Althouse: NYT reports: "The Internal Revenue Service did not follow the law..."

June 24, 2014

NYT reports: "The Internal Revenue Service did not follow the law..."

"... when it failed to report a hard drive crash that destroyed emails belonging to a senior official at the center of a scandal over the agency’s treatment of conservative-leaning political groups, the nation’s top archivist said Tuesday."

73 comments:

tim maguire said...: The reason, of course, is that it did not destroy any emails. Until the crash and subsequent destruction of the hard drive became a useful event, it was just a piece of equipment that was replaced.; 6/24/14, 7:35 PM
Original Mike said...: "NYT reports:"

This is my shocked face.; 6/24/14, 7:35 PM
Matt said...: Heh, rhetorical pretzels.; 6/24/14, 7:37 PM
Just asking questions (Jaq) said...: Not a "smidgin" of corruption:

"Two years after activists for same-sex marriage obtained the confidential tax return and donor list of a national group opposed to redefining marriage, the Internal Revenue Service has admitted wrongdoing and agreed to settle the resulting lawsuit.

The Daily Signal has learned that, under a consent judgment today, the IRS agreed to pay $50,000 in damages to the National Organization for Marriage as a result of the unlawful release of the confidential information to a gay rights group, the Human Rights Campaign, that is NOM’s chief political rival."

"Unauthorized disclosure of confidential tax information is a felony offense that can result in five years in prison, but the Department of Justice did not bring criminal charges."

The link; 6/24/14, 7:37 PM
Anonymous said...: And the Democrats will continue to shill for the IRS and will continue to say, "Move along. Nothing to see here."

I understand you're not conservative Ann because of our social side. But something you don't understand about social conservatives. We have a moral core that doesn't allow us to stand up for crooks and thrives when we spot them on our team.

Its true that we may be willing to give them the benefit of the doubt when they are on our team, but once evidence like this starts to stack up, you'll never see us protect them in lockstep like Democrats will.; 6/24/14, 7:42 PM
damikesc said...: I'm floored that Democrats have no problem with this.

Do they think this can NEVER impact them?; 6/24/14, 7:44 PM
Strategist said...: "Did not follow the law". Is that the same as breaking the law?; 6/24/14, 7:48 PM
Tarrou said...: NO EVIDENCE OF WRONGDOING!

I blame white people and demand reparations for my fellow african americans.; 6/24/14, 7:57 PM
Bob Boyd said...: The manager of Ford's Theater did not say Booth committed a crime, only that was not following the law, when he sneaked into a play without a ticket on April 14th.; 6/24/14, 8:00 PM
YoungHegelian said...: NYT reports:"The Internal Revenue Service did not follow the law"

I'm sorry, but for anyone who is familiar with Federal IT & Federal IT regulations, the only response to this is: "No shit, Sherlock!".; 6/24/14, 8:06 PM
David said...: They noticed!; 6/24/14, 8:07 PM
LilyBart said...: So, it looks like the IRS would rather take the heat of the suspicious 'computer email crash' than have the emails actually get out!

Yeah, that's what it looks like.; 6/24/14, 8:13 PM
Birkel said...: Gambling at Rick's, you say?; 6/24/14, 8:14 PM
Jupiter said...: There was a time when the fact that one or more major departments of the federal government intentionally violated the law would have been -- what? "News", I suppose. What you put in a newspaper, if it is fit to print. At this point, I am surprised that a propaganda organ of the Democratic Party would want to call anyone'e attention to this depressing but unsurprising fact.; 6/24/14, 8:15 PM
gk1 said...: Yeah, I totally want these guys to be in not only charge of my financial but my health records too! What a bunch of losers. Thanks dems.; 6/24/14, 8:18 PM
Hagar said...: All the news we see fit to print, and when and how.; 6/24/14, 8:20 PM
B said...: Now that we know laws were broken, I'm sure Elijah Cummings will aggressively pursue this.; 6/24/14, 8:24 PM
Patrick said...: "Did not follow," "broke," whatev.; 6/24/14, 8:27 PM
khesanh0802 said...: Slowly, slowly things are beginning to fall apart. What is Koskinen going to say at his next hearing - which I am sure will be soon. If I were Issa I would keep Koskinen's ugly mug on the TV as much as possible. Only John Mitchell could have been a more unsympathetic witness!; 6/24/14, 8:36 PM
jaed said...: Do we think the hard drive actually crashed?

If there was a hard drive crash, would it have destroyed all the email she'd copied to the drive? (No, not unless there was physical damage to the drive. Which isn't likely. These days, disk-structure damage that renders the data inaccessible is damn rare.)

More to the point, do we believe that destruction of a hard drive on someone's desktop PC would have somehow magically reached out and destroyed the archives on the mailserver? And the backups used to reimage the replacement PC?

All of this strikes me as tail-chasing of a particularly fishy cover story rather than going to the main point.; 6/24/14, 8:47 PM
madAsHell said...: ...and this was on which page??; 6/24/14, 8:48 PM
TMink said...: They had me with the first nine words.; 6/24/14, 8:50 PM
aberman said...: The NY Times is ok writing about this because 'not reporting the loss' is a side issue.; 6/24/14, 8:51 PM
Richard Dolan said...: Nothing to see. Obama said so. Move on.; 6/24/14, 8:57 PM
Anonymous said...: aberman said...

The NY Times is ok writing about this because 'not reporting the loss' is a side issue.

Actually, "not reporting the loss" takes it from "possibly it happened" to "no, it did not happen."

An "innocent" crash would have been reported, as the law required. It's only a guilty "crash", where the hard drive was deliberately destroyed to cover up criminal activity, and where they wouldn't report what happened since it would risk the possibility that the backup tapes could be checked before the "six month wipe", where the "crash" would not be reported.

Every person will have a different "straw" that destroys believability. But this is going to turn out to be a big one.; 6/24/14, 9:26 PM
KLDAVIS said...: David said...
They noticed!

Only slightly.

"A version of this article appears in print on June 25, 2014, on page A15 of the New York edition with the headline: Archivist Faults I.R.S. for Not Reporting Loss of Emails."; 6/24/14, 9:36 PM
cf said...: Did you guys read the whole thing? Did you see their pissy little video?

Ugh. They are still into, oh the Repuglicans are such silly meanies.

I say, Everyone Out. Every IRs. Every Sen.Merkley sen.Franken. Every Koskinen. Every Lerner. No pensions, lucky to stay alive, assholes.

Voter suppression of the little guy, you pumped up creeps?

Drag em all through the streets, NYT included. Leave em cut and bleeding.

Rhetorically speaking...; 6/24/14, 9:46 PM
Michael said...: OK. So what are you going to do about it? Put the IRS in jail?

Here lies the problem of giant bureaucracies. They can tell anyone, including the POTUS to go fuck themselves. And all, including the POTUS, know it.; 6/24/14, 9:50 PM
rcommal said...: The NYT report noticed that the IRS (which is a sub-part of the Department of the Treasury) did not follow the law.

It did not note that in order for that to be the case, specific people of some number broke the law.

Shameful bit of language-whoring and bureaucratic ducking.

Reportage, my ass.; 6/24/14, 10:06 PM
chillblaine said...: "Not a "smidgin" of corruption"

I think that Obama actually believes this. To him, corruption means quid pro quo. Like when a building inspector takes a cash bribe to look the other way, to him, that is corruption.; 6/24/14, 10:17 PM
Left Bank of the Charles said...: I am shocked, shocked that the crashed hard drive did not report itself to the national archivist.

The FBI needs to dig that hard drive up from whatever landfill it was deposited in, read it its rights, and prosecute to the full extent of the law.

The poor IRS story about the backups and the hard drive crash is probably true (exclusive of Lois Lerner's part in causing it to happen, to which she refuses to testify). But no one wants to believe the IRS, it's too much fun not to, so they won't be believed.; 6/24/14, 10:29 PM
Carnifex said...: Nothing will happen until people are put into jail. With Zero and Holder in office , everyone who committed these crimes has a get out of jail free card. Ergo, nothing will happen.

I am against the death penalty on religious grounds but what the Zero regime, and I use that term in the fullest sense, has done deserves nothing less than execution of the whole elected Democratic caucus. That's how seriously I think they have damaged this country.; 6/24/14, 10:49 PM
Lnelson said...: We've finally reached Banana Republic status.
Good job guys and gals.; 6/24/14, 11:10 PM
rcommal said...: Carnifex:

So, in other words, you *aren't* actually, truly against the death penalty, your religious grounds notwithstanding.

---

(You'd sell your religious principles to make more strong your political points on a blog?

WTH?)

--

Heh. I am not surprised. (As always, unfortunately.); 6/25/14, 1:04 AM
Paul said...: Question.... if this 'hard drive' crash erased 2 years of emails of Learner's .. should not alot of other employees emails been lost?

The officials should have memos to that effect on file somewhere... unless magically ONLY Learner's were lost.; 6/25/14, 1:41 AM
Anonymous said...: "Unauthorized disclosure of confidential tax information is a felony offense that can result in five years in prison, but the Department of Justice did not bring criminal charges."

Can the victims not demand "felony charges" or is that at the total discretion of Holder's "justice department"?

Doesn't the IRS have internal procedures to punish this sort of thing? Where there consequences for the criminals in question? If not, what is the point. It's not as if it is the IRS's own money.

50.000 dollars seems peanuts. Conservatives really need to grow a pair if they want to combat the lawfare of the left.; 6/25/14, 2:39 AM
Just asking questions (Jaq) said...: Leftie,
The IRS admitted to a felony yesterday. That they disclosed donor lists from a conservative organization to a liberal one.

They got the donor list as part of the political harassment, I mean, "special scrutiny" in a separate division to which they subjected only conservative groups, despite liberal talking points to the contrary.

Lerner refused to testify on the grounds of her right not to self incriminate, BTW.

The emails are a side show, a side show crafted by the administration.; 6/25/14, 4:35 AM
Just asking questions (Jaq) said...: For those of you who think this is innocent please explain:

Republicans and conservative groups widely complain that they are being run through hoops to get approved by the IRS, including the demands for donor lists and other data not normally required for this.

- June 3, 2011 Lois Lerner's direct boss, the head of the IRS receives a notice of the investigation and a request for all records relating to how political organizations were selected for scrutiny.

At this point, I think a judge would probably say that the right thing to do would be to set those tapes aside as evidence and spring for the 50 bucks or whatever for a new backup tape to put into the rotation.

- June 13, 2011 Lois Lerner's hard drive 'crashes.' At this point there were six months of emails stored on the backup system.

- The IRS decides not to restore the email of one of its most senior executives on the grounds that it would have been 'too costly." See the testimony of Koskinen Monday night. Now each day that passes, more emails disappear forever.

- The IRS internally 'tries' to recover the data, fails, and instead of keeping the hard drive, which could reasonably be expected to contain records related to policies on scrutiny, given that it belonged to the head of the division in question, as requested in the letter from Congress, is discarded, or "recycled," is there term, which I guess means used again, even though it was "unreadable."

Six or seven, I have lost count, other hard drives which contain copies of the emails also crash, including one belonging to a figure fired in the controversy. None of these can be restored, nor do they go to the backup either. Despite the request from Congress for all records relating to the policies on selecting applications for scrutiny, which was the business of this department.

-Lois Lerner takes the fifth after proclaiming her innocence.

-The IRS notifies the WH that they lost emails. The WH has promised to work hand in hand with Congress to get to the bottom of this, but does not notify Congress.

Oddly, in the effort to recover the emails by gathering emails other people within the IRS we copied on, no emails to the White House or to the DNC were recovered. Despite the fact that key figures in the scandal, who had nothing to do with the ACA, BTW, but enforcement of these rules regarding political/charitable organizations, visited the WH 155 times. All without arranging the meetings by email, or following up any items by email, or leaving any email trail whatsoever.

-The IRS finally chooses to respond to the subpoena, cops to losing the emails, long after the taped backups had cycled away, and claimed that they could restore no emails between the White House and the IRS, despite those 155 meetings.

Yesterday, the IRS admits to wrongdoing in giving a donor list, obtained through this "special scrutiny" from a conservative organization to a liberal organization. A felony with a possible punishment of five years in federal prison, and pays a $50,000 settlement.

-Eric Holder declines to prosecute the people who helped Obama get elected.

The whole controversy was about using the IRS to pry donor lists from conservative organizations, holding up approval until after the election, basically weighing in on the election on one side.

Does anybody know why the consent decree would be under lock and key? Shouldn't it be a public record? It related directly to this scandal that is now focused on the emails.; 6/25/14, 5:17 AM
Brando said...: If Holder won't appoint a special prosecutor to investigate this, that should be grounds for impeachment of the Attorney General.

And the GOP needs to make this a top campaign issue for the fall--every American can relate to a fear of the IRS, and where that agency is abusing its power that should resonate at the polls. Any Democratic congressional candidate should be forced to answer whether they'd vote to demand a special prosecutor here.; 6/25/14, 5:53 AM
Tank said...: Larry Nelson said...

We've finally reached Banana Republic status.
Good job guys and gals.

Elijah Cummings is the perfect face for that.; 6/25/14, 6:27 AM
ilvuszq said...: Prosecute someone. Start making (in)actions have consequences. When people start being punished bad behavior will stop.; 6/25/14, 6:33 AM
Carnifex said...: rcommal

you should worry more about your politicians selling out your country than my morals. I'll stand in front of God soon enough.; 6/25/14, 6:33 AM
Just asking questions (Jaq) said...: Remember when these kinds of things used to be known as "Constitutional Crises"?; 6/25/14, 7:24 AM
The Drill SGT said...: Tim in Vermont, your timeline while excellent doesn't start early enough.

per the WSJ, the clock starts:

In August 2010 Z Street sued the IRS on grounds that this selective processing of its application amounted to viewpoint discrimination.

Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and legal precedent, once the suit was filed the IRS was required to preserve all evidence relevant to the viewpoint-discrimination charge. That means that no matter what dog ate Lois Lerner's hard drive or what the IRS habit was of recycling the tapes used to back up its email records of taxpayer information, it had a legal duty not to destroy the evidence in ongoing litigation. In private white-collar cases, companies facing a lawsuit routinely operate under what is known as a "litigation hold," instructing employees to affirmatively retain all documents related to the potential litigation. A failure to do that and any resulting document loss amounts to what is called "willful spoliation," or deliberate destruction of evidence if any of the destroyed documents were potentially relevant to the litigation.; 6/25/14, 7:27 AM
rhhardin said...: I'm reporting that my idle 2005 Dell laptop got a blue screen of death overnight, in case that's required.; 6/25/14, 7:30 AM
Tank said...: Tank said...
Larry Nelson said...

We've finally reached Banana Republic status.
Good job guys and gals.

Elijah Cummings is the perfect face for that.

Ted Kennedy would have been the perfect white guy for this position, but he's dead.; 6/25/14, 7:44 AM
Mark said...: Speaking of toxic, why are our Progressive friends still so eager to expand the powers of government when the current government is so clearly indifferent to the laws of the land?

Will you cheer as our country becomes an Imperial State as long as the first American Caesar has a (D) after his or her name? Historically speaking that hasn't worked out well for other great civilizations.; 6/25/14, 7:57 AM
The Crack Emcee said...: Carnifex,

"you should worry more about your politicians selling out your country than my morals. I'll stand in front of God soon enough."

And he's gonna laaaaaugh,….; 6/25/14, 8:06 AM
Doug said...: democrats "did not follow the law".
Republicans "broke the law with malice aforethought". Check the NYT stylebook - it's in there.; 6/25/14, 8:12 AM
Delayna said...: Not reporting the lost emails is only the *last* broken law in a chain--starting with the illegal activities they were covering up.

The only way Lerner's emails could be lost by her personal (agency issued?) hard drive crashing would be if the entire IRS was violating Federal laws about how Federal records should be stored.

All Federal employees are required to take annual training on what constitutes a Federal record and how they are to be preserved. The IRS IT department should be intimately familiar with these rules. There are multiple layers of archiving--overlapping backups and offsite storage.

ALL, all Federal employees know that this whole thing is one big fat steaming pile of fresh stinking BS. Whether or not they will admit it to you is a useful litmus test of their basic honesty.; 6/25/14, 8:42 AM
Matt Sablan said...: I'm sure it is a phony scandal without a smidgeon of corruption though.; 6/25/14, 8:50 AM
Just asking questions (Jaq) said...: "And he's gonna laaaaaugh,…." Crack

Don't worry Crack, you will get your reparations in Heaven, don't listen to Bob Marley.; 6/25/14, 8:51 AM
Just asking questions (Jaq) said...: Read about IRS lawbreaking that just "happened" to help the Democrats in the LGBTQNation

This is the only reference to the story that came up on google news, not that the MSM is trying to bury this story or anything.; 6/25/14, 9:07 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: I was somewhat amazed that the NYT, after a decent headline, said so little about what happened the last couple days in Congress, and had to get in the obligatory 'Throughout the I.R.S. hearings, Democratic lawmakers on the Oversight Committee and the Ways and Means Committee have complained about Republicans’ “badgering” of witnesses', led by, of course, the execrable Rep. Cummings, who, himself was involved in pushing the IRS to investigate Tea Party groups. As is their want in this sort of situation, the NYT did its best to distract and minimize what is going on right now with the IRS.

What is a bit chilling is that the Administration in general, and the IRS in particular, seem to have taken the lessen from previous Obama Administration scandals, notably here, I think, Fast and Furious, that if they just stonewall for a bit, the evil Republicans will go way, and they know that the Eric Holder and his Justice Department have their back, having refused to follow up on criminal referrals from Congress. People at the IRS (as well as VA, BATFE, etc.) should be going to jail, but, as I keep pointing out, one big reason that winning is everything for the Dems and the left (which justifies cheating) is that they then control the levers of justice.

Also note that what the IRS commissioner was defending, was that the IRS seems to be trying to run out the clock here. The 5, 6, or 7 crashed hard drives (all within a week or so, and all involving players in this scandal) are in some landfill, the tapes are erased, and the contractor that was backing up their email long gone. Note how the IRS knew of this in Feb., but didn't bother telling Congress until late June, despite being in the midst of document production for them. And, then, it was in the middle of a letter to the SENATE, controlled by Dems who are, for the most part, protecting the IRS, instead of investigating it.

So, of course, there were fireworks yesterday, and of course, the NYT pretended that nothing happened.; 6/25/14, 9:14 AM
Blackbeard said...: "I'm floored that Democrats have no problem with this.

Do they think this can NEVER impact them?"

They can ignore this because the media will continue to ignore it.; 6/25/14, 9:32 AM
William said...: I think that this is past smidgeon and into smudgeon......This must have been done with the help of someone with a smidgin of IT expertise. Presumably IT employees are not hired based on their political affiliations. I wonder if a whistleblower will come forward.......Maybe not. You only get heroic whistleblower status if you report something embarrassing to Republicans or major corporations. See the difference between Linda Tripp and Anita Hill. One's a snitch, and the other is a whistleblower.....If some IRS employee comes forward and reveals how the levers were pulled, we will soon learn of his chronic bed wetting problems and why his ex wife divorced him. Better to keep quiet.; 6/25/14, 10:06 AM
Boltforge said...: tim in vermont said...
"For those of you who think this is innocent please explain:"

On the backup tapes ... they are hiding the real archive solution used. Those 6mo tapes are mostly meaningless for long term email. The IRS used Sonasoft to archive their emails (a dedicated archive service is sometimes needed to keep that volume of information).

June 3, 2011 they are notified of the investigation.

Within weeks of that what happened? They canceled the email archiving contract, removed all emails from being stored on the MS Exchange server, had 7+ hard drive crashes, and ran out the clock on the low end 6mo server backups.

That is a serious attempt to wipe ALL information. Just from that alone the IT staff should probably go to prison, because they KNOW that all of that should never happen. It is written into their jobs and required by law to keep the data safe.

Things to dig into ... who cancelled the Sonosoft contract and what was their "plan" for archiving. They had a contract for a reason (it is required by law), if it was cancelled without a replacement it was done to destroy data. And the person who did it needs to go do jail.; 6/25/14, 10:36 AM
Hagar said...: I just thought of it, that we only have the IRS' word for it that these hard-drives crashed and were "recycled."
What if they still exist? At least some of them?; 6/25/14, 11:10 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: I just thought of it, that we only have the IRS' word for it that these hard-drives crashed and were "recycled."
What if they still exist? At least some of them?

I don't think that they do. Too dangerous. They talked somewhere about recycling. That would presumably mean that the drives were parted out. Then, if they can't actually recycle the physical disks, they at least will be separated from their visible serial numbers, and are likely by now at the bottom of some landfill.

When the email part of the scandal was just about the 6 month backups and a single hard drive, it almost was credible. The IRS actually might be so far behind the times that they weren't backing up email properly (meaning, I believe, journaling the email traffic, and then archiving the journals indefinitely - which takes a lot less room than doing what they claim to have been doing, which was backing up the static email on the servers). But, when a bunch of hard drives all supposedly crashed within a short period of time for a bunch of the key people in the Lerner part of the scandal, it became, in my mind, close to certainty, a cover up. Of course, there is a minuscule chance that it truly was happenstance. But, I think that the IRS would have to come forward with the numbers of hard drive failures that they had over time, and during that short period of time, and esp. in their DC office. My guess is that the odds of all those hard drives of those related people crashing during such a short period of time is on the order of less than one in a million. Clearly, less than 1%, which means that you are into beyond a reasonable doubt territory.

Not formal probability, but back of the envelope type to get orders of magnitude here. If you have a hard drive with a two year life, in which it is likely to crash at any point during that time, the chance of crashing during any one week is about 1% (or 1/10^2) Probability of two unrelated crashes multiplies these together - 1%*1% = 1%% (1/10^4). Five would be 1%%%%% (1/10^10). That is one in ten billion. Of course, the chances of hard drives crashing during their lifetimes is not evenly distributed, but increases through time. But, they also typically last well beyond 2 years these days, so the 1% is probably not far enough off to really matter (i.e. the real answer maybe 1/10^6, or 1/10^14, but likely not more probable than that).

Working with null hypotheses, and those back-of-the envelop figures, it is very highly likely that the crash of those five or six hard drives during that short period of time were not unrelated. And, very likely were not random. I don't think that you can completely eliminate the possibility that one crash was not random. But 5 or 6? Yes, I think that you can.; 6/25/14, 12:00 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: Back to what I think might have happened. I don't see the IT people being all that involved in the hard drive crashes. So, how did they do it? Could completely erasing the hard drives to it? I doubt it. Routine diagnostics would probably reveal that the hard drives were still perfectly operable, and a bunch of those all at once would seemingly be suspicious. Is there a way to drop the computer case that would do it? I don't know. These probably aren't the type of people who would pop the skins, pull the drives, and then drop them, and that may not be sufficient, since the heads are presumably retracted at that time.

Just Googled crashing a hard drive, and a couple of things popped up:
1. Introducing a virus (and turning off low level virus protection).
2. Use of a magnet or hammer.
3. Under Windows XP, modifying the registry (w/RegEdit) to allow crashing on holding down the Ctl key. (but crashing the computer isn't crashing the hard drive).

Absent popping the skins (which this group of people would seem unlikely to do), it is still fairly easy to figure out where the hard drive is, and even easier if you get the schematics (easy enough to do with models sold to the IRS in volume). And, indeed, the manufacturers often do (or at least did) provide fairly simple documentation on how to open up a PC, insert boards, and replace hard drives. A magnet would seemingly be the best physical approach (absent the virus), but it is not clear that you could get a powerful enough magnet close enough to the drive in a desktop machine, w/o opening up the box. It may be easier on a laptop, and contemplating how to do it. Still, if you put a big enough magnet right up to the case right next to the hard drive, and made sure that it was running (or maybe not), it might just work.; 6/25/14, 12:21 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: I should add to my last post about hard drives, is that it really is easier to pop the hard drive on my (non-Apple) laptops, than my desktop machines. A screw or two opening up a small door on the bottom, and you are in.; 6/25/14, 12:22 PM
Boltforge said...: Hagar said...
"What if [the hard drives] still exist? At least some of them?"

They don't. Government rules on hard drives is full wipe. If a drive is serviceable for reuse, you use an approved standard (usually a 6 time rewrite of all data structures) to remove all possibility of recovering the data. If the drive is damaged you physically destroy the drive using a drive shredder. It is also a guarantee that there would be a paper trail for this action.

The Govt LOVES their data wipe documentation. There will be three or more copies of it. One held by the technician, one held by the purchasing agent tracking 'dead' hardware, and one by the warehouse taking the hardware. It would be really easy to get.

Once someone marked the drive as bad the support group would take it from there and destroy it like any other device. Unless they are really really lazy and just set it on a shelf.; 6/25/14, 12:24 PM
Boltforge said...: Just call in the tech personnel, the purchasing/disposal agents, and all relevant documents.

Ask for ...
What machines (with serial numbers etc) were used by the people of interest.

All documentation for purchase, repair, and disposal.

All signed tech docs for data removal and disposal.

All correspondence for work requests relevant to the hardware.

Bring in all the server admins with their personal documentation on data care, software used for data preservation, and contracts for such software.

... each of those usually have a required 48 hour turn around time anyway. Administrators can go to any one of tech crew and ask for the above and expect a reply in 48 hours (with physically producing the hardware as requested as well if it is mobile).; 6/25/14, 12:33 PM
Steve said...: Where's WikiLeaks, or Anonymous, or other hackers? We know someone can get into those computers, or other computers, cell phones or laptops of recipients.; 6/25/14, 12:48 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: Once someone marked the drive as bad the support group would take it from there and destroy it like any other device. Unless they are really really lazy and just set it on a shelf.

So, the question still remains, how did all those drives get marked as bad in such a short period of time?

And, that may be where your paper trail comes in. I would expect that there would be some indication of why all those drives were considered bad in all that paperwork.; 6/25/14, 2:04 PM
Boltforge said...: Bruce Hayden said...
"So, the question still remains, how did all those drives get marked as bad in such a short period of time?"

Honestly? I'm thinking just because they said so. I'd guess everyone above the tech level is just plain lying. The easiest way to get rid of the data? Mark the old laptop as obsolete and buy a new one. Old one would probably just go through a computer shredder. ( little video of a shredder ... http://youtu.be/14_fVmfM4-0 )

Bruce Hayden said...
"And, that may be where your paper trail comes in. I would expect that there would be some indication of why all those drives were considered bad in all that paperwork."

Yep. Administrators would have a hard time faking the paper work of the tech support crews. Because Administrators LOVE them some paperwork. Nothing better to keep your job than making everyone below you fill out paperwork in triplicate.; 6/25/14, 2:58 PM
Original Mike said...: Something I haven't seen reported, but was stated as fact by a couple of posters here; What is the time frame of the "crashed" drives? I know Lerner's drive "crashed" 10 days after Camp sent his letter to the IRS. When did the other drives "crash"?; 6/25/14, 3:36 PM
Just asking questions (Jaq) said...: Ran across something else interesting today. A dot to connect...

Above I pointed to the article where the IRS admitted wrongdoing in leaking a donor list which found its way to Joe Solmonese, a Co Chair of the Obama campaign.

Of course it was all unintentional, even though the main subject of the investigation took the fifth, like Lerner, and holder has declined to grant immunity to force testimony.

Where did that donor list come from and why did the IRS have it in the first place:

"They also sent some letters out that were far too broad, asking questions of these organizations that weren’t really necessary for the type of application. In some cases you probably read that they asked for contributor names. That’s not appropriate, not usual," - Lois Lerner's apology

So the reason the had the list they they leaked, accidentally, since, well you know, the witness took the fifth and nobody can prove nuttin' is because of the same enhanced scrutiny that is at the center of all of these hearings.

It doesn't really sound much like a "phony scandal" to me anymore.; 6/25/14, 5:52 PM
Just asking questions (Jaq) said...: They probably had a party at the White House to "crash" the drives.

God himself might not know about some of the stuff they have there.; 6/25/14, 6:47 PM
donald said...: No shit Sherlocks.; 6/25/14, 8:32 PM
rcommal said...: you should worry more about your politicians selling out your country than my morals. I'll stand in front of God soon enough.

I'm assuming that when you wrote "your politicians" you meant to accuse me of a specific thing, of voting in a specifically generalized way and, more to the point, that I voted for specific people of whom you don't approve. That is the basis for my further assumption that you wrote "your country" as an extension of your accusation.

---

Have you considered whether the core assumption of your fundamental accusation is founded or not?

Because you ought.; 6/25/14, 10:13 PM
Pianoman said...: Companies like Iron Mountain will shred hard drives onsite. These are laptop drives, which are small -- 2 1/2". They essentially toss them into a "wood chipper" for drives, and shards of metal come out the other side.

That's my guess as to what happened here. They erased the incriminating emails from the servers, popped the hard drives, shredded them, then reported them "crashed".

I wonder if there will be a Deep Throat in the IRS case ... someone willing to spill their guts to a trusted member of the national media ...; 6/26/14, 12:38 AM
Pianoman said...: One of the companies I contracted for last year had a lawsuit filed against them, and they were required to create a checkpoint archive of all emails immediately, and set it aside. The idea was that, if the courts demanded it, the company would need to produce those emails immediately. We basically had to "drop everything", and get the archive done. A company that's unable to produce emails when it's demanded of them faces summary judgement, which can run into millions of dollars. This company I worked for didn't *have* millions of dollars, so it would have been the end of the company.

@Drill SGT: I was thinking about this when I read your 7:27 AM post. I wonder if Issa/Gowdy are thinking along the same lines.; 6/26/14, 12:57 AM