Now that the Inspector General's office has recovered 30,000 additional Lerner emails, why isn't IRS Commissioner Koskinen being held in contempt of Congress?
Friday, February 27, 2015
Via The Hill:
The IRS initially told lawmakers that emails from Lerner, the former official at the heart of the Tea Party targeting scandal, were lost. But many Lerner emails were found despite claims from officials that they were not backed up.
"There is potential criminal activity," Timothy Camus, the deputy inspector general for investigations, told the House Oversight Committee at a late Thursday hearing, according to reports.Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration J. Russell George and Camus, his deputy, told the Oversight panel they were also working with recovered hard drives from IRS email servers that could contain additional emails. But it is unclear whether that data can be recovered.
The investigators learned earlier this month that there were over 400 additional back tapes that may contain Lerner's emails from a crucial period in 2011. According to reports, the IG's office was not notified about those backups, which took them only two weeks to find.
The officials learned about the back-up tapes after demanding additional documents that IRS had not initially shared. One of those documents made clear that there were hundreds of other tapes.
“We were following up on our initial interviews, we realized we were missing a document. When we obtained that document and reviewed it, we realized that there were an additional population of tapes that had been unaccounted for,” Camus told lawmakers.
Via Washington Examiner
House Democratic leaders are telling their rank and file to vote against a three-week spending measure that would keep the Homeland Security Department funded after a Friday deadline.
In what has evolved into a game of partisan brinkmanship, Democrats say they will approve nothing short of a seven-month funding bill, which would last until the end of the fiscal year. But the tactic could be a risky political move. Republicans are offering a “clean” bill to keep the department running and Democrats could end up shouldering the blame for a partial closure if they vote against the measure and it doesn’t pass.
“The House Democratic leadership is whipping against this bill,” an aide told the Washington Examiner, “If House Republicans want to end up with another manufactured crisis that risks our national security in a matter of days they can do it with 218 votes of their own.”
House Republicans plan on introducing a measure Friday that would fund the department for another three weeks. They’ll take up the bill hours before the department runs out of money when a stopgap measure expires.
A temporary funding bill would buy the GOP time to force House and Senate lawmakers to compromise on a larger deal now up for debate in the Senate.[…]
Thursday, February 26, 2015
Sens. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) are the only conservatives with a spine left in the Senate. Remember this vote. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is most pleased.
The stalemate over funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was broken Wednesday as the Senate voted 98-2 to proceed to legislation that would prevent a partial government shutdown.
Democrats agreed to support the DHS bill after Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) stripped out provisions inserted by the House that would reverse President Obama’s executive actions on immigration.
The only votes against proceeding to the bill came from Sens. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.).
“Democrats will support getting on the House Homeland Security funding bill. In exchange, the leader will provide the only amendment, [it] will be a clean Homeland Security funding substitute,” Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said.
WAPO: ‘Jihadi John’: Islamic State killer is identified as Londoner Mohammed Emwazi LONDON — The world knows him as “Jihadi John,” the masked man with a British accent who has beheaded several hostages held by the Islamic State and who taunts audiences in videos circulated widely online.
But his real name, according to friends and others familiar with his case, is Mohammed Emwazi, a Briton from a well-to-do family who grew up in West London and graduated from college with a degree in computer programming. He is believed to have traveled to Syria around 2012 and to have later joined the Islamic State, the group whose barbarity he has come to symbolize.
“I have no doubt that Mohammed is Jihadi John,” said one of Emwazi’s close friends who identified him in an interview with The Washington Post. “He was like a brother to me. . . . I am sure it is him.”
"What Difference, At This Point, Does It Make?"
Via NY Times:
After a relatively quiet public schedule this year, Mrs. Clinton planned to deliver a paid speech at a women’s conference in Silicon Valley on Tuesday—the first in a series of addresses in the coming weeks focused on women. Ever since the birth of Charlotte Clinton Mezvinsky, in September, Mrs. Clinton has infused her public comments with references to being a new grandmother.
And some of her longest-serving advisers are open about their intention not to repeat what they see as one of their most crucial mistakes from the 2008 primaries. Ann Lewis, a senior adviser in that race, called the decision not to accentuate Mrs. Clinton’s gender—which ceded the mantle of barrier-breaker entirely to Barack Obama—the “biggest missed opportunity” of that primary contest. “It was not a major theme of the campaign,” Ms. Lewis said.
“I think she clearly understands this time the significance of having a woman president of the United States,” said Gov. Terry McAuliffe of Virginia, who served as Mrs. Clinton’s campaign chairman in 2008. He added that Mrs. Clinton’s gender was “a tremendous asset.”
The decision to run more emphatically as a female candidate is rooted in a strategic assessment of the demands of this campaign and of a changing country. With Republicans determined to portray Mrs. Clinton as an aging relic—she will turn 69 just before Election Day next year—her supporters believe her campaign offers a powerful rejoinder to the charge that she does not represent change.