs with impressive credentials are willing to put their names on affidavits and describe, under oath, the efforts made to recover the data before concluding it was not possible. Here is the evidence you have to rebut: http://images.politico.com/global/2014/07/18/irstruethevote.html

          • objectivefactsmatter

            You’re in over your head if you think that testimony is worth anything to anyone that knows computer science forensics.

            You think this is small potatoes and people are just going to say, yeah, that seems right. Sure.

            That’s just another round to shut the judge up.

          • Smiddywesson

            You must have missed the classes on appearing credible to a jury. You have an excuse for everything and appear completely dishonest. Maybe you are being honest, and are just stupid, but that does nothing to bolster your argument.
            Whether it was a violation of the law or not, it WAS a coverup based on the actions of the accused agency, the MO of the Administration, and simple logic.

    • VoteOutIncumbents

      Gee…good thing the IRS is not in charge of medicine…oh, wait.

      • CaoMoo

        Ive already said…Hmm thats a mighty important surgery you need vote the way we tell you and you just might get it

  • Hank Rearden

    Have to stop having these lawyers and administrators testify. Have to get the hands-on tech people. What was the routine on the tech side? When a disk crashed, the disk was destroyed and they assured that no back-ups had been made? Was that the procedure?

    • ExRepug

      No, no, no — you don’t understand. Issa subpoenaed this specific attorney. Issa didn’t subpoena the IT folks. The chairman subpoenaed a lawyer so the staff could question him about IT matters. There’s a method to Issa’s madness. The IT techs are going to be subpoenaed when Issa gets to the tax law questions.

  • MeanGirltwo

    IRS is a criminal organization. Shut them down!

    • objectivefactsmatter

      But they’ve institutionalized their criminal behavior, so we’re supposed to just accept it at this point.

  • ExRepug

    The IT manager who heads the group that includes the technician who worked on Lerner’s drive made an affidavit that was filed in the United States District Court on Friday. Obviously, he wasn’t “disappeared” by the agency, so the innuendo that something hinky had to be going on because three managers out of a hundred or so are no longer with the agency is just that — innuendo.

    • Tea for 330 million

      That’s right Mr Paralegal. All of these destroyed hard drives that just coincidentally happened to destroy the IM communications between parties, including at least one hard drive at the FEC are just plain serendipity in action!

      BTW, when you handle starts with a lie, why should anybody believe anything you say? You were never a Republican. I bet you can’t name a Republican you ever voted for, and if you make one up, I bet you can’t explain why you voted for them. Republicans can usually explain their actions, liberals usually have to lie about their motives.

      • Padraig

        Boom. Well said.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    Must have been a laser-delivered EMP strike from Iran or the TEA party.

  • Raymond_in_DC

    Curious that in the 25 years I spent doing IT work – at the IRS! – I never experienced such a cluster of hard drive failures. And, though I wasn’t thrilled about the enterprise E-mail solution they long ago adopted (based on Exchange and Outlook), it never lost any of my email, which was stored on central servers just outside DC – not on my personal PC. That’s why I find this series of claims about “lost e-mail” so ludicrous.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      They claim that they needed to limit mailbox size and began storing email on client PCs. That’s OK under certain conditions. It does not excuse having backups. And there are other problems with this testimony.

      I won’t go in to detail because I don’t want to broadcast clues that allow liars to modify their stories. Certain traps have been laid.

  • tickletik

    Congress is composed of spineless bribe taking garbage. If there was anything even resembling a man in that pit of jellyfish they would put that whore up on charges of materially obstructing a lawful investigation.

    Do you think ANY of us would ever be capable of getting away with that excuse? We’d be thrown into prison in a heartbeat.

  • knowshistory

    why belabor the obvious? anyone capable of thought knows that the destruction of the irs hard drives was an intentional premeditated crime committed with the full knowledge of the Obama administration and the thugs who control the irs. only democratic stooges pretend to believe otherwise. the only question is what punishment are the criminals going to suffer. the answer is none.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      They’re on record now claiming they sent the disk to “crime lab” technicians but they have disclosed absolutely nothing about what procedures they followed. They offered an entire CV for the tech whose word we are supposed to trust that he “tried.”

      It’s typical bluff as you’d expect from “expert” witnesses, except that he is a direct witness. This individual needs to be cross examined.

  • Tea for 330 million

    It is not the emails, Lerner made pretty clear that she wasn’t that stupid. She said that the IMs were the “perfect” vehicle for avoiding subpoenas. IMs are stored on the local hard drive, that is why she thought the weren’t “searchable,” because they are not stored on the servers. That is why so many hard drives had to be destroyed.

    When these emails come out, there will be little there, and co-conspirator Cummings will be crying out for the “witch hunt” to end.

    When they destroyed the hard drives, they got away. Maybe not clean, but whatever was on there that was worth this level of bad optics to get rid of is gone.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      The obstruction efforts still count as evidence. Eventually forensics will answer our questions about who is involved even if we can’t recreate every conversation word for word.

      We citizens need to make sure we keep the pressure on.

    • DanielTourtillott

      Legally speaking when one party destroys evidence the law assumes the evidence to be worst case scenario for the offending party.
      I won a case against Kroger because the video tapes were erased even though a criminal act and police report were made.
      It was a easy win

  • joe dirt

    Where’s NSA now? They could dig up the info I imagine.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      No, they only target political enemies these days. That’s us.

      • joe dirt

        Oops, my bad ;)

  • CaoMoo

    Cant they just go for a RICO suit against these criminals who commit conspiracy then waterboard them to see if Barry was involved

  • Smiddywesson

    Not true, hard disks on DESKTOPS do get scratched, you just have to wait for 5:01 pm when all the federal workers are gone and topple your desktop off your desktop, repeatedly.