Posted on | June 17, 2014 | 49 Comments
Democrats lie routinely and habitually, and are accustomed to having their lies accepted without question by the media. It is therefore significant that the media are openly mocking the preposterous claim that Lois Lerner’s emails have been “lost”:
Last Friday afternoon, the Internal Revenue Service claimed that Lois Lerner, a former executive tasked with overseeing tax-exemption applications, lost thousands of emails after her computer crashed. Many of those emails, the tax collection agency claimed, could not be recovered.
This convenient excuse for failing to comply with a request from House investigators is not sitting well with some in the journalistic community.
“Do you believe in the Easter Bunny?” CNN’s John King asked his panel of political reporters on Monday. “Do you believe in Santa Claus? Do you believe that Lois Lerner’s emails suddenly went ‘poof?’” . . .
In a sardonic segment on MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Monday, hosts Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough ruthlessly mocked the notion that a hardware crash could eliminate files stored on remote servers.
“Mika, even you have to admit this is pretty ridiculous,” Scarborough probed.
“Pretty ridiculous,” Brzezinski replied. “Those emails exist.”
Perhaps made uncomfortable by the implications surrounding this admission, Brzezinski quickly changed topics.
Of course, Democrats want to change topics, because “the implications surrounding this admission” are logically obvious: If we know the administration is lying about the “lost” emails, why are they lying?
The only logical explanation: Lois Lerner’s emails, subpoenaed by congressional investigators, must include evidence that the IRS targeting of conservative groups was approved by the White House.
This is what the “lost” email lie is intended to conceal. It can have no other purpose. For the past year, Democrats and their media allies have insisted that this is a “phony scandal,” even while evidence and testimony disproved a series of excuses offered by the administration, e.g., that the targeting was the work of a few “rogue” employees in the Cincinnati IRS office. The so-called “investigation” by the Justice Department is part of the cover-up, a whitewash designed to hide the truth of the scandal.
Ever since this scandal first became public, congressional investigators have believed (although they would never say so, on the record) that the IRS targeted Tea Party groups because of political pressure from the White House and congressional Democrats. If the IRS has deliberately destroyed (or attempted to conceal) relevant evidence, we need not wonder why. Cleta Mitchell is not deceived:
Federal courts have held, in the context of trial, that the bad faith destruction of evidence relevant to proof of an issue gives rise to an inference that production of the evidence would have been unfavorable to the party responsible for its destruction. . . . The fact that the IRS is statutorily required to preserve these records yet nevertheless publicly claimed that they have been “lost” appears to evidence bad faith.
It’s time to call this what it so obviously is: Obstruction of justice.