IT boss ‘blown away’ that IRS backup tapes in Lerner case erased, watchdog says

The chief technology officer at the IRS was "blown away" after learning backup tapes that likely contained messages to and from controversial ex-official Lois Lerner were destroyed, according to an internal government watchdog report. 
The 1,600-page report, prepared by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, examined the agency's handling of Lerner's missing emails and apparent computer crash. Lerner is the former official at the heart of the scandal over IRS targeting of Tea Party and other conservative groups, but lawmakers were told last year that some of her electronic communications had been lost. 
The effort to recover those files has seemingly been marked by a string of blunders. Inspector General J. Russell George first told lawmakers last week that 422 backup tapes were "magnetically erased" around March 4, 2014, meaning thousands of emails might never be recovered. 
The IG report, which is not expected to be made public but has been viewed by Fox News, does not point to any deliberate cover-up. The report says investigators found "no evidence that the IRS and its employees purposely erased the tapes in order to conceal" some of the emails in question. 
However, the report demonstrates the IRS did a sloppy job retaining documents despite a House Ways and Means Committee directive to do so. 
Late Thursday Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, responded to the report, saying, “After spending more than $20 million and three years investigating, the Inspector General’s conclusions remain the same:  there is no evidence to substantiate Republican claims of political motivation, White House involvement, or intentional destruction of evidence.  It’s time to stop this political witch hunt and focus on investigations that impact American’s lives."

More on this...

• Tea Party reaction to latest Lerner email revelation

According to the report, IRS Chief Technology Officer Terry Milholland told the IG office he was "blown away" after learning the tapes had been demagnetized -- a process known as "degaussing." This was done at the IRS's IT center in Martinsburg, W.Va. Those tapes are believed to have contained Lerner emails that "were responsive to Congressional demands and subpoenas," the report says. 
"Backup tapes were destroyed as a result of IRS management," the report says, noting officials failed to appropriately follow a May 2013 directive from Milholland concerning record preservation. 
The report further states that the IRS "did not fully identify as a source or perform recovery attempts for email" associated with Lerner. It says that as many as "23,000 to 24,000 email messages may not have been provided to Congress." 
Beginning in the summer of 2011, according to the report, there was an effort by the IRS to recover the failed hard drive belonging to Lerner. 
A July 19, 2011, email from Carl Froehlich, who headed the service's "Agency Wide Shared Services" division, to Lerner declared that "Lillie Wilburn" was on the case. Wilburn is the IRS's program manager of network services for IT in Atlanta. 
"It may be too late - don't send them off to the hard drive cemetery," Lerner wrote to the IRS' IT department on July 20. 
On Aug. 5, 2011, Wilburn wrote to Lerner: "Unfortunately the news is not good. The sectors of the hard drive were bad which made your data [unrecoverable]. I am very sorry. Everyone tried their best." 
Lerner then replied: "Thanks for trying. It really do appreciate the effort. Sometimes stuff just happens." 
Before leaving the agency, Lerner led the division that came under fire for allegedly singling out conservative groups for additional scrutiny as they sought nonprofit status.

Kentucky clerk sued for not issuing same-sex marriage licenses

Four Kentucky couples are suing a clerk who is refusing to issue gay-marriage licenses – or any marriage licenses for that matter – following a landmark ruling from the Supreme Court giving same-sex marriage couples the legal right to marry.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky filed a federal lawsuit against Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis Thursday on behalf of two homosexual and two heterosexual couples, all of whom were turned down when they tried to get marriage licenses from Davis’ office this week.
Davis has said that her religious beliefs prevented her from complying with the Supreme Court decision, so she decided not to issue marriage licenses to any type of couple – straight or gay.
Davis is among a handful of judges and clerks across the South who have defied the Court’s order, maintaining that the right to “religious freedom” protects them from having to comply.
The Decatur County, Tennessee clerk and two office employees resigned Thursday due to their opposition to same-sex marriage, County Commissioner David Boroughs told The Jackson Sun.
However, in Alabama, all counties appeared to be complying with the Supreme Court ruling as of Thursday, lawyers representing gay couples told The Associated Press.
In Louisiana, where most parish clerks had been issuing same-sex marriage licenses since Monday, the state Office of Vital Records, which issues the licenses in New Orleans, didn't begin doing so until Thursday.
Following the Supreme Court’s ruling last Friday, Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear ordered all clerks to fall in line. Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway followed up with a warning that failing to do so might open them up to civil liability.
Officials have also warned defiant clerks could be risking criminal charges. Warren County Attorney Ann Milliken, president of the Kentucky County Attorneys Association, president of the Kentucky County Attorney’s Association, said clerks could be charged with official misconduct, a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail.
Some Kentucky clerks who at first resisted issuing same-sex marriage licenses changed course this week aand agreed to sign them. However, Davis and a few others stood firm, despite the protests outside her Morehead office earlier this week.
She pledged to never issue a marriage license to a gay couple.
"It's a deep-rooted conviction; my conscience won't allow me to do that," Davis said Tuesday. "It goes against everything I hold dear, everything sacred in my life."
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Ashland, requests and injunction ordering Davis to begin issuing licenses. IT alleges that her policy is unconstitutional and asks for punitive damages for violating the four couples’ rights.
April Miller and Karen Roberts, a couple for 11 years who live in Morehead, told The Associated Press that they asked for a license Tuesday and were told to try another county.
Another gay couple, L. Aaron Skaggs and Barry Spartman, called the Rowan County clerk's office Tuesday and asked to apply for a license. An employee on the phone said, "Don't bother coming down here," according to the lawsuit, and told them the clerk was refusing to issue licenses.
Two opposite-sex couples also tried to get licenses and were told by staff that none would be issued, the lawsuit alleges.
The clerks have argued that if they issue a license to no one, they cannot be accused of discrimination. Kentucky state law allows adult couples seeking marriage licenses to get them from any county. If a marriage involves minors, however, they must get their license in the county where they live.
The four couples who filed suit say that because they live, work, vote and pay taxes in Rowan County, they have a right to file for a marriage license there.
In the lawsuit, ACLU legal director William Sharp wrote that Davis' religious conviction "is not a compelling, important or legitimate government interest."
One of the attorneys who filed the lawsuit, Laura Landenwich, wrote that Davis "has the absolute right to believe whatever she wants about God, faith, and religion, but as a government official who swore an oath to uphold the law, she cannot pick and choose who she is going to serve, or which duties her office will perform based on her religious beliefs."

Trump bump: Why his media war against offended corporations is boosting him

The first time I interviewed Donald Trump, back in 1987, he said this:
“When I go up to New Hampshire -- I'm not running for president, by the way -- I get the best crowd, the best of everything in terms of reception.
“The politicians go up and get a moderate audience. I go up, and they're scalping tickets. You heard that? They're scalping tickets. Why? Because people don't want to be ripped off, and this country is being ripped off. I think if I ran, I'd win.”
He has been honing this act for a long time.
Many pundits—some of them the same wiseguys who thought Trump would sink like a stone—are saying that he’s taken a beating over the last week. After all, NBC, Univision, Macy’s and Serta have all cut ties with him over his comments on Mexican immigrants.
Many people obviously found those comments offensive. But in purely political terms, this is helping Trump.
For one thing, he has dominated the campaign news cycle for a week, drawing more attention than all the other candidates combined. He has driven home his message with a spate of cable news interviews. (And—subtle plug here—The Donald will be talking about these issues Sunday on “Media Buzz.”)
Here’s what the media elite misses, and why he’s surged into second place in Fox and CNN polls. Trump portrays himself as a fighter, and that resonates with many voters. Trump casts himself as a straight talker, and voters like that. Trump markets himself as a non-politician in an era when the public is fed up with pols. He’s seen as tough on illegal immigration, which doesn’t hurt in a Republican primary.
The bombastic billionaire also strikes a populist note by going to war with big corporations.
And this just in: President Obama, in Tennessee, called for a smart legal immigration system “that doesn’t separate families but does focus on making sure that people who are dangerous, people who are, you know, gang-bangers, who are criminals that we’re deporting as quickly as possible.”
Gang-bangers? Trump’s version was more inelegant, but if the president is worried about Mexican gang-bangers, doesn’t it suggest the businessman had a point?
By now, most politicians would have softened or papered over the remarks about Mexican immigrants including such miscreants as rapists. But Trump has doubled and tripled down. He’s denounced NBC, sued Univision for $500 million and urged customers to boycott Macy’s. This dovetails nicely with his refrain about politicians being “all talk and no action.”
Meanwhile, the press has been prodding Trump’s Republican rivals to take him on. “His outlandish rhetoric and skill at occupying the national spotlight are also proving to be dangerously toxic for the GOP brand, which remains in the rehabilitation stage after losing the 2012 presidential race,” says a front-page Washington Post story.  
CBS’s Nancy Cordes said Republican leaders “worry” that Trump’s rising polls “will just embolden him and further alienate the critical Hispanic vote.”
But why is this a Republican problem? Yes, the party has well-documented difficulties with Hispanic voters, but Trump is hardly an establishment Republican. He might be causing himself problems with Latinos, but why would that rub off on, for example, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio? The media often demand that all party members respond to one Republican’s controversial comments in a way that you rarely see with Democrats.
Still, some GOPers realized they could ride this wave. George Pataki, perhaps to remind people he’s running, called Trump’s comments “unacceptable.”
New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez said “I think those are horrible things to say about anyone and any culture.”
Hillary hit Trump, but without naming him, while Jeb Bush limited himself to “I don’t agree with him. I think he’s wrong.”
The point is, they’re all responding to Donald Trump. And for the moment, he’s the guy driving the campaign narrative.

Gay Cartoon :)

Donald Trump and Macy’s end relationship, retailer will ‘phase-out’ menswear line

NEW YORK –  It’s been a tough week for Donald Trump. First, the presidential candidate was dumped by NBC following statements he made about Mexican immigrants during his presidential announcement, and now mega-retailer Macy’s has announced it’s done with the Donald. But there is some lingering uncertainty over who dumped whom.
Macy’s told FOX411 dropping the mogul was its idea.
"We have no tolerance for discrimination in any form,” the retailer wrote in a statement. “We are disappointed and distressed by recent remarks about immigrants from Mexico. We do not believe the disparaging characterizations portray an accurate picture of the many Mexicans, Mexican Americans and Latinos who have made so many valuable contributions to the success of our nation. In light of statements made by Donald Trump, which are inconsistent with Macy’s values, we have decided to discontinue our business relationship with Mr. Trump and will phase-out the Trump menswear collection, which has been sold at Macy’s since 2004.”
But Trump insists the decision to end the relationship was his.
“I have decided to terminate my relationship with Macy’s because of the pressure being put on them by outside sources,” he said in a statement sent to FOX411.
The pressure Trump seemed to refer to came in the form of an online petition imploring Macy’s to drop Trump, which garnered more than 700,000 signatures.

More on this...

• Greta: Beauty queens in crosshairs of Trump-NBC spat

• Trump: Macy's 'weak, under pressure,' I gave them an out

Trump stated that if he launches a new product line, it will be solely comprised of made-in-America items.
“While selling Trump ties and shirts at Macy’s is a small business in terms of dollar volume, my principles are far more important and therefore much more valuable. I have never been happy about the fact that the ties and shirts are made in China, and should I start a new product line somewhere in the future, I would insist that they are made in America. Quite frankly, I was never satisfied with manufacturing my product in China, but because of what they’ve done in terms of devaluing their currency, it is very hard for other companies to compete and make such apparel in the United States. These are the kinds of issues I am committed to addressing.”
Trump reiterated that he is only committed to his presidential run, not the brands he’s had business relationships with up until this week.
“I have also continually stated that I am not beholden to anyone and this includes NBC and Macy’s. Clearly, NBC and Macy’s support illegal immigration, which is totally detrimental to the fabric of our once great country. Both Macy’s and NBC totally caved at the first sight of potential difficulty with special interest groups who are nothing more than professional agitators, who are not looking out for the people they purport to represent, but only for themselves. It is people like this that are actually running our country because our leaders are weak and ineffective.”

US reportedly blocks Arab allies' attempts to deliver weapons to Kurds fighting ISIS

The U.S. has reportedly blocked any attempts by Middle East allies to fly weapons to the Kurds fighting the Islamic State in Iraq.
The Telegraph reports that U.S. allies say President Obama and other Western leaders, including Britain’s David Cameron, aren’t showing leadership over the escalating ISIS crisis in Iraq, Syria and throughout the Middle East.
These allies are now willing to “go it alone” in giving heavy weaponry to the Kurds, even if it means defying Iraq and the U.S. who want all weapons to be funneled through Baghdad, according to the newspaper.
High level officials from Gulf and other states have told The Telegraph that plans to persuade Obama to arm the Kurds directly have failed. The Senate voted down an amendment for the U.S. to bypass Baghdad and send weapons to the Kurdish fighters.
The officials told the paper they are looking for ways to bypass U.S. permission to give the Kurdish fighters weapons.
“If the Americans and the West are not prepared to do anything serious about defeating ISIL, then we will have to find new ways of dealing with the threat,” a senior Arab government official told The Telegraph. “With ISIL making ground all the time we simply cannot afford to wait for Washington to wake up to the enormity of the threat we face.”
The Peshmerga have gotten support from the Kurds to drive the Islamic State back from Erbil. However, they are doing so with makeshift weapons. The Telegraph says weapons have been bought by a number of countries throughout Europe to aid the Kurds, but U.S. commanders are blocking the arms transfers.
The Kurds also have said that the main part of their plight is that Iraqi forces have abandoned so many weapons in the face of ISIS’ attacks, they are now fighting American-made weaponry with Soviet-style equipment.
The paper reports that at least one Arab nation is considering arming the Peshmerga without U.S. permission.
Other Gulf nations have been visibly irritated by the lack of direction from the U.S. in the fight, according to the paper. Other members of the coalition have identified clear militant targets but then have been blocked by U.S. vetoes from engaging them.
One Gulf leader went as far as saying, “there is simply no strategic approach.”
As the U.S. and Britain mull whether to take the next step in the war against ISIS, the terror group continues to commits acts of savagery. A new report from the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights revealed that more than 3,000 people have been killed at the hands of ISIS since its emergence last summer.
ISIS has also ramped up his violence after calls for more attacks during Ramadan. On June 30, 11 workers from al-Miadin endured live crucifixion and were forced to wear signs saying "70 lashes and to be crucified for 1 day for breaking the fast in Ramadan."
The Islamic State was also responsible for an attack on Egyptian army checkpoints that left at least 64 soldiers said, according to country officials.

Not so fast? Lawmakers poised to fight Obama on Cuba ambassador pick, embargo

WASHINGTON –  Declaring “this is what change looks like,” President Obama announced an agreement Wednesday to reestablish economic ties with Cuba and re-open embassies in each other’s capitals.
But the historic step will also touch off a new round of battles with Congress. To complete the thaw in U.S.-Cuba relations, the Obama administration still needs to get lawmakers on board to confirm an ambassador, sign off on spending millions on a U.S. embassy in Havana and soften sanctions against the communist country that has a long history of human rights violations.
That's no easy task.
Juan Carlos Hidalgo, a policy analyst on Latin America at the Cato Institute, said the Obama administration has exhausted its executive authority in its Cuba push, which included restoring diplomatic ties and removing it from the terror-sponsor list.
“Lifting the outstanding elements of the embargo and travel ban is a prerogative of Congress,” Hidalgo said.
He added, “As it is, it looks unlikely that a bill in that regard will reach Obama’s desk for the remainder of his term.”
In the near-term, a fight over a yet-to-be-named ambassador is already brewing. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., has repeatedly said he does not support restoring ties with the Castro regime over its detainment of dissidents, and threatened Wednesday to hold up the nomination of an ambassador.
“It is important for the United States to continue being a beacon of freedom for the Cuban people,” he said in a written statement. “I intend to work with my colleagues to block the administration’s efforts to pursue diplomatic relations with Cuba and name an ambassador to Havana until substantive progress is made on these important issues.”
Rep. Illeana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., said that opening a U.S. Embassy in Cuba misses the mark and “will do nothing to help the Cuban people and is just another trivial attempt for President Obama to go legacy shopping.”
The top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland,  said even though opening the embassies was part of a “common sense approach to Cuba,” the U.S. must be cautious. He called on Cuba to admit to being out of step with the international community on human rights. He also said Cuba must stop its “arrests and detention of dissidents” and said “genuine political pluralism is long overdue.”
If the Senate does successfully hold up the nomination of an ambassador, it would slow the process but not stop the reopening of the embassy, which is set to happen July 20. The embassy would be headed by a "mission chief" instead of "ambassador." The duties, however, would be largely similar, William LeoGrande, a professor of government at the American University School of Public Affairs and a former staff member of the U.S. Senate Democratic Policy Committee, told Fox News Latino.
LeoGrande, author of “Back Channel to Cuba: The Hidden History of Negotiations between Washington and Havana,” also called the announcement a “major step” toward normalizing relations between the two long-time adversaries.
The U.S. had imposed sanctions and then broke off diplomatic relations entirely with Fidel Castro’s communist regime in the early 1960s.
In the decades that followed, the U.S. actively tried to either overthrow the Cuban government or isolate the island altogether through tough economic sanctions first put in place by President Dwight D. Eisenhower.
President George W. Bush’s administration increased travel restrictions and tightened the embargo with Cuba, but when Obama took office in 2009 he loosened them. Obama took it even further in 2011 when he undid even more Bush-era restrictions, which led to Americans being able to communicate more freely with friends and loved ones in Cuba as well as travel there for educational and religious purposes.
Obama has long argued that freezing out Cuba, a communist island 90 miles off the coast of Florida, has been ineffective.
Since the 1970s, the U.S. and Cuba have operated diplomatic missions -- called interest sections -- in each other’s capitals. The missions are technically under the protection of Switzerland but don’t enjoy the same status as embassies. Fox News is told the new U.S. embassy would be located in that building in Havana.
Obama has not yet said whom he will nominate as ambassador.
The short list, according to The Hill and Foreign Policy, includes diplomat Jeffrey DeLaurentis, chief of mission at the U.S. Interests Section in Havana, and former Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., an early champion of relaxing sanctions on Cuba.
Meanwhile, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest predicted Wednesday there is strong bipartisan support in Congress for lifting the 54-year-old embargo on Cuba.
But GOP leaders panned the developments. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said the Obama administration handed Fidel and Raul Castro “a lifetime dream of legitimacy without getting a thing” for the Cuban people who have been oppressed by a brutal communist dictatorship. The top GOP House lawmaker said in a written statement that relations with the Castro regime should not be revisited, let alone normalized.
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who is running for a 2016 presidential bid, said Obama’s decision to reopen the embassy further legitimizes the “brutal” Castro regime and has more to do with cementing Obama’s own presidential legacy than creating real change.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who participated in delegations to Cuba in the past seven months, heralded the announcement as a path to progress.
“Reopening embassies lays the foundation for a new, more productive relationship with Cuba that can support and advance key American priorities – including human rights, counter-narcotics cooperation, business opportunities for American companies, migration, family unification, and cultural and faith-based exchanges,” she said in a written statement.

Congressional pressure building on Obama as Iran talks drag out

The Obama administration's decision to send Iranian nuclear talks into overtime is triggering a backlash on Capitol Hill, as congressional Republicans warn Tehran is exploiting the situation and moving the goalposts.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., called on the administration to "press pause" on the discussions, after negotiators announced they would miss the June 30 deadline and extend talks another week.
"President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry should use the opportunity to pause negotiations, take a step back and re-examine the point of the talks in the first place," McConnell wrote in an op-ed for Politico.
He and other GOP lawmakers worry the administration's negotiating position is weakening, giving more ground to the Iranians by the day.
Some also are fuming over a comment Monday by an anonymous administration official. The official was quoted suggesting international inspectors shouldn't have access to "every military site" in Iran, "because the United States of America wouldn't allow anybody to get into every military site."
This triggered accusations the administration was wrongly comparing the U.S. to Iran, and trying to hold them to the same standards.
"With the Iranian nuclear negotiations in a critical phase, this statement should alarm us all," Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said in a statement. "There is no place in this negotiation for moral equivalence. That thinking was wrong in the Cold War, and it is wrong today. Iran is not like any other nation, least of all the United States. Iran has a proven record of cheating on its nuclear program."  
A key disagreement between the so-called P5+1 negotiators and Iran is over how much access inspectors would have to Iranian nuclear sites, as Iranian officials try to bar inspectors from military sites. McCain and Graham, as well as McConnell, said it's imperative that inspectors have complete access.
"The standard needs to be 'go anywhere, anytime' -- not go 'some places, sometimes,'" House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, R-Calif., said in a statement.
President Obama seemed to agree that robust inspections are critical, when he addressed the nuclear talks during a press conference on Tuesday. He told reporters he would "walk away" from negotiations if a bad deal is in the works, and cited the need for comprehensive inspections.
"The question is whether he will actually enforce this red line," McCain and Graham said.
Another lingering question is over the timeline for talks themselves.
Obama administration officials said Tuesday they were now working toward a July 7 deadline. But Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said Wednesday, "We did not set any deadline."
Congress does have some leverage. Under recently passed legislation, lawmakers would have between 30 and 60 days -- depending on when it's submitted -- to review an agreement before sanctions could be eased. With enough votes, Congress could also scuttle any sanctions relief.
Meanwhile, the head of the U.N. agency that would monitor any nuclear agreement was traveling to Tehran to meet with President Hassan Rouhani and other senior officials on Thursday.
International Atomic Energy Agency head Yukiya Amano reportedly said he wants to "accelerate the resolution of all outstanding issues related to Iran's nuclear program, including clarification of possible military dimensions."
Obama's Democratic allies on Capitol Hill are willing to give the talks more time.
"Preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is a vitally important national security priority in the Middle East and negotiating a good deal remains our best avenue to do so," Rep. Adam Smith, top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said in a statement. "This is our opportunity to block all of Iran's paths to a nuclear weapon while avoiding military action.  As such, we must let the process play out."