There was no 'the election'. Each district elects their own Representatives or Senators. Stupid git.

Is this not taught in high school any more?

Wrong. Her records were and are subject to the retention laws on the books, and 6 month retention does not meet the requirements of the law. Specifically ask records of communications between her, her subordinates, and other agencies, particularly the White House. And the law requires paper copies be created and filed.

  Massive failure to meet the requirements of the law.

why are we skimping on the most fundamental aspect of college?"

Because it is profitable.

In other words, go after my IRA.

Confusing the criminal case with a political agenda is stupid.

But today it is astute. That was then....

"did not lose an irreplacable work product. "

Apparently, they did. You are incorrect

"Without this investigation, what they lost would be junk."

Investigations are one of the primary reasons to retain this data. You are incorrect again.

Try again.

My current .OST file is 6.8GB, down from 8.7GB after a purge of mail >2 years old. I have no legal holds nor regulatory holds, so this was a self-directed purge. I did, however, circumvent policy and archive to a local file.

I work for a Fortune 100 financial company, and we have similar regulatory requirements.

Blaming system constraints is disingenuous. Jail them.

Actually, this is about 501(c)4 groups. Different thing.

It is not crying wolf to point out one abuse and not another m. Perhaps the Senate could investigate those abuses against liberals?

Ignoring the multiple technical questions, yes, assume the worst.

Now, in a practical sense, let's have Issa subpoena ALL IRS emails to reconstruct the internal email that Lerner sent and received. Expand that to the White House, Justice, and all recipients identified.

When they complain that this is a huge burden, have Justice employ the same systems they use for managing discovery in antitrust cases.

Technical questions about this abound. Lots of senior management to fire, records retention violations to pursue, FIOA violations also. A career for some lucky lawyers.

The 501(c)4 process is a long-standing and ordinarily well defined process. In March 2010 it is alleged that IRS staffers began flagging applications that included text such as "We the People" and "Take Back the Country." Staffers also targeted groups whose names included the words "tea party" and "patriots." Those flagged applications were then sent to specialists for a more rigorous review than is typical." The IRS gave extra scrutiny to 298 groups applying for tax-exempt status, the Washington Post reported. Seventy-two of those groups had "tea party" in their title, 13 had "patriots," and 11 had "9/12," shorthand for the 9/12 movement started by conservative TV host Glen Beck. But IRS officials not only singled out tea party and liberty groups. They also looked for "political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding government, educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, social economic reform/movement," according to the leaked timeline. This included groups that planned to focus on government debt and spending, taxes, or those trying to "make America a better place to live." In June 2011, Lerner reportedly became aware of what was going on and directed staffers to change to how they vetted nonprofit applications."

"What did tea partiers mean when they said they were being "harassed?" The Waco Tea Party was one such group targeted by the IRS. The agency asked for information about the group's members, donors, and any "close relationship" with candidates for elected office. The IRS also requested transcripts of radio interviews done by Waco Tea Party staffers and print copies of news clips mentioning the group. Conservatives who received these special requests complained that the IRS's requests were unwieldy and impossible to fulfill, and a veiled attempt to intimidate them during the run-up to the 2012 elections.

That said, the IRS hasn't shied away from punishing liberal groups that flout the law. Last year, the IRS revoked the tax-exempt status of Emerge America, a San Francisco-based group that trains female Democratic candidates. Emerge was too political and too focused on benefiting the Democratic Party, the IRS ruled, to qualify for 501(c)(4) status.
(From Mother Jones)

96 groups targeted intentionally with key words in their applications, applications delayed during the 2010 campaigns, with the effect in most cases of both delaying their activities and preventing donations... One liberal group denied... In historical context, this is what Democrats consider 'fair'. It does seem that the IRS did, back then, focus on a particular political alignment, which is more chilling and damaging than anything else this administration has done than killing innocents on the 'battlefields' of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Insofar as corporations serve their stockholders, employees, and customers, who are real people, they may claim a right to speech on any number of issues that impact them or their constituents.

We can probably re-write the law to survive constitutional review, but neither major party actually wants that unless one gains an advantage over the other.

You do realize that charity groups are just fronts for monied groups, relatively speaking... Their clients, beneficiaries, whatever, are often by definition much poorer and less 'well off' then those who found, support, even work for these charitable groups.

Doh.

Not merely the majority of investigations and delays were targeted against politically conservative groups, but the nature of the investigations, is an issue.

If you think some progressive, liberal, or activist groups were also discriminated against, give Issa's office a call. He's probably happy to investigate even more accusations.

"The focus was on the type of applicant and the status applied,"

That, AC, is precisely the complaint. They were a certain type of applicant. Politically Conservative