next generation of aircraft. so i understand the desire to keep an aircraft that's been doing incredible work for 30 or 40 years, but it's time we look to the future, make that investment and i'm pleased to yield to the ranking member, mr. visclosky. advice i have i appreciate the chair -- mr. visclosky: i appreciate the chairman yielding and would add my comments that the a-10 is a wonderful aircraft. the b-17 flying for the rest was a wonderful aircraft -- fortress was a wonderful aircraft. it was replaced. the warrior was indispensable during vietnam, it's being replaced. the a-10 is being replaced over a protracted period of time, in the interim other aircraft are going to take its place until the f-35 is prepared to do its mission. the chief of staff of the air force flew the a-10 and it

is their recommendation to phase this plane out and the air force stated to the committee that given another $4.3 billion, they have a range of other options they would pursue before continuing the a-10 program. but the final observation i would make is that the amendment is somewhat disingenuous. but while it will sound to our colleagues there is no money involved in this amendment, i would propose that i would like notind $239 million that is in the bill because you need crews and you need fuel and you need maintenance, that is not in the bill because we agreed with the administration's position. there is another $200 million that would be required over the next year for spares and

modifications of this aircraft. so essentially, you are leaving the committee now in a position of now $600 million by simply saying no funds shall be used to terminate this program during the coming year that aren't in the bill. and the author of the amendment and those who support it have not shown us where the money is going to come from in this bill. and i would urge my colleagues for the reasons i stated in my opening remarks we have to make some tough decisions. there is a finite amount of money in this bill. mrs. miller: i would indicate that we had several other amendments we offered up to the committee that there would be a point of order on those amendments, but we add offsets articulated in those amendments. so we were looking for

additional dollars. mr. visclosky: there is no offset in this amendment and the cost is $600 million that is not in the bill. and i appreciate the chairman yielding to me. mr. frelinghuysen: yield back and i urge a no-vote on this amendment. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is yielding back. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mrs. miller: i ask for a roll call vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from michigan will be postponed. who seeks recognition? the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition?

mr. grayson: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: will the gentleman specify the amendment. mr. grayson: grayson number 4. the clerk: amendment number 4 offered by mr. grayson of florida. section, none of the funds made available by this act may be used to make aircraft including armored vehicles, excellencers, toxilogical agents, biological freeing freeing i have a point of order. the clerk: ballistic missiles, rockets, torpedos, bombs and mines as authorized for demilitarizations purposes available to local law enforcement agencies through the

department of defense excess personal property program, established purnlt to section 1033 of public law 1004. the chair: the gentleman from -- the gentleman from florida and a member opposed each will control five minutes. combrace grace i rise today to address a growing problem throughout our country, the militarization of local law enforcement agencies. police in our community should be engaged in community policing. unfortunately, local police departments have looked like military units preparing for battle on america's streets. we fight our wars abroad and not at home. and the tactics should reflect that fact. the "new york times" reported that police departments have received cam flauges and night vision equipment and armored

cars and aircraft. i think this is appalling. this would prohibit the department of defense of gifting drones, armored vehicles, grenade launchers, bombs and so on to local police departments. there is no mass rebelion brewing here in the united states. there are no improvised explosive devices. this is happening nevertheless. what expect to happen is happening as the "new york times" article, war gear flows to police departments. police swat teams are now deployed tens of thousands of times each yire for increasingly routine jobs. ass helpfully armed police

department in louisiana as part of a liquor inspection. in florida, officers in swat gear and officers with swat gear carried out raids on barber shops. d.o.d. equipment is changing the mentality of police departments. recruiting videos feature clips of officers storming into homes with smoke grenades and firing automatic weapons into homes as well as officers creeping through the fields in war camoflauge. this is not policing. this is war. one south carolina police department takes its new tank vehicle with a .50 caliber gun to schools and community events and a spokes map said that is a conversation starter. that is not a conversation

starter i want to have. the federal government should not be encouraging our public servants to view america as occupied territory. i prefer the views of the police chief of south bend, indiana. according to the "new york times" article, he decided not to request a mind-resistant vehicle for his city. he said, i go to schools and i bring green eggs and ham. let's's not treat our citizens as terrorists and let's help our police act like the public servants they need to be. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman is recognized is recognized. mr. frelinghuysen: it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and violates clause 2 of rule 21. the rule states in pertinent

part, the amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law, requires -- the amendment requires a new determination. i ask for a ruling from the chair. the chair: the gentleman from florida wish to be heard? mr. grayson: yes. there is no new determination under this amendment. i call your attention to the specific language. it says none of the funds made available in this act may be used to make aircraft, including unmanned aerial vehicles, grenade launchers, toxilogical agents, including chemical agents and associated equipment, guided missiles, ballistic missiles, rockets, torpedos, bomb or nuclear weapons, quote, as identified for demilitarization purposes as outlined in the title. all the terms that i just

described are as identified for demilitarization. since they are in-depth of defense manual, they require no new determination of law. available to local law enforcement agencies through the department of defense excess personal property program, again local law enforcement agencies is designed under statute. the excess personal property program is established as this amendment indicates pursuant to ction 1033 of public law 104-201, the national defense authorization act for fiscal year 1997. therefore every single term that is used here is a term defined in law. there is no new determinations to be made by anybody including the people who enforce this amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: any other member wish to be heard.

the chair finds this amendment includes language requiring a new determination as the meaning of local law enforcement agencies within the context of department of dens excess personal property program. it is the point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey ride? mr. frelinghuysen: i move that the committee do now rise. the chair: the committee is on the motion that the committee do now rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: mr. chairman. chairman the committee having had under consideration dress me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the

union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 4870 and has come to no esolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house an enrolled bill. the clerk: senate 1254, an act research and control act of 1998 and for other purposes. chair ker pro tempore: lays before the house the

following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mrs. kirkpatrick of arizona from june 18-20. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. he request is granted. the chair will entertain requests for one-minute peeches.

the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the ajority leader. mr. gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to express my appreciation to the appropriations committee for the appropriations process. i think we're all better when we have open amendments. and have a chance to have

everybody have input. it's a nasty process but it is a good way to do it. because input is important. because when you don't listen o proper input, you can end up the a judgment as did pell tear case where a juvenile court judge in massachusetts her way custody from a victory finally judge ay as the court, joseph johnsonton, wrote in his ruling, that effective wednesday, june 18, 2014, care and protection petition is dismissed in custody of justina

is returned to her parents, lou and linda. but the first statement there is, quote, i find that the parties have shown credible evidence that circumstances have changed since the adjudication on december 20, 2013, that justina is a child this need of care and protection -- is a child in need of care and protection. and clearly the only thing that had changed was not credible idence, it was a judge finally did his job which was not to take parents' kids away from them. nd it was reminiscent of -- or reminded me of comments made by daycare director in the soviet union back when i was an exchange student during college

days, and the daycare director was bragging that the children belonged to the state. that parents are only temporary caregivers, that serve at the whim of -- she didn't say whim, but basically at the discretion of the government. and back then in the soviet union, if you ever told your child anything negative about the soviet union, the soviet government, soviet leaders, and they found out, they would whisk in, take your child away and as the director said, give them to more deserving parents. it appears that's what really happened in the peletierre case. some bureaucrats refused to consider all of the evidence as they should have and decided that they would play god for a give custody of this

poor child to the state instead of her parents, who gave every indication of loving her and caring about her, trying to do the right thing for her. instead the state caused great amage and unfortunately that happens too often in many different areas when the states think they know better than the people personally involved. who gets even worse is when you ave a federal administration that believes they know better than the law. that they don't have to follow the law because they're better than the law. which would make them right on par with the chavez in

venezuela or pick out the dictator, they're right there. because they know so much better than anybody else in the country. that's why they're called dictators. and one of the most shocking things about the lawlessness of this administration is that they could have spokespeople with straight faces come out and say, we really don't know what's causing this wave of humanitarian crises on the border. we just really don't understand why this wave is coming now. well, all they have to do is review some of the reports from border petroleummen, i.c.e. agents, particularly the border patrolmen that have been interviewing these kids, especially the older ones, 15, 16, 17, why did you come to the

united states illegally now? and the border patrol reports so many of the children just say, basically the same thing, it's because of your new law that is going to let us come and stay legally. it's the new law that we get amnesty, that all we have to do is come. it is incredible the humanitarian crisis that this administration has caused. and there is some blame to go around for republicans as well that have entered into this discussion about providing amnesty, providing legal status , when if they would simply listen to the people in the field, on the border, and understand the trauma that they have been going through, trying to protect this country, they

would find out, as chris crane has said before, said again yesterday, when people in washington talk about amnesty or legal status, we see a massive influx of people coming. because they want to get here for the legal status, the amnesty, and that's why it's so critical that we not talk about any kind of legal status or amnesty being awarded to anyone. that we wait until we have a president, hopefully a change in this president's heart, so he will start enforcing the law. and start faithfully executing the laws of the country. it is unconstitutional for anyone in the united states,

including the president, to say, i don't like the law the way it is, congress hasn't changed it, so here's the new law. and one rather shocking thing was when the president said, you know, congress hasn't fixed it, so here's the new law on who's going to be allowed to stay and be given legal status, that we're not going to throw out. here's the new law. here are the new requirements. and i couldn't believe conservative news media, liberal news media, they're all reporting the same thing. gee, here's the new law, here's the new requirements that the president just pronounced into law. fortunately there were many level-headed folks that understand we do -- we're supposed to act within a constitution, who pointed out, you can't just stand up and say, here's the new law. you actually got to have it pass through congress and, yeah, it's a tough thing to do,

and that's exactly what the founders intended. because they knew the easier it was to pass laws, the quicker americans would lose their liberty. and ever since the 17th , the ent was ratified states lost their check and balance over the federal government not usurping the power reserved to them in the soing the -- in the 10th amendment. and some have incorrectly reported that i want to repeal the 17th amendment, go back to selecting senators by state legislatures, making the selection. well, there were some abuses there. some senators figured out how to -- i mean, some legislatures figured out how to game the system through the senators they selected, all you'd have to do is say, all right, we're going to select you to be our senator, but here's our laundry

list of things that we want. so it was susceptible to being abused as well. but the point should not be lost that there has to be a way for states to regain the check and balance over the federal of rnment, usurpation rights, of the various states. the powers of the state. if the states still had the check and balance over the federal government, you wouldn't see a report like john roberts of fox news reported this week. wave of humanity, he reports, border petroleum overwhelmed by flow of illegal immigrants -- patrol overwhelmed by flow of illegal immigrants. he says daybreak in this border town, two women from guatemala, one with a small child strapped to her back, wait patiently on

the levee overlooking the rio grande. they have been instructed by the coyotey, who ferried them across the river for an exorbitant fee, as much as $1,000, to simply wait for the border patrol to pick them up. after processing they will likely be given a notice to appear for an immigration judge -- before an immigration judge and a bus ticket to wherever in america they may have friends or relatives. that's the way it goes. day in and day out. and what has become ground zero of the latest immigration crisis. thousands upon thousands of people from central america exploiting the poorest border of the rio grande valley to enter the united states. quote, if we don't send the message that they can't just come in and stay here, it's going to continue. this wave of humanity.

unquote. said texas representative henry cuellar. cuellar is a democrat but an outspoken critic of how president obama has handled this crisis. another story from brandon darby. rom brightbart, reports that vice president moran invoked the case of robert rosese -- roses, a border patrol agent who was ambushed by immigrants in 2009 in southern california. n that instance, the agent was dispatched alone to check on a sensor activation. brightbart news has covered that issue extensively and revealed that one of the men involved had been on supervised release from u.s. authorities. the illegal immigrants wanted

the agent's night vision equipment so they lured, trapped and murdered him, according to the u.s. attorney's office. a repeat occurrence of an incident like this is what we fear, especially now without full staffing in the field. said vice president moran. sean moran is vice president of the national border patrol council, the nbpc. he stated, the administration has already -- was already putting budgets before the securing of the border. our jobs are immensely dangerous as we interrupt cartel activity on u.s. soil. their border security policy failures have already reduced the number of agents securing the border and now they have fewer agents out there to back each other up. the lives of border patrol agents should not be pawns in the political games of

washington, d.c., and this administration is literally risking our lives. the loss of agent rosas is an example of what happens when an administration is lawless. it breeds more lawlessness. and that's exactly what we have now on our united states border in the south. the story says, though, border patrol are often heavily grouped in urban areas along the u.s.-mexican border. they're often alone in desolate rural areas and most of the .s.-mexico border is desolate. it is really tragic what is happening and this administration rings its hands, well, some do, some play golf, some ring their hands, some make sure they've got a good grip on their 7-iron, but others ring their hands about

the losses of life and the agedies occurring on our u.s.-mexico border. there's a story from the "l.a. hennessy-fisk, the call went out on border patrol radios just before sundown one day this week. 31 immigrants spotted illegally crossing the rio grande on a raft. no sooner had the my grants been found hiding in the brush .han another report came in people walking up the river bank. the rio grande valley has become ground zero for an unprecedented surge in families and unaccompanied children flooding across the southwest border, creating what the obama administration is calling a humanitarian crisis as border officials struggle to accommodate new detainees. largely from central america, they are now arriving at a rate

f more than 35,000 a month. and the 96-acre expanse of fields a woodlands has turned from a family recreation area into a high traffic zone for illegal migration. the number of children and teenagers traveling alone is pected to reach up to 90,000 across the southwest border by the end of the year. now this story was written june 13. had information that that number hit 60,000 by may and originally 60,000 was expected to be the tops. so i think it would be a good estimate to expect if we got more than 60,000 and coming

ster and faster and that 60,000 was hit by early may or the first of may, i think you could count on more than 90,000, perhaps more than 120,000 and that's this year. nd as these teenagers, others, are given legal status, then their parents, they will be able to be anchors to bring other family members in. you are talking about adding one million people when you start looking at all the other ways people are coming in. we bring in a million people with visas. no other country in the world does that. countries, the number of times our size allow visas but we do,

but we understand there is an obligation, you have to maintain some kind of semblance of order. and at a time when you got tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of people coming in illegally and you don't know who they are and drug cartels taking control, they are taking advantage of it, they are moving more drugs than ever and as some ave said this week, we, border patrol, i.c.e. were changing diapers. so how is that all happening? it comes back to the administration, if you have an administration that is lawless and refuses to enforce the law as this administration has, you are going to reap the whirlwind. news," story from "u.s.

migrant surges u.s. borders. had to find an immigrant sneaking illegally in the country. he waited in plain sight along a dirt road as a group of migrants and a young girl walked up surrendered to him a mile to the rio grande. they are giving up. the main responsibility is supposed to be serving court papers. as he waited for agents, another group was coming up behind him, and on, and on and on it goes.

it's what happens when an administration refuses to enforce the law. itself.to the law when you have an attorney germ hides the evidence and keeping the evidence secret of what happened in a couple of thousand guns being sold, forced by the government to be sold, to people that should have never got them in the operation called fast and furious. we have known about for a number of years, but we have always lt like even in the john mitchell department of justice, en when there was illegality somewhere, even at the top with the attorney germ, that there

would be good people in the department of justice that would stand up and say, this is wrong. you are going to destroy our country because we are supposed to be the department that ensures justice across the country. and it seems like what we are doing here in the d.o.j. is going after political enemies of the administration instead of being fair across the board. i mean the rest of the wofrled notice these things and they notice that we are not being fair and just and righteous as we once were. and all the time this humanitarian crisis illegal immigrants flooding into the country from our south and the administration saying we don't know why this is happening, why

are they rushing here. here is a story, the white house to honor young adults. 10 came into the united states illegally and qualified for the united states program to deaver deportation programs. i might remind, mr. speaker, that this is the president's program where he decided to change the law unilaterally without congress to say he deposit like the existing law, into pronounced law existence. e story from rebecca sh arch bmp arch d says the childhood program as long as they meet certain guidelines.

they were honored as champions of change. so the white house is gore filing people that came in illegally and then being shot shocked that more people want to glorified for coming in illegally. there's another story from reuters. a new york lawmaker wants to grant citizenship to millions of noncitizen residents including state and local elections. let's give benefits, let's give a give food and legal counsel as this administration is doing all. and let's give them incentives and the right to vote so they

can vote for more people to come in illegally. once you give the right to vote to people who have not respected the law and you give them the right to vote before they can be educated on the importance and madam, if you can keep it, you are going to lose that republic. you are going to lose the ability toe have a government of the people, by the people and for the people. it becomes lawless. ite makes right. tory from breitbart this week, children available for amnesty. gloria. children,al immigrant

office of refugee resettle thement. they reunite them with those already here in the u.s. and the u.s. district judge has said, now we are engaging in human trafficking. this is a good lesson on how you ose a great nation because you refuse to enforce your laws. this country has never had perfect laws. never will have perfect laws. they are made by man. but the thing we are supposed to strive for is making them better and better.

you don't have to study that much history to understand that no nation ever lasts forever. they never have, they never will. not in this life. so the question is, how long are you able to sustain a great nation? some have gone for hundreds and hundreds of years. the united states has never been, will never be an empire, like the greek or roman empire or the british empire, because the united states has never been imperial is particular. when we go in and fight for freedom, americans die for freedom, people still speak the same language, still have their same currency. we help them to set up a

vernment, which time we quit nation-building. now issuing, so many of us rned about this and after my last visit to iraq, represent tiveroirk pointed out problems mall ackyinister toll and we pointed out promises that were made and broken and he deposit like it. and it was very clear to us that all acky was either going to totally sell out to the iranians who were killing americans who were there, or he get knocked off, just like in afghanistan. president karzai is going to have to sell out to the taliban

or going to be killed or take money that people say that he has not actually embezzled that maybe some of his family has and live off of the money and live outside of afghanistan. we don't have to nation-build. we should just make it clear to a country, you can pick whatever government you want, but when you are a threat to us and you announce you want to zoy us as a great satan and destroy israel as the little satan and working on the bomb that will do that, we need to take your government out and need to take out all your areas and keep bombing until we have saturday torle done that and let the nation pick whatever government they want. but if they want to come after us as the khomeini has, but the

problem is this administration hoob floating ideas of working with iran, who have been killing american soldiers the entire time that u.s. soldiers were in iraq, providing i.e.d.'s, providing weapons, providing the means and people to help kill americans and made clear they want to wipe our country off the map and israel off the map and this administration has people who say let's work with iran who control iraq. that is sheer insanity. who is thinking of these things? allies of the unions all over the world are asking, are we the next ally to be thrown away as the united states continues to

embrace its enemies and throw away its friends? i mean, take your pick of the way nations have been lost over time, great nations have lost what freedom they had, what self-control they had. look at the way they have been lost. some have lost it internally. they spent too much money on .hemselves, overspent lost the country, became a bankrupt nation. or sometimes they let their defense down and people came in and overwhelmed the nation. or sometimes they were attacked by armies who destroyed their power at their governments. i mean, everywhere you turn, it appears we are taking the steps,

this administration and congress is not doing enough yet to stop him, but appears the administration repeatedly is taking all of those roads that lead to destruction. you cannot keep punishing your friends and you cannot keep encouraging your enemies and develop weapons that will destroy you. you cannot leave your borders open when people have made clear we are combrig in drugs. we are taking over gangs in your cities. we are going to destroy you from within. you can't keep doing that. and all that time, we are cutting spending on our defense to keep evil out. .

we're still overspending. sure, we've paid $600 million or so for a website, for obamacare, to friends of the administration, when we're told, gee, you could have done a better website for $4 million. sure, we've spent it on all kinds of things like that. but the spending of future generations' money has to stop. because you can lose the country just in that way as well. and just when you think the lawlessness of the administration could not get any worse, just when you think, wow, it is absolutely incredible, but it is very clear now that this administration's internal revenue service was using r.s. laws to persecute

political opponents of the administration so they could not be effective and do again in 2012 had this -- what they did in 2010 and guess what, it worked. at first we were told, no, they were going after liberal groups and conservative groups the same way. well, now we know that's not true. they were going after conservative groups and when any administration has i.r.s. officials that send out questions asking about the content of your prayers, it's time to start firing people right and left and since that hasn't happened, it tells you that there is a disease running through this administration, a cancer that needs to be stopped. and since we know that the attorney general himself is in contempt of congress, and we know that he sat there and told

me i was not to ever think it was a big deal, it was not a big deal to him to be found in contempt of court, when he knew that a year before he told abc news it wasn't a big deal to him. because he didn't have any respect for people in congress that voted to hold him in contempt. he couldn't even get his story right when he was testifying to congress. needs to go. and since the administration has refused to move out an attorney general who has repeatedly failed to do his job , has repiecedly failed to do justice, has repeatedly allowed the law to be used to go after political enemies, while protecting political friends, while they have refused to go after people who believe that this country ought to be part of a great radical islamic caliphate, and we protect those

people, not only do we protect them, according to egyptian periodicals that were controlled by muslim brotherhoods, they bragged about the people in this administration who were in sitions of power and amazingly, maybe it shouldn't be that amazing, but eventually truth does have a way of coming forward. so, yes, we had the i.r.s., at point, gee, they've lost emails. of course that triggered ideas in my head because, you know, there are laws, criminal laws, about obstructing congress. there are criminal laws about obstructing investigations. there are criminal laws about i.r.s. agents abusing their positions. and so anyone, anywhere in the

administration that is in any in assisted or encouraged any way, the losing or the reported loss of emails, this coverup, this active coverup that's going on, they've committed a crime. and it isn't just a six-month statute of limitations. nd they should be worried. so, the i.r.s., despite the laws regarding redundancy, despite the requirements that , they to keep records haven't done so. there's a great letter that was sent by attorney for true the vote, one of the persecuted

, writes to groups the down sill -- counsel for the i.r.s., and says, as you know, true the vote filed its lawsuit in the above referenced matter on may 21, 2013. by the time true the vote filed its suit, the internal revenue service and its employees and officials were on notice of the commencement of several congressional investigations. house committee of oversight and government reform, house committee on ways and means and the senate finance committee have each provided notice to the i.r.s. of their ongoing investigations into the i.r.s. nd specifically defendant lois lerner in her activities for over a year now. late friday the i.r.s. apparently advised the ways and means committee that the i.r.s.

has lost lois lerner's hard drive which includes thousands of defendant lerner's email records. however statutes and regulations require that the records be accessible by the committees and in turn must be preserved and made available to true the vote in the event of discovery in the pending litigation. those statutes include the federal records act, internal revenue manual section 1.1566. e i.r.s. document 12829, 6-cfr-1230 and 36-cfr 1222.12. the i.r.s. is required to preserve emails or otherwise con temp rainiously transmit records for preservation. therefore the failure for the i.r.s. to preserve and provide these records to the committee would evidence further violations of numerous records'

retention statutes and regulations or obstruction of congress. 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 interference that production of the evidence would have been unfavorable to the party responsible for its destruction. and cites a federal case. that's called a doctrine ex poleation. the fact that the i.r.s. is statutorily required to preserve these records, yet nevertheless publicly claims that they have been lost, appears to be evidence of bad faith. 18, u.s.c., 1505 makes it a federal crime to obstruct congressional proceedings and covers obstructive acts made during the course of a congressional investigation, even without official committee sanction. cites authority for that proposition. further, by letters dated

september 17, 2013, true the vote provided notice to counsel for the individual i.r.s. defendants in this litigation. the individual defendants are ki, lois lerner, michael sato, douglas shuleman, cindy thomas, william wilkins, susan maloney, ronald bell, janine estes, fay engie. true the vote, september 17, 2013, letter correspondents remind you and your clients of the individual defendants' obligation, quote, not to destroy, conceal or alter any paper or electronic files generated by or stored on your client's computer systems and storage media, hard disk, floppy disk, backup tapes, or any other electronic data such as voicemail, unquote. we identified this scope as encompassing both the personal

and professional or business capacity of your clients and involving data, quote, generated or created on or after july 15, 2010, see the attached letters. as the d.c. district court has found, quote, a party has a duty to preserve potentially relevant evidence. once that party anticipates litigation. cites the authority for that. in fact, that obligation runs first to counsel, who has a duty to advise his clients of the type of information potentially relevant to the lawsuit and of the necessity of preventing its destruction. and also extends to the managers of a corporate party who are responsible for conveying to their employees the requirements for preserving evidence. by letter dated september 25, it's acknowledged receipt of

our litigation, whole letter, and objected to our having the temerity to send such a letter. rejecting our characterization of documents to be preserved. indeed, she indicated she took great offense on having been put on notice to maintain documents related to the issues of this litigation. you further advised, however, that you could continue to advise, quote, your clients as appropriate and always will abide by my legal and ethical obligations, unquote. the public records released late on friday, june 13, 2014, stated the i.r.s. now claims to have lost the emails of defendant lois lerner. nd i've got to inject, ms. benitez, apparently she wasn't being honest. she didn't apparent lino how to properly advise her clients and

properly abide by the legal and ethical obligations that she had. this letter goes on. these reports are particularly astonishing in light of your representations, that you would advise your clients as appropriate and would abide by your legal and ethical obligations. the lost emails from press reports appear to cover a time period from january, 2009, to april, 2011. we're deeply troubled by this news and are concerned about the information and documents pertaining to this case and the apparent failure on your part to, a, protect and preserve all potentially relevant information, and, b, to advise us of such failure and when you first learned of it. we're even more concerned after receiving your assurances that you would, quote, abide by your legal and ethical obligations.

accordingly, we hereby request that you advise us of the following. and then it goesen to demand -- goes on to demand, they're quite reasonable, it says, in addition to seeking responses to the questions in this letter, we also seek your consent to immediately allow a computer forensic expert selected by true the vote to examine the computers that is or are purportedly the source of ms. lerner's lost emails, including cloning the hard drives in an attempt to restore what was supposedly lost and to seek to restore any and all lost evidence pertinent to this litigation. we also seek access to our computers, both official and personal, used by any and all of the defendants from, after july 1, 2010, and in order to ensure preservation of the documents of all defendants in this action. we wish to resolve our concerns applicabley but absent your consent, we will file such motions as deemed necessary and appropriately asking the court to require that you respond to

the questions contained in this letter, to permit such forensic examination described herein and for such other relief as may be appropriate for this egregious breach of legal authority and professional ethics. anyway. the judge in that case needs to o ahead and order all kinds of sanctions against the internal revenue service, needs to order all kinds of sanctions against the attorneys and the employees involved in that litigation, who have failed to produce what was required. the judge needs to make clear that justice, including from our own so-called justice department, will not permit this kind of lawlessness. it is outrageous.

it is simply outrageous. the ust when you think ignoring of the safety of american citizens couldn't get much worse by this administration, they brag that they're bringing a known terrorist to new york city. nobody on the left seems to be terribly bothered by the fact they say they're putting him on a slow ship to the u.s., when they should have put him on a fast plane to guantanamo bay. . it is better kept than many prisons i've been to, that actually meet the requirements of the law, including the requirements of liberal judges. it is better than so many prisons. and yes, they get to play soccer and when