Posted on 07/19/2014 10:41:07 AM PDT by Innovative
The IRS declared under oath and penalty of perjury on Friday that Lois Lerner’s hard drive is irrecoverable after being wiped clean by tech staff and recycled with an outside contractor, according to a court filing.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
That “Voltaire” guy sounds like a smart fellow.
asking a lot of a kid to pick up his room..
considering it’s connected to the house. that’s a lot of weight to lift!
I’m telling ya, they are going to the records of all those in the IT department trying to find a republican.. Once they do.
That poor guy is dead meat..
When an individual is charged with a crime they are innocent until proven guilty. I assume this is partly because on one side you have a person and on the other you have the entire weight of government with its policing powers, infinite financial ability to prosecute, persecute, hound, jail, fine and so on. The balance of power is not balanced. THEREFORE, perhaps there should be a law which dictates that when the government is accused of wrongdoing against a citizen or citizens, the reverse is the case: GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT...and for the same reason. With their vast powers should come the burden of proving they did NOT break laws which harm citizens. They have the ability to prove their innocence, had they done their due diligence for which they are well-paid. It should be on them and if they can’t show their innocence because of missing documentation then it is assumed, or should be, that they have guilt. (Taking into account you can’t prove a negative and so on). Maybe I haven’t thought this through and I am thinking nonsensically, but at the moment it sounds right.
PST files can be stored on the local. If you lose your hard drive they can be lost. If it is important these files also will be backed up somewhere. Banks and other financial companies are required by FDIC to keep a record of all e-mails for many employees. HIPPA has laws the require the keeping medical records and some e-mails. Both these laws include criminal prosecution of those deliberately of negligently destroy e-mails records. This includes both the people the e-mails belong to and the IT personal that maintains the e-mail system.
The IT issues in government are massive. Look at Bradley Manning. Who would give a SPC 4 access to diplomatic traffic that has nothing to do with his/her job? Setting limits to access is one of the principals of IT security. I am getting ready to transfer and the IT loser in my office want to burn all my stuff to a CD. All my stuff is on a server and evidently he can't migrate it for me. Insane.
The only way any of these crooks would ever go to jail is if the “people” sentenced them.
The judicial authorities need to explore that level of the technology which the IRS uses.
The central point is that a hard drive is a piece of machinery and it is NOT — in itself — interesting. No one is REALLY interested in Lois Lerner’s hard drive. So, finding out the specific details of what happened to her hard drive is not (necessarily) a decent answer to the subpoena.
What is wanted is information about her EMAILS. Now, if the fact is that the emails only resided on that hard drive, then knowing the fate of the hard drive has relevance. But before we reach that conclusion, we do need to know the architecture of the email system.
A techie from the IRS needs to go under oath and explain how the IRS email works. A broad, technical explanation at the organizational level. That discussion isn’t about Lois Lerner, and it’s not about a specific hard drive which may or may not have been recycled on a specific date.
From the standpoint of the architecture of the IRS email system — WHERE do the emails reside?? Because the law says the IRS needs to keep them, and if their architecture really depends on emails being stored in a decentralized fashion on thousands of individual hard drives, then I would be AMAZED.
The House investigators HAVE to start putting heat on people so they will start turning on each other. Right now, they have no incentive because Holder sure as heck isn't going to prosecute.
Gentlemen, this IRS offensive Lerner defense is targeted not toward us, who know something; it's targeted to those over there, toward the great mind-washed, who know nothing!
The only answer I can think of is that the Republicans don’t want to find Lerner’s e-mails.
How about we pay the town, city, county where we live, who then cuts a fixed percentage check to the next entity above them. Town to county, city and county to state, state to Federal government. Keep the first control of funds closest to where those funds need to be used and where priorities can best be set for local needs.
Taking the public for fools, as usual.
1) To the best of their knowledge the data on the hard drive could not be restored so the hard drive was degaussed and destroyed.
2) However since they don't track hard drives individually they really have no idea what happened to the hard drive.
On 1 the testified that the data hard drive “could not be restored” , which means they could reload data onto the hard drive, not that the hard drive was damaged to the point that existing data on the malfunctioning hard drive was not recoverable. This also implies that the hard drive was not severely damaged and was still functional enough such that the technician tried to reload the drive with data to restore it.
The use of the term “restore “ in attempts to reload Lerner's original disk is semantically significant because restore has a very specific meaning.
In the context of recovering from a hard drive crash, the term restore means returning the drive to it's original pre crash state with all of the backed up data reloaded from the back up archives.
This implies two different things.
First, archival back up data of some sort for Lerner's drive was in possession of the techs who tried to reload her “failed” hard drive but were unable to do so.
Second, it is reasonable to assume that the techs goal was to “repair” Lerner's non functional computer if it was in fact non functional. In that case the techs would have installed a new hard drive into Lerner's computer and then restore Lerner's backed up data onto the new hard drive to restore the drive (remember Lerner is a VERY high level IRS employee and the IRS is legally obligated to preserve her data). The paperwork implies that back up data required to restore the drive was in existence and should have been loaded to Lerner's new drive when they could not load the back ups onto her ‘failed” drive to restore it.
Rather than tracking her old hard drive, it would be a good idea to check the repair history of her computer and determine the current disposition of her computers. These days most people have mirror image data on their desk top commuter, their portable computer and their cell phone.
It is also strange that the focus of the documents in IRS possession is solely on the hard drive and not on the repair of her non functional computer.
Did she bring in the whole computer for repair, or just the hard drive? the documents imply she only brought in the bare hard drive to have it checked and not the whole computer.
If so, who removed the drive for her and why did she not simply bring in the whole computer.
Are we to believe that a 64 year old woman with a law degree, no technical training and who is “not good at math” tore apart her government IRS furnished computer, removed the hard drive and then hand delivered it to IRS IT Techs?
Or did she have the hard drive removed by some third party. If so, who did it?
Rather than tracking her old hard drive, it would be a good idea to check the repair history of her computer and determine the current disposition of her computers. These days most people have mirror image data on their desk top commuter, their portable computer and their cell phone.
It would also be really interest to know why absolutely no data was recoverable from her hard drive .
It is really all but impossible for a drive to fail and destroy the data on such that it cannot be recovered forensically. There are cases where people have destroyed their hard drives by beating them with a hammer to destroy the data and forensic techs have reassembled the fractured discs of the drive with super glue and read the data off of them.
About the only way that this could happen is if the drive was erased and over written 7 times or if the drive was degaussed to destroy the data on the disk .
The testimony provided by the IRS left a lot information out and a lot of terminology used is misleading.
> Lois Lerner’s hard drive is irrecoverable after being wiped clean by tech staff and recycled with an outside contractor
What we need in Washington is a headsman block and an axe.
Let's hope some investigative/computer geniuses can recover that which is purported to be irretrievably gone.
If this can be done, the perjurers will be thrown in gaol...and the Sherlockian snoops will deserve a medal.
If not, Professor Obenadict Moriarty wins another one.
Leni
There’s no such person as the “IRS”.
However, whoever with the IRS made this sworn statement may be in trouble before too very long, along with Koskinen, Lerner and the other culpable partisan stooges Obama will toss under the bus.
The backup server was on that last Asian plane that went down. Thanks a lot Vlad!
How stupid are the congress men & women (and senators) if they fall for this. Does NO one have someone on staff that’s graduated from college in the last quarter of a century?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.