« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
White House: "We Live in a New Time"
Highlights from this morning's White House press gaggle, during which spokesman Scott Stanzel did his best to explain the White House's email retention policies to a very skeptical press corps.
Here's one highlight in particular. Until 2004, the RNC automatically deleted the emails of White House staff after 30 days. But after that, the policy was changed. The RNC wouldn't delete the email, but the staffers' themselves could. But to do that, they would not only need to delete the email but then delete it again from the trash folder (there's a larger question of whether even that would actually delete the email, but we'll get to that later). A reporter asked if that didn't mean that certain staffers had made two affirmative decisions to delete certain emails. Stanzel responded:
Since 2004, the RNC has had a policy of excluding White House staff from their automatic deletion policy, which means that the RNC every 30 days has automatic deletion policy. Since 2004, it's our understanding, that White House staff who have political email accounts provided by the RNC have been excluded from that policy. And in terms of the double delete, what you're talking about is the user's ability, if they are sitting at their laptop, and decide that, 'gosh, I've got a hundred emails here that I just -- are cluttering up my inbox, I want to put them in the deleted file, and I right-click the deleted items to empty my deleted file.' It's possible, possible, that those records could have been lost....
More below.
From the gaggle:
Reporter: If the White House policy was not clear, though, the Presidential Records Act is clear, presumably. It's a federal law that's been on the books since the late '70s. How could the White House not have clear guidance on what the federal law is? Regardless of White House policy, it's a federal law on the books.Stanzel: Well, technology has certainly advanced. We live in a new time. This is just the second administration who's actually had email. This is the first administration who has dealt with the ubiquity of 24/7 communications in the form of BlackBerrys. So it is always on. The White House policy actually has been improved. We've strengthened that in policy, clarified it for staff so they understand how to avoid violations of the Hatch Act, while at the same time adhering to the Presidential Records Act.
In the manual previously, White House manual, there was one paragraph about using your official email account for official business. There were two pages of information about making sure that you do not violate the Hatch Act. That is certainly of concern and we take steps. It's appropriate to take steps to avoid violating the Hatch Act. There are official business emails, there are political business emails, and then there is also this gray area. And that's where employees have to make a judgment. And some employees, out of an abundance of caution, could have been sending official business emails on their RNC political account.
So that is the gray area that we're, in our new policy, working to make sure that staff is clear that they have to retain those. When they have to make a judgment, and they will have to make judgments, they should err on the side of avoiding violations of the Hatch Act, but they should also retain that information so it can be reviewed for the Presidential Records Act....
Reporter: On the change in policy in '04, wasn't that in response to Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation into the White House and the need, in response to his inquiries, to preserve records?
Stanzel: I don't know the reasons for that change. That's our understanding of when that change occurred. But the White House Counsel's Office is working with the RNC counsel to be sure and to gather more information about when changes were made and why they were made....Reporter: Why would it be the case that a White House official would be talking and writing about the US attorneys case on a non-White House email account?
Stanzel: Well, as I indicated, the guidance at the White House prior to this point has been very clear that you should avoid inadvertent violations of the Hatch Act. And so some employees, it seems clear, out of an abundance of caution, or sometimes out of logistical reasons, have communicated about official business on those political email accounts. And so I can't speak to the motivations of any individual on why they sent one email one way. I don't know that. But the White House guidance, what we've been working on is trying to make sure that it's more clear so people understand their obligations under both the Hatch Act and the Presidential Records Act.
Comments (1063)
kvenlander wrote on April 12, 2007 12:49 PM:Tell me he isn't trying to give detailed instructions how people who have accounts should delete their mail...
EdNsted wrote on April 12, 2007 12:49 PM:Just a couple of notes here...
While email is frequently deleted from SERVERS as a matter of course (i.e no malintent, just a practical matter), people tend to keep emails on their personal PCs MUCH longer - often for years. And on a PC, delete does not necessarily mean gone.
Second, when in the course of business, someone's old computer is replaced with a new one, the old one is decommisioned and sent to an internal 'boneyard' where it saved for parts, etc., often with hard drives intact. Typically, because the technology is old, the PCs simply sit there and languish for long periods of time.
bobh wrote on April 12, 2007 12:51 PM:He just indicated a crime has been committed.
Interesting....
Sholom wrote on April 12, 2007 12:55 PM:It depends on how the email system is set up. My US Govt work email, e.g., exists *only* on servers, none of it exists on my actual PC. (The only way I could get it onto my PC is to create a new archive on my local disk, but why would I bother?)
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 12:57 PM:OK, so we've determined the White House doesn't have a reliable set of e-mail copies. This is in violation of the Presdential Records Act, so laws were broken.
That point aside, we haven't determined what records (or traces of records) may be across town at the RNC -- or down in Chattanooga at SmarTech.
Inquiring minds want to know.
VT wrote on April 12, 2007 12:57 PM:Side question. Did Fitz ever see Rove's RNC emails in the Palme investigation? Did Libby have a RNC email too? Is there a darth vader email server out there that resembes gwb43.com?
Does anyone know?
Mnamna wrote on April 12, 2007 12:59 PM:STANZEL: "Well, as I indicated, the guidance at the White House prior to this point has been very clear that you should avoid inadvertent violations of the Hatch Act. And so some employees, it seems clear, out of an abundance of caution, or sometimes out of logistical reasons, have communicated about official business on those political email accounts."
Is it just me or does that seems completely backword? (And he emphasizes it twice so I don't think he misspoke.) If you were being overly cautious to NOT violate the Hatch Act then why would you default to the RNC account, versus the official White House account?
Michael wrote on April 12, 2007 1:00 PM:He probably doesn't know any better, but this is at least the fourth administration to have e-mail. There has been e-mail at the White House since the Reagan years. There's even a book about it, "White House E-mail."
KG wrote on April 12, 2007 1:02 PM:I think the intersection with the Fitzgerald investigation is interesting. How is it possible for government employees with security clearances to legally discuss government business on non-secure and non-archived email accounts and servers? Similarly, if there was so much concern about not violating any laws, why no move to make sure it was all done legitimately by making sure the RNC servers were archived? You know, just in case someone made a minor error in "judgment."
r€nato wrote on April 12, 2007 1:03 PM:The only way to destroy data for sure, is to take the hard drive out of the computer and take a hammer to it and smash it into little pieces. I am sure there are data recovery experts out there who would be glad to donate their services to recovering these emails. I know for a fact there is a company called Drivesavers which specializes in recovering data, even from hard drives which have been subjected to the worst kinds of physical shock... fire, immersion in water, you name it. These people are utter idiots if they think that just deleting an email erases it forever. There are pedophiles busted for kiddie porn all the time, who thought they had erased their data.
dan tynan wrote on April 12, 2007 1:04 PM:three words: backups, backups, backups.
email is stored first on a server, then sent to individual computers. often a copy is retained on the server. servers are backed up periodically, usually to tape drives or other storage devices. those backups are archived.
this by the way, is how ollie north got nailed. the internal white house email system had a permanent continuous backup system that north wasn't aware of.
so... are the missing emails on a backup tape somewhere? somebody better subpoena the RNC and its service providers quick, before they "lose" those too.
dt
C 92 wrote on April 12, 2007 1:04 PM:Again, loudly.
The HATCH ACT IS A RED HERRING.
By holding political briefings at GSA (Lurita Doan) and other Federal Agencies, Karl Rove's shop showed clear disregard for abiding by the Act.
That one is really basic - you cannot do political activities during the workday in a Federal building with Hatch-restricted (most Schedule C's) appointees. That's a clear violation. Yet they did it again and again.
Moreover, White House (WHO) appointees [those people who work in the White House] have less stringent restrictions on them for Hatch purposes.
RED HERRING. RED HERRING. ROVE TURNING WEAKNESS INTO STRENGTH. OBFUSCATION.
They don't give a toss about the Hatch Act. That's why they violated it twelve ways to Sunday. And "abundance of caution" for Hatch activites on e-mail is JUST NOT BELIEVABLE.
GWN wrote on April 12, 2007 1:06 PM:"We live in a new time. This is just the second administration who's actually had email."
I wonder who came up with that "talking point".. Gosh we've only been using email for about 11 yrs. You have to give us more time to get used to it.
When diggin yourself into a hole... stop digging...don't design a bigger shovel.
Gary wrote on April 12, 2007 1:06 PM:Elections matter!
If Arlen were still running Judiciary, none of this would come out.
Hats off to Leahy, he is kicking serious ass.
And hats off to TPM, doing same . . . but none of this would be possible if it weren't for 2006 election.
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 1:07 PM:Mr. Stanzel, remember the OLIVER NORTH e-mails during Iran Contra?
Wasn't that under Reagan? Wasn't that 4 Presidencies ago?
ManagedChaos wrote on April 12, 2007 1:08 PM:STANZEL: "Well, as I indicated, the guidance at the White House prior to this point has been very clear that you should avoid inadvertent violations of the Hatch Act. And so some employees, it seems clear, out of an abundance of caution, or sometimes out of logistical reasons, have communicated about official business on those political email accounts."
Is it just me or does that seems completely backword? (And he emphasizes it twice so I don't think he misspoke.) If you were being overly cautious to NOT violate the Hatch Act then why would you default to the RNC account, versus the official White House account?
I think the funniest part of this comment is his use of the word inadvertent. What he is saying is...out of an abundance of caution not to INADVERTENTLY violate the Hatch Act, they went all the way in their violation. It wasn't inadvertent at all. HAHAHAHA
john wrote on April 12, 2007 1:09 PM:If the email has at anytime been indexed, then it is stored once again as database records whose deletion would be quite difficult to conceal.
Andrew wrote on April 12, 2007 1:11 PM:First, last I checked, ignorance of a law wasn't a defense.
Second, aren't these the people who think everyone should be taught the 10 commandments? Did they miss the part about falsehoods? It seems like when a rule is direct enough it doesn't need more than "one paragraph about using your official email account for official business," or, "two pages of information about making sure that you do not violate the Hatch Act," in order to be effective.
Kim EM wrote on April 12, 2007 1:12 PM:I seem to remember, from the mists of antiquity, which means from before the modern age of politics, the old adage, "ignorance of the law is no excuse". Competent 'guidance' or not from the White House, aren't the people who deleted things in violation of the Presidential Records Act still legally liable? Perhaps a few prosecutions will provide some incentive for the rest to produce their missing documents, and "straighten up and fly right" in their somewhat limited future white house careers.
r€nato wrote on April 12, 2007 1:13 PM:When Bush first seized the White House, he promised an administration which would restore 'honor and integrity' to the White House.
How's that working out for you, "President" Bush?
Jeff wrote on April 12, 2007 1:14 PM:What is the penalty for violating the Presidential Records Act?
Star wrote on April 12, 2007 1:15 PM:It's no wonder that staff had trouble determining what was White House official business and what was political. The Attorney General seems to have had the same difficulty. In this administration, they are one and the same.
jrcjr wrote on April 12, 2007 1:16 PM:I wonder if there's anyone out there that really believes that these emails can't be recovered.
I'd bet the GOP's own IT personnel wouldn't even testify to that, unless of course they never want to be trusted with computers again.
jacabo wrote on April 12, 2007 1:16 PM:They must know the shitstorm that accompanies the claim that they lost these emails, and decided it was worth it. Man, whatever they are covering up must be REALLY bad
legion wrote on April 12, 2007 1:17 PM:Let me get this straight... out of an "abundance of caution", admin employees _deliberately_ did the _exact opposite_ of federal law?!?
What brand of crack are these guys smoking?
Clayton wrote on April 12, 2007 1:18 PM:Damnit, don't we now have ways to make people talk!?!
mbbsdphil wrote on April 12, 2007 1:20 PM:The WH's records policy changed after 2004? In February 2005, the President changed the National Archivist, the guy with whom the President must confer about his records retention/destruction policies. [44 USC sec. 2203(c)(2)]
Respected Archivist John Carlin resigned his post early, without explanation. Bush replaced him with the controversial Allen Weinstein. Ironically, Weinstein is an expert on Soviet espionage.
The controversies about Weinstein relate to his Republican politics, his scholarship, his ethics, and his management abilities.
Google Weinstein and Carlin for several background stories.
negativequity wrote on April 12, 2007 1:22 PM:
TheraP wrote on April 12, 2007 1:23 PM:Hey Kim EM -
You wrote: "Perhaps a few prosecutions will provide some incentive for the rest to produce their missing documents, and "straighten up and fly right" in their somewhat limited future white house careers."
Just so you know - A tree born crooked, will never grow straight...
All of this is, of course, interconnected. It's like a giant spider web, with bodies littered all over it. Or it's like a cancer and if you simply try to do a biopsy you find it has already spread everywhere! Or it's like organized crime. A whole bureaucracy of organized crime!
It is clear that we are dealing with criminals who will stop at nothing. No lie is too little or too big. No theft is bypassed. No consequences. No consciences. No shame. No guilt. No limits to wrongdoing or cover-ups. And misdeeds are described as an "abundance of caution."
Logic is long gone. Ethics are long gone. And one wonders if the republic itself is also long gone!
Paul wrote on April 12, 2007 1:23 PM:I think the part of this story that will incense the most Americans is that having to do with national security.
The White House communications system is the among the most secure in the world so that White House staff can communiate about highly sensitive topics, including security.
By circumventing that system, for whatever reason, it's guaranteed that the White House has put the country at risk.
All of us should emphasize this in calls and emails to REPUBLICAN Judiciary Committee members, not just Dems.
majorreno wrote on April 12, 2007 1:23 PM:What unbelievable gall with the email use claim! These White House F**** really must believe that Americans are going to buy this. The obsfucation pattern is emerging. There is no real mystery here. Simply lay out the chain of events from the Watergate mess and adapt it to this cluster. When that is accomplished, there you have it. The duo of bush and rove is anethema to our Democracy.
Curbnoise wrote on April 12, 2007 1:24 PM:Has anyone looked into how many emails the originated within the Department of Justice that were sent to RNC addresses? This would require the sender to type in (or select from his/her address book) the RNC address. If there are a large number of these, it would indicate that standard practice was to use the RNC addresses and put lie to the comment that "some staff members may have been overly cautious to avoid violating the Hatch Act".
P J Evans wrote on April 12, 2007 1:24 PM:Geeze, and I thought when I deleted my e-mail and emptied the trash that it only disappeared from my local computer....
My company archives non-deleted e-mail after 30 days. It doesn't disappear unless it's been deleted. And even then, it would show up on the server backups for the period when it wasn't deleted. We also have a lot of stuff we have to keep for legal reasons.
What kind of incompetents does the WH have running their systems?
RandyBastard wrote on April 12, 2007 1:28 PM:As I understand it, all of the email in question HAS been archived.
It's all over at the NSA with all the email from everybody else in the world.
adam wrote on April 12, 2007 1:29 PM:What about simple tape backups? I work in IT, and there is always someone calling a help desk saying, "I've just deleted this or that. Can you pull it from tape backup for me?" Come on. Are they saying that, if Karl Rove lost some files or emails, or dropped his laptop or his Blackberry got wet, that they couldn't do anything for him? BS.
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 1:29 PM:On the archivist, a telling sign ---
"...A host of historians are also disturbed by the way that Weinstein got his job in the first place. In a surprising move, Weinstein was chosen last spring while John Carlin -- a Clinton appointee and a former governor of Kansas -- was still in office. Nearly two dozen professional organizations, including the American Historical Association, cried foul. The groups worried about "the politicization of the office," Wiener says.
"My concern was about the process being subverted," says Bruce Craig of the National Coalition for History, an advocacy group for the profession. "There is a law." The 1984 law, which created the National Archives and Records Administration, stipulated that the archivist will serve an indefinite term and can be removed only if the president gives a reason to Congress.
*****So far, President Bush has not given any reason for Carlin's dismissal and Weinstein's appointment. Speaking from his home in Olney, Carlin says he has no idea why he was fired. "I was assured they had no problem with what I was doing*****...."
Sound familiar?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14555-2005Mar30_2.html
Redundant2 wrote on April 12, 2007 1:29 PM:"What is the penalty for violating the Presidential Records Act?"
Posted by: Jeff
It's the same as the one for violating the 10 commandments.
squirm wrote on April 12, 2007 1:31 PM:It's obvious Rove likes his odds a lot better if this goes to court, so he's gone and authorized this clear admission of guilt. He's tired of the chess game and is ready for the knife fight.
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 1:31 PM:Dana Perino just said they have been "forthcoming"!!!!!!!!!!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!
lilnubber wrote on April 12, 2007 1:31 PM:Um, isn't a White House employee in violation of the Hatch Act if they are conducting RNC business during working hours?
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 1:31 PM:Does Grover Norquist have a gwb43.com account?
shrubsy wrote on April 12, 2007 1:32 PM:gots to subpoena RNC records.
shut them down, investigate
possible RICO violations
scour ALL of their files. Think of the Finds!
Think of the ratfuc*king (best word to come out of the Nixon era) operations they have piled up there.
All of the worst violators of this admin come from there. Would be nice to shutdown the federalist society and the repub lawyers assoc.
basin - circling the drain
Jimmmm wrote on April 12, 2007 1:32 PM:Sure, WH officials deliberately erased legally mandated records of their official (and non-official) correspondence...
But a black rap artist just said "nigga" on one of his singles!!!
These are not the droids you're looking for.
Hey, security code: delete. How amusing!
blacksheep wrote on April 12, 2007 1:34 PM:Sheeple: Do we not have more imoortant things to worry about? I mean my gosh, Anna Nichole lied about the real father of her baby. Imus just called a girls basketball team a bunch of "Knappy Headed Whoe's". This is absurd that you are more worried about a couple of emails. Whats the big deal? Shut up and get back into line... Both parties have a Country to destroy, are you actually going to get in the way of that?
Curbnoise wrote on April 12, 2007 1:34 PM:Another interesting would be to troll all governmental email systems for email to/from any @georgewbush.com (or any of the other RNC domains). Could be very illuminating.
nm wrote on April 12, 2007 1:35 PM:I looked up the MX records for gwb43.com. It appears that all email for gwb43.com gets routed to servers hosted by SmartTech Corp. Its website boasts somewhat ironically:
How safe will your content be when stored at our facility? As safe as the basement of the former Pioneer Bank building. Our facility is located along with shared security within the bank basement.
Even if Karl Rove deletes all his emails religiously every night, which I doubt, I would be very surprised if his emails were not backed up every night by SmarTech.
C 92 wrote on April 12, 2007 1:35 PM:HATCH ACT IS A RED HERRING.
Don't let this talking point succeed.
If they were concerned about the Hatch Act, they wouldn't have been sending J. Scott Jennings to to political briefings in clear violation of the Hatch Act.
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 1:36 PM:Perino just said it- they wanted to "avoid" the Hatch Act.
Adam Cole wrote on April 12, 2007 1:36 PM:code word: crime
As a stockbroker, I have a fiduciary duty not to invest your money in bad faith. There are many pages in my SEC ethics manuals about this.
Now, there are good-faith investments, there are bad-faith investments, and then there is also this gray area. And that's where brokers like me have to make a judgment. And out of an abundance of caution, it may be that I sometimes took your money and stashed it in my own offshore accounts for "safekeeping".
In the manual previously, SEC manual, there was only one sentence about using your clients' funds for one's own personal gain ("Stealing...is RIGHT OUT!"). Our legal counsel felt this instruction was far too concise to understand, though.
But rest assured, we're going to do everything we can to get you your money back. We've got all our best in-house guys on it.
mbbsdphil wrote on April 12, 2007 1:36 PM:"White House communications are the most secure in the world because of the highly sensitive national security matters it deals with daily", or words to that effect.
Not only does this White House draw no distinction between itself and the Republican Party, it makes none between covering its backside and defending national security.
Here's hoping Congress will enlighten them about those distinctions.
owenz wrote on April 12, 2007 1:37 PM:The problem with all this talk of the emails being recoverable from old computers, servers, etc. is that the White House operates like an organized crime family. The emails have been purposefully destroyed - and I suspect the destruction has been quite thorough. We're not talking about accidental deletions here.
Companies get fined for destroying emails. There is a strong disincentive to doing so. Organized crime families don't get fined for destroying evidence; just the opposite, in fact. It protects them. They have every incentive in the world to cover their tracks.
This White House is much more like an organized crime family than a business. Thus, I have to believe it was their intent to destroy the emails permanently. Our only hope is the spectacular incompetence of these people in nearly everything they do. Just because they wanted to destroy them permanently doesn't mean they were smart enough to do so.
Aaron G. Stock wrote on April 12, 2007 1:38 PM:jacabo at 1:16PM: "They must know the shitstorm that accompanies the claim that they lost these emails, and decided it was worth it. Man, whatever they are covering up must be REALLY bad"
This point bears repeating. Good one, jacabo.
Patriot NW wrote on April 12, 2007 1:38 PM:So, you're trying to tell me that Karl Rove has some intern-like grasp of what the rules are regarding the Hatch act and retention of records? Yeah, and I've got a bridge for sale in Arizona. Also, he's claiming "this is only the second administration to have email". True, but we're not talking about two or three years than this has been around. We're talking about over a decade. It's as if they are trying to paint this technology as so incredibly new that there wasn't any real policy. Get those NSA people to find those "missing" emails, pronto. I'm sure they have it all stored on a hard drive somewhere.
Deb wrote on April 12, 2007 1:39 PM:If 50 people had RNC issued accounts/equipment, does this mean that they were all employed by us (taxpayers) and the RNC at the same time, or are we (taxpayers) footing the entire bill? Do they account for their time spent on RNC business separately from time spent on 'the People's' business? What would the procedure be in such a case?
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 1:40 PM:Security Code: fear
here's the gop service provider that hosts all of the sites in question - smarttech in chatanooga, tn. they also handled spamming for the gop, which means they must have a lot of email stored somewhere.
http://www.smartechcorp.net/index.php?page=news&sub=story&id=68
Local company hosts GOP Internet sites
posted: 08-22-2004
By Andy Sher Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON — It’s more than 700 miles from Madison Square Garden, but that won’t stop Chattanooga from "hosting" next week’s Republican National Convention in New York City.
Chattanooga based Smartech Corp. is serving as Web host for the convention, bringing the event to computer screens across the globe. The company will provide convention speeches, video-on-demand "streams" and live shots of events through powerful Web servers, most of which are at Smartech’s headquarters in downtown Chattanooga.
[ material deleted ]
Max Everett, the Republican National Convention’s director of information technology, said in a statement that "Smartech has been great for us so far."
"They’ve got a tight group that does their support, and they know how to do some coding of their own, so they are able to respond and customize more than your average Web host," he said.
In addition to its work at the convention, Smartech also sends out several million e-mail messages a day under contracts with both President Bush’s campaign and the Republican National Committee.
The company also hosts the Bush-Cheney campaign Web site, at www.georgewbush.com, and the national committee’s site, www.GOP.com. In the past year, the company has added six employees, bringing its total to 12. Smartech does not release revenue figures, but political work accounts for 25 percent to 35 percent of the company’s total business, Mr. Averbeck said....
draftedin68 wrote on April 12, 2007 1:41 PM:.
The first four steps in the Rovian issue resolution procedure:
1 - Duck
2 - Dodge
3 - Bob
4 - Weave
They have finished Step 1 and are beginning Step 2.
.
za wrote on April 12, 2007 1:41 PM:Reporter: So, what you're saying is that witha trillion dollar budget, the White House simply couldn't afford to hire a few IT professionals to give them guidance on all this?
Stanzel: Well, we've always relied on Billy to help us with these issues.
Reporter: Who's Billy?
Stanzel: He's the White House Custodial Representative and refuse liaison.
Reporter: You mean, janitor?
Stanzel: Tomato/tomahto. Anyway, Billy once told me about the Ctrl-Alt-Del key sequence that's gotten me out of more than one jam, I can tell you.
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 1:41 PM:Dana Perino has a perma smile glued to her face.
monocle wrote on April 12, 2007 1:42 PM:Bush - quagmire in Iraq
Nixon - quaqmire in Vietnam
Bush - spying on enemies
Nixon - spying on enemies
Bush - lost e-mails
Nixon 18 1/2 minute gap
So it goes.
broken bottle wrote on April 12, 2007 1:42 PM:Just to put my 2 cents in as an IT guy, depending on what mail server they're using, mail deleted from the user's client doesn't necessarily truly get deleted. Exchange has deleted mail retention that's configurable but it keeps deleted mails recoverable for I *think* around 2 weeks. Some people above mentioned mail typically getting deleted from *servers* but not the clients when the opposite is actually more likely to be true.
Having said that, as someone who uses e-mail heavily to conduct business, I'm surprised to read that anyone deletes anything other than true junk mail. E-mail is sometimes the best way to maintain a record of a discussion. If you want to be organized and keep good track of details, you keep generally keep your e-mails. If they're not retaining mails client side or server side, I would suspect that things are conducted that way intentionally. If some users have their mails and some don't, it would indicate that they're collectively not that organized.
jhe wrote on April 12, 2007 1:43 PM:I seem to recall that Bush himself swore off all email right around his first inauguration because of the requirements of the Presidential Records Act. It was pretty unambiguous that at that level there was a clear understanding of the act's requirements. When did that understanding change? Who gave the legal opinion to change it?.
HowDidIGetHere? wrote on April 12, 2007 1:43 PM:From a 2004 Wash. Post article about National Archivist John Carlin's replacement:
'Carlin said in his July 22 letter to Levin he would like to remain in his post for four more months so he could complete several initiatives he had undertaken. They include getting congressional funding for development of "a groundbreaking system that will allow the government to manage and preserve any kind of electronic records, now and in the future."'
Read the rest here:
Rodney Lamprey, jr. wrote on April 12, 2007 1:43 PM:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13913-2004Jul25.html
These "off the books" e-mails on RNC accounts are going to be the equivalent of Nixon's tapes. The e-mail still exists on servers and back up tapes, even if the user deletes it.
John Snyder wrote on April 12, 2007 1:44 PM:A colleague once told me a story about a client who was a defendant in a lawsuit, who said that he had destroyed his email after the lawsuit started. The lawyer, in shock, said, "are you crazy, that's spoliation of evidence -- now they are going to assume the worst about those emails."
The client replied, "nothing they could assume is as bad as what those emails actually said."
skaren wrote on April 12, 2007 1:45 PM:I find it interesting that those folks who sometimes show up on these posting defending the Admin are really quiet right now,...
Not a single one in this long list to be seen.
I agree to pull this they are really hiding something worth a lot.
Code=right
za wrote on April 12, 2007 1:47 PM:erm, yes, we all know how strict the White House is on matters of the Hatch Act. Just ask Scott Jennings, who is the one that provided a PowerPoint presentation to the GSA on how they could help Republicans across the country win elections in 2008.
The Hatch Act is obviously of utmost importance to these people.
US8 wrote on April 12, 2007 1:47 PM:I posted this under the Rove story but it is relevant here as well.
I just finished reviewing an Office of Special Counsel power point presentation on the Hatch Act. It is interesting that the act specifically excempts government employees paid for out of an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President, or those appointed by the President and Senate Confirmed. The only caveat is that the costs of such activities cannot be paid for with money derived from the U.S. Treasury. With that it appears that Rove and Company weren't actually covered by the Hatch Act. Which begs the question, why are they saying that they set up the parallel email system to avoid running afoul of it? Thats the rub.
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 1:49 PM:Smartech Corp was also outsourced by the government of the State of Ohio (at the time being run by Republican Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, who was seeking the governor's office) to...... wait for it....
tabulate the official election results for the State of Ohio...
http://scoop.epluribusmedia.org/story/2006/11/7/115314/922
NelsonC wrote on April 12, 2007 1:50 PM:So, "We live in a new time." is part of their defense for not being able to maintain the minimum level of competence?
owenz wrote on April 12, 2007 1:52 PM:Since every passing year is different than the one before it, all past administrations have had to "live in a new time".
There are millions of people in this country who adapt to new situations and technology every day. Why are none of these people in our Executive Branch?
The client replied, "nothing they could assume is as bad as what those emails actually said."
You've got it exactly right, John. What are the practical consequences for the White House, assuming they have successfully destroyed these emails? Assuming the emails are truly gone, probably not much. I mean, Pat Leahy will be pissed. Bloggers will be pissed. But the media will move on quickly. And no charges will be filed.
The Administration breaks the law every day. Nothing happens. This is not to say we should give up on trying to recover the emails. God knows these people are incompetent enough to have screwed up the deletion job. But Karl Rove is Karl Rove, and I very much doubt they screwed THIS up. They are very good law breaking, after all. It's the whole "running the government" thing they have trouble with.
phidda wrote on April 12, 2007 1:52 PM:It seems unlikely that as emails are both sent and received, that at least one copy couldn't be found. It also seems likely that someone would not archive their emails from Karl Rove. For your own scrapbook, so to speak, or to CYA if things got hot. Think Scooter Libby.
Chuck wrote on April 12, 2007 1:52 PM:Well, at the risk of stating the technologically obvious here, depending on the specific software the RNC uses for email, it's possible that a user deleting the email and emptying the deleted items folder wouldn't immediately delete the emails from the server. There's often a "janitor" process that would do that, hours, days, or even weeks after as part of server maintenance routines.
Until that occurs, it's usually a trivial matter to recover items emptied from a deleted items folder. And, even had the janitor process run, no responsible organization (whoops, am I forgetting the nature of the organizations we're discussing?) operates without backing up the database that holds the mail (the store, as it is typically called) in order to be able to recover from a failure of the mail system.
Then it becomes a matter of the retention policy for the backups and how long it is before the media on which the backup exists is recycled. So if the "emptying" of the folders in question is very recent, the question is whether any emails in question can be recovered through other means.
If not, then the inability to recover the items becomes a question of whether that was intentional given the retention policies of the organization and typical practices with respect to the timing of the recycling of the backup media. Since this is all subject now to a congressional inquiry, that could lead to a question of whether Contempt has occurred.
TR wrote on April 12, 2007 1:53 PM:The reason he keeps mentioning the Hatch act is to create confusion. The Hatch act has zero relation to archiving administration email, papers or any other official government communication, so to use the Hatch act as an excuse to delete email is disingenuous. In fact, it looks more like they were intentionally deleting email that was itself evidence that the Hatch act was regularly being violated.
Sparrowgal wrote on April 12, 2007 1:57 PM:I was reading over at Firedoglake this morning, and one of the bloggers had an interesting point to make re. the Chattanooga connection, whose veracity I haven't verified. Rather a juicy morsel, however, if true.
--------------------Post:--------------
cevrero wrote on April 12, 2007 1:57 PM:Is The AP Trying To Erase GOP Bad Behavior From The News?
---------comment by charlie wilson:-------
Gosh Kids, didn’t anyone else notice that Karl was in Chattanooga TN last week which is home to the company that handles the rogue accounts, people should have been faster on the acquisiton of the emails before the drives could be scrubbed, sharpen up folks.
Should they even be in the whitehouse if the majority of the work in RNC related? Time to ask for a refund on their salaries.
mh wrote on April 12, 2007 1:57 PM:a lot more about Smartech here
MW wrote on April 12, 2007 1:58 PM:http://trustme.com/story.php?title=secret-White-House-comunication-system
"This is just the second administration who's actually had email."
That's false. This is the fourth administration to use email, the first being the Reagan administration. In fact, the National Security Archive sued the Bush I administration under the Freedom of Information Act to preserve White House emails after email deletions by John Poindexter and Oliver North during the Iran-Contra scandal. (I happened to have worked on a project to archive email under the Clinton administration, which inherited the lawsuit).
Some details can be found here:
EH wrote on April 12, 2007 1:58 PM:http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/white_house_email/index.html
Many places, not having adequate and tested tape backups is a firable offense.
foggybuttner wrote on April 12, 2007 2:00 PM:"There are official business emails, there are political business emails, and then there is also this gray area. And that's where employees have to make a judgment. And some employees, out of an abundance of caution, could have been sending official business emails on their RNC political account."
So it appears to me they are admiting the attorney firings were indeed political. Guilty either way you look at it.
Rick Hall wrote on April 12, 2007 2:06 PM:Dan Tynan is absolutely right here. I am a Network Engineer with more than 20 years of experience. I can tell you for a fact that it is standard operating procedure for companies and organizations to retain backups of email systems daily. It is simply NOT TRUE that a user can delete his own email in such organizations UNLESS an INTENTIONAL decision is made by that organization's IT department (in cahoots with their executive managers) to NOT keep backups for fear of any government oversight. Any company or organization with more than a handful of members or employees would consider it essential to keep such records for legal reasons. This procedure is so standard by IT professionals and lack of such practices so blatantly irresponsible that not keeping backups could potentially make a prima fascia case of a cover up.
Sojourner wrote on April 12, 2007 2:07 PM:Just suppose...
That a White House staffer was considered to be selling information to some foreign entity. In the course of the investigation, I am sure that investigating authorities would need to comb through email. I am almost certain that copies of ALL email communications in the White House are stored on a BIG storage device, and that there would be no problem whatsoever in examining suspect messages.
I also have to wonder just what national secrets were being relayed to RNC? Neither the RNC nor the DNC has any right to such information. Right there is a basis for an investigation!
Get busy, FBI!
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 2:07 PM:"Dana Perino has a perma smile glued to her face."
Posted by:
Date: April 12, 2007 01:41 PM
Sagrilarus wrote on April 12, 2007 2:12 PM:Are we sure her "big-girl panties" aren't a little tight?
"Many places, not having adequate and tested tape backups is a firable offense."
I'm pretty sure the RNC isn't one of them.
Sag.
Dan wrote on April 12, 2007 2:12 PM:All this makes me wonder if this isn't an invitation for Patrick Fitzgerald to re-open his case. Was Fitzgerald, or his office, aware of this parallel network ? Didn't Karl Rove belatedly "find" e-mails that were long under subpoena ? Were they, or any other materials turned over to Fitzgerald from this shadow network ? Can Leahy get access to Fitzgerald's files? Hmmmm...
Dawn wrote on April 12, 2007 2:14 PM:Dan
Just gotta say it : this is my favorite comment thread ever. LOL funny and dead on target as well.
Emily wrote on April 12, 2007 2:14 PM:Montpelier Step It Up 2007: Central Vermont's Day of Climate Action
For more info contact: drew Hudson, VPIRG, 223-8421 (o) 279-4430 (c)
drew@vpirg.org
Who: Senator Bernie Sanders, VT Senate President Peter Shumlin, Burr
Morse, and other local business owners, the Association of Vermont
Recyclers, National Wildlife Federation, Vermont National Resources
Council, and the Vermont Public Interest Research Group.
What: The state's largest Step it up action with hundreds of
participants, exciting speakers, excellent visuals, music, free creemees
and more! Over 1200 events have been scheduled nationwide and over 60 in
Vermont to demand our leaders 'Step it Up' by pledging to cut carbon 80%
by 2050.
When: 12p.m. - 4p.m. Saturday, April 14, 2007
Agenda:
12:00 Morse Farm - 1168 County Rd - Montpelier
Guided nature walk, sugaring demos, Free Creemees and more!
1:00
first-hand accounts of how global warming threatens Vermont' skiing,
fishing and future from Burr Morse, local fishing guides, sports-store
owners, and high school students.
2:00 **Excellent Visuals**
Hundreds of attendees will March to the State House lead by
performance artist/percussionist the Junkman.
3:00 Vermont State House State Street - Montpelier
Speeches by Senator Bernie Sanders and Senator Peter Shumlin. Both
leaders will sign a giant pledge committing to support legislation that
can achieve 80% by 2050 cuts in carbon emissions
Where: Morse Farm 12p.m.-2p.m., and the VT State House 2p.m.-4p.m.
Why: Vermont and America's emissions of Greenhouse Gasses are on the
Michael wrote on April 12, 2007 2:15 PM:rise. Recent Reports from the IPCC and dozens of other peer-reviewed
research studies have said that if we do not cut carbon emissions 80% by
2050, Vermont and the planet's climate will pass a tipping point from
which it will never recover. But change is possible. Legislation
introduced by Senator Sanders and Supported by Senators Leahy and
Congressman Welch has the potential to cut America's climate foot-print
80% by 2050. And while action to-date is insufficient, the VT
legislature is debating 2 bills, S.94 and H.520 with the potential to
achieve cuts in global warming pollution in-line with the 80% goals. In
response, an unprecedented number of Vermonters are speaking out,
stepping up and making it known that they support action at the local,
state and federal level to cut carbon and avert a climate crisis.
I work for a public agency. ALL OF OUR EMAIL IS ARCHIVED FOR 7 YEARS BY LAW, PERIOD.
Congress needs to issue a subponea to smartech ASAP, before they can whack the data.
Also, be ready for an unknown cyber attack to spread a virus that compromises all federal electronic records.
We need to be aware that NSA may be compromised with Bush hacks, just as FBI and CIA are.
AL Quaeda will get the blame, by the time the dust settles....Voila no more AG issue.
Joshua wrote on April 12, 2007 2:18 PM:Would the Dept. of Justice somehow be in charge of making sure the White House understood the Hatch Act? Or maybe Harriet in the day?
(Playing along with this obvious lies regarding their understanding of these laws...)
Who would be the "guilty" party here? In other words, maybe there are some people who can be held accountable for the admissions of guilt provided in the cover story--people who, under oath, might be hesitant to substantiate the administration's claims, considering that in doing so, they would be admitting to a negligible understanding of the law and a profound inability at providing council.
Basically, if we are to believe the administration's silly untruths here (or play along with them for a moment), then someone in charge of something is an incredibly incompetent adviser. Who is that someone?
Michael wrote on April 12, 2007 2:20 PM:Emily,
The subject of this thread is the missing email from the RNC servers.
This is a national forum. Nice to see you have events organized for Earth day in your community.
Now back to the subject at hand, missing email from RNC servers.
TheraP wrote on April 12, 2007 2:20 PM:Don't you just love the logic? They collect everybody else's email - and delete their own!
anon wrote on April 12, 2007 2:24 PM:...I find it interesting that those folks who sometimes show up on these posting defending the Admin are really quiet right now,...
I'm really looking forward to seeing the spin. Something's clearly wrong, check. It involves computers, check. It's gonna be fun to hear what Capt. Ed has to say. And--bonus--the spin from on top is rather confused right now. It's going to take a few days for them to get their story straight and, hey, I bet everyone in the RNC shop is kinda busy right now.
I'm thinking: "Well, see, those e-mails have information about the War of Terror and so they have to be deleted to keep the terrorists from seeing them." Um, scratch that. Maybe "Keeping those e-mails would be an invasion of privacy." Um, maybe not that one. How about "Everyone has accidents. I dropped my hard drive into a vat of boiling oil on the same day that the building that houses the servers was flooded by Katrina." Um, okay, we'll try that one.
We're going need popcorn _and_ nitrous to make it through this one.
Code: attack
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 2:25 PM:So, not having gone through the Watergate scandal, what will it take for the American public to finally reach the tipping point, take notice and demand impeachment.
Is Rove so clever as to avoid any such tipping point?
pre-amerikkkan wrote on April 12, 2007 2:27 PM:you don't think these guys have read all the watergate material they can get their hands on?
if congress doesn't impeach bush AND cheney, they are not doing their jobs. goodling and rove should be in jail right now.
if i could, i would tell them all to go back where they came from and let's start over!
jeez, how bad can you mess this up?
Jeff Yurka wrote on April 12, 2007 2:28 PM:The individuals who do not provide information requested.
The individuals who do not tell the truth.
The individuals who do not expose the lies.
The individuals who hide information.
Are not true Americans.
Dee Loralei wrote on April 12, 2007 2:29 PM:Are not true patriots.
Could be considered traitors for wasting this governments time and resources in a time of war, when our efforts should be focused on issues that will make us safer and stronger.
I'm with C92, the admission of a possible "inadvertant" Hatch Act violation is absolutely a red herring. This is Rove et.al., copping a plea to a lesser offence. Even the "inadvertant" violation of the Presidential Records Act is another obfuscation. I'm thinking there are a number of bodies burried in those servers, that would prove much much more than even we suspect. Leahy, Waxman or Fitzgerald needs to subpoena those servers from the RNC, from SmarTech and from Coptix, and remember the Coptix relationship may also be another red herring.
Can we get a PI over to Coptix or SmarTech to see how many servers they remove? I wouldn't put it past any of thse people.
Can any of you legal types tell me why none of the things we've learned just in the last 4 months of Democratic oversight, hasn't kicked in some RICO investigation? I mean how many laws need to be broken, by how many people before a RICO violation has occured? Nothing describes the Bush WH and Karl Rove's operations more than a mafia crime boss.
Begonia Buzzkill wrote on April 12, 2007 2:32 PM:Ahem, didn't the nation's democracy defenders scream and rant not long ago about the NSA and/or Patriot Act's ordained spying on Americans rules that included . . . demanding internet servers retain and store ALL of America's internet activites?
So if that is still a neo con rule of law: they have broken their own ordained Hatch Act laws using outside communications systems . . .let alone the NSA's rules of RNC's internet activities not being stored.
Dawn wrote on April 12, 2007 2:32 PM:They are using the Hatch Act as their excuse for using the RNC account in the first place. To paraphrase them: they were ao 'overabundantly' cautious about not doing political work from the White House that they used the RNC (and other) accounts more than perhaps they should have.
In reality, they were using the alternate accounts to cover up their violations of the Hatch Act. These people constantly conduct politics when they are supposed to be doing government work. They admitted themselves that Bush’s top priority last year was getting Republicans elected in 2006. Are we supposed to believe that his entire staff was not geared to that in everything they did? The Hatch Act is not a red herring. As usual with Rove, the thing he claims to be ‘overabundantly cautious’ in avoiding is exactly what he is doing.
Of course, deleting the records is another crime altogether...when are we getting a special prosecutor on this case?
John wrote on April 12, 2007 2:33 PM:As I understand, there is no penalty for violation of the Presidential Records Act, and there is one for violation of the Hatch Act, which explains why they erred on the side of compliance with the latter (I believe Froomkin has more on this today in the Post). The reason why it seems so hard for all of us to understand why Rove's team had such a hard time balancing the HA and the PRA, is because everything they do, whether official or not, is in service of politics, rather than governance. Indeed, this Administration has failed to govern. It's not that they govern poorly, they actually don't govern at all. Bush can't even be a "decider" about his own damn war. He needs a "czar" now.
Whistler wrote on April 12, 2007 2:34 PM:New times, my foot. Quoting Nicolo Machiavelli's classic "The Prince" from the early 1500's:
"Besides this, one cannot by fair dealing, and without injury to others, satisfy the nobles, but you can satisfy the people, for their object is
more righteous than that of the nobles, the latter wishing to oppress, while the former only desire not to be oppressed."
Plenty more where that came from!
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/1232
anon wrote on April 12, 2007 2:38 PM:...Can we get a PI over to Coptix or SmarTech to see how many servers they remove?...
Hmmm, I think the tense would be past, as in "they removed." Unless Leahy and Co. have been thinking ahead, I'd say every server that can be scrubbed has been scrubbed. Seems to me that everyone needs to assume that the crime/cover-up has already been committed and go from there. Other angles are available. Maybe they missed a server, maybe given enough legal pressure someone will talk, who knows but I wouldn't assume that the e-mails are just sitting there.
Also, I'd kinda wonder if this doesn't explain the GOP reaction to the raid on Jefferson's office? How many of Rove's e-mails do you think went to Congress? How many members of congress used "special" GOP Blackberries?
Don Rider wrote on April 12, 2007 2:39 PM:During one of the White House's information dumps in March e-mails were produced from political party servers. Are we supposed to be believe that these same e-mails that they were able to recover from months before are accidently deleted.
I am missing something here. To put this into context, it appears that the White House is staffed full of Republican political operatives being paid by the government. How is it acceptable for staff to be working in the executive branch on entirely political activities using parallel communication system? Aren't they working for all the American people? Shouldn't political types be working at Republican headquarters. Where is the accountability? They don't even pretend to be working for the American people. Talk about a broken system.
I am guessing that these e-mails have all kinds of interesting information. Maybe even illegal things. If these emails ever see the light of day, I think that they will have a greater impact than the Watergate tapes.
Dawn wrote on April 12, 2007 2:41 PM:One more thing and then I'm done..
I'm not trying to be obtuse by harping on the Hatch Act violations. I just want to see at least one conviction for the real crime and not the cover-up. By all means go for the inevitable perjury and records charges also, but get the base crime as well. After all, Rove's entire career in the White House is probably in violation of the Hatch Act.
bobh wrote on April 12, 2007 2:41 PM:Roves already deleted the emails in TN. We're fucked. The congressional Dems couldn't get off their ass quick enough....
I really hope they up and suprise me by finding some damning evidence of wrongdoing soon.
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 2:42 PM:Lets Summarize:
Hatch Act = Red Herring.
failure to comply with Pres Records Act = copping plea to lesser offence.
Signing statement was issued (Suprised if not).
Only Libby has gone to court, nearly everyone else has pled guilty (from a previous thread).
The email was deleted.
The back-up tapes are lost.
The Server equipment is gone.
The RNC equipment was updated to Vista this week.
AGAG has gutted federal law enforcement.
USA Fitzgerald reports to AGAG (not going to do anything).
The NSA reports to Bush (through Hadely) (not going to do anything).
The Republicans have been yelling fishing expedition/witch hunt.
Americans know the administration is incompetent (e.g. Katrina) and will probably shrug it off.
Voter Fraud is a sham.
WSJ works for Dems (seeing if your paying attention).
Please add to this...
The big question is: If the republican prospects for '08 are dismal, then what is Roves END GAME!?!
Knowing the end game will lead us to his next moves.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/11/us/politics/11repubs.html?bl&ex=1176523200&en=89fa78a51b1695e0&ei=5087%0A
anon wrote on April 12, 2007 2:44 PM:... they will have a greater impact than the Watergate tapes...
Though it's worth noting that the Watergate tapes--released slow over, what?, twenty years--have had less impact, IMO, than, say, the Clenis. You'd think we'd learn but...
Maalox wrote on April 12, 2007 2:45 PM:During the first document dump there was a fire in the DOJ IT dept.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/3/20/01821/6358
It smells more and more like a black bag operation
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 2:46 PM:And some employees, out of an abundance of caution, could have been sending official business emails on their RNC political account.
Like Monica Goodling is, out of an abundance of caution, taking the fifth to keep herself from self-incrimination by telling the truth.
MICHAEL wrote on April 12, 2007 2:47 PM:"How many members of congress used "special" GOP Blackberries?"
Not sure however I do know that members of congress siting on the Committee on Energy and Commerce use special Democrat "Dingleberries".
Hey , need to lighten this up.
C 92 wrote on April 12, 2007 2:48 PM:DAMNING REPORT JUST OUT FROM CREW.
Not only were the RNC emails lost, but many of the White House's own official (EOP.GOV) e-mails have been lost too, in a "seperate" and "unrelated" matter:
http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/27607
"...In a startling new revelation, CREW has also learned through two confidential sources that the Executive Office of the President (EOP) has lost over five million emails generated between March 2003 and October 2005. The White House counsel’s office was advised of these problems in 2005 and CREW has been told that the White House was given a plan of action to recover these emails, but to date nothing has been done to rectify this significant loss of records..."
SHOCKING.
anon wrote on April 12, 2007 2:48 PM:Nice summary above. (Though you might want to add the fire.)
OTOH, miracles happen and the FSM knows: These guys have made a few enemies.
Dawn wrote on April 12, 2007 2:48 PM:I don't think they 'erred on the side of compliance' with the Hatch Act. I think they CLAIM they erred on the side of compliance with the Hatch Act, when they were actually drving tanks through the Hatch Act. Big difference.
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 2:52 PM:So, now that they 'changed up' how are they communicating now? I think the TN trip by Rove is an indication.
They still have to communicate.... You can't conceal a conspiracy by not communicating, keeping people in line, continuing operations.
jeffs wrote on April 12, 2007 2:59 PM:To communicate now they'll have to use human couriers, meetings in noisy places, and writing on scraps of paper and then eating the paper.
Like the Abramoff scandal hit their fundraising, this scandal will really put a crimp in their organizing.
It's not a war, because it'll never end; it's really a police action.
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 3:00 PM:"... To communicate now they'll have to use human couriers, meetings in noisy places, and writing on scraps of paper and then eating the paper... "
Just like Al-Qaeda.
TheraP wrote on April 12, 2007 3:06 PM:Rove's End Game?
Well, doesn't the Patriot Act allow for the declaration of martial law?
Probably they will need to do that "out of an abundance of caution.
AND THAT IS WHAT WORRIES ME.
Maybe what we know of the past is not even as bad as whatever dastardly deeds are planned for the future!
After all, if they've destroyed emails, they can "find" anything they care to make up - about the past. And so forth.
I hope I'm wrong....
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 3:07 PM:Up until now, only a narrow majority of Americans has been in favor of Congress' vigorous pursuit of this investigation. My prediction: that number will jump considerably after this. Only a complete doofus would not see through this as an obvious attempt to cover their tracks. For those of us who are old enough to remember Nixon's efforts to do the same and the infamous 18-minute gap, this is disturbingly familiar.
There must be something really incriminating in those emails.
Keith Gore Wiseman wrote on April 12, 2007 3:07 PM:Emails that are cluttering your in-box aren't moved to the deleted file for safe-keeping. Their lies are even weaker than their military service.
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 3:07 PM:Is the behavior of the RNC edging in to RICO territory?
risty wrote on April 12, 2007 3:08 PM:Stop using the RNC frame of STAFF. Makes it sound like some worker bees in the WH. It was Rove, and company.
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 3:12 PM:I have a book called "White House email" that dates back to Iran-Contra and the 1st Reagan Administration. I would say that the "new time" to which Stanzel refers is one in which the people are empowered by technology to shed light on the lies and crimes of this administration.
barry wrote on April 12, 2007 3:17 PM:I say --Haul them all up to Capital Hill and have them spill their guts---and throw them all in jail if they don't cooperate.
Shawn Fassett wrote on April 12, 2007 3:18 PM:According to somebody at Talk Radio News Service (via Thom Hartmann's show this morning)...their organization, CNN & NBC news were not allowed to participate in the teleconference on this issue.
wategate_legacy wrote on April 12, 2007 3:31 PM:The more the Congress digs the more veins of garbage is heaped with lame excuses. What is needed is criminal trial judge like Sirica to compel a special prosecuter to subpoena these materials. Wategate broke when one of the defendents went to Sirica and confessed of a bigger conspiracy.
The conspiracy here is no different, it is the entire pervasive effort of authoritarianism, and they know they are in trouble. My gut is the redacted stuff will lead to other stuff and the McNulty file will have entire reams of RNC email in them. Getting those hard drives will be the next order of business. My guess is someone who is a mouse is holding a couple for their own get out of jail free card.
As for 2008....I hope the GOP gets a face full. and then I hope the criminal investigations continue as they should have after Watergate.
ahem wrote on April 12, 2007 3:42 PM:Violate the Hatch Act and you get fired.
Violate the Presidential Records Act? Well, they don't spell out punishments for that. Though if it means obstructing justice, I think it's impeachable.
Congress needs access to physical materials. Hard drives, or at least images of them. Not least because it'd be worth seeing if Unka Karl has a DOD strength free-space eraser application running on his 'personal' computer.
Node of Evil wrote on April 12, 2007 3:46 PM:I don't know what they do with White House server logs, but to even send email from the White House, presumably you'd have to go through their servers. Are those records retained? It doesn't matter what account you use, if it goes over the wire out of the White House, then it should technically pass through at least one White House server on its way out. I wouldn't be surprised if those servers had logs. Unless the user encrypts between the outside email service and their desktop client software, then the email messages that pass through those servers should be recoverable. Then again, maybe they don't log all traffic in and out of the Whitehouse network.
mike wrote on April 12, 2007 3:53 PM:I sure hope no enterprising hackers take it upon themselves to track down those emails and post them on the internet. That would be disgraceful.
joshua web wrote on April 12, 2007 3:53 PM:Maybe this is too cynical, too conniving but....
Since Rove and co. know Congress can dig up those emails, is it possible that they are planning on it happening. That the emails aren't that bad, and that, once they're found, they will show that "they weren't trying to hide anything?" If so, this could squash a lot of the growing distrust the American people have. (Never mind that it could take time and attention away from everything else they're doing.)
It sounds far-out, but there are theories that this is precisely what happened with Rathergate: the opposition excitingly hails a break (really a memo leaked or created by Rove, etc.) that turns out to be "nothing," leaving the oppo standing around like Geraldo in Al Capone's vault, and leaving the real issue (Bush v. Air Force Service) dead in the water.
I can't help but feel that there's someone on the other end of this dangling a carrot. It's so tasty looking! And so close! A couple more steps and we'll have it!
Andrew wrote on April 12, 2007 3:55 PM:Unless the user encrypts between the outside email service and their desktop client software, then the email messages that pass through those servers should be recoverable.
You think the Federal government can't decrypt any encryption used by the RNC?
litigatormom wrote on April 12, 2007 4:02 PM:STANZEL: "Well, as I indicated, the guidance at the White House prior to this point has been very clear that you should avoid inadvertent violations of the Hatch Act. And so some employees, it seems clear, out of an abundance of caution, or sometimes out of logistical reasons, have communicated about official business on those political email accounts."
Is it just me or does that seems completely backword? (And he emphasizes it twice so I don't think he misspoke.) If you were being overly cautious to NOT violate the Hatch Act then why would you default to the RNC account, versus the official White House account?
Posted by:Mnamna
_______________________________________________
They decided to be "overly cautious to NOT violate the Hatch Act" by deciding that ALL of the work they were doing in the White House was political. And the Hatch Act doesn't say it's okay if you use a different e-mail account while sitting on government property. The Hatch Act says you are not supposed to engage in political activity while you are on government property. Period.
So Stanzel is admitting massive violations of the Hatch Act. Unless he's admitting massive violations of the Presidential Records Act.
My analysis: he's admitting both. Also, keep in mind that destroying documents doesn't just mean acting affirmatively to destroy them. It also means permitting them to be destroyed pursuant to ordinary destruction or electronic deletion programs without taking affirmative steps to save them.
They are screwed. I am going to have soooo much fun watching this play out.
Mark Rippy wrote on April 12, 2007 4:04 PM:And I thought Rose Mary Woods had passed away. Is she still working at the White House?
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 4:07 PM:Now we're told that they have computer experts working on the problem to try to recover the lost emails. I believe the first part of that...
John wrote on April 12, 2007 4:20 PM:Indeed the Hatch Act is a red herring. But what a damning admission that is! They didn't want to take the chance that they would be conducting purely political work on government computers, and as the firing of the US Attorneys was purely political, the Hatch Act somehow required them to use non-governmental machines. Hmmm.
biggerbox wrote on April 12, 2007 4:31 PM:The Hatch Act is not only a red herring, it's a brain-dead red herring.
If the RNC addresses are for partisan political communications, than using them for official business dangerously exposes the recipients to Hatch Act concerns, doesn't it?
Shouldn't, for example, DOJ employees ONLY be doing official business with government employees acting IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITY, i.e., with a .gov domain? Isn't responding to an email from someone at an RNC domain a violation?
The point of having two seperate addresses is not just to keep the Presidential Records Act clear, it's to keep clear when someone is working as a government official, and when one is working as a partisan political operative. (Yes, I realize that distinction doesn't exist in Bush-speak, but still...)
By using the RNC addresses, Rove et al. were signalling to other government employees that theirs was a political, not an official communication, and anyone who sent mail to that address may reasonably be assumed to have been engaging in partisan activities in a governmental workplace.
Swashbuckler wrote on April 12, 2007 4:31 PM:Did they backup the email servers? I'm betting they did.
Just get the backup tapes...
sp0t wrote on April 12, 2007 4:42 PM:These emails are "lost"...?
Yes, until they realize that some of them will actually be helpful to them. Then they will magically reappear on someone's computer hard drive.
Ginger Yellow wrote on April 12, 2007 4:49 PM:"Well, as I indicated, the guidance at the White House prior to this point has been very clear that you should avoid inadvertent violations of the Hatch Act. And so some employees, it seems clear, out of an abundance of caution, or sometimes out of logistical reasons, have communicated about official business on those political email accounts."
This excuse is laughable. Besides all the other reasons given by commenters above, if you were acting out of an "abundance of caution" about breaking the law, you'd also make damn sure the emails didn't get deleted, becasue that's what the PRA requires.
Foo wrote on April 12, 2007 4:52 PM:Here's the next thing -- call Patrick Fitzgerald before the committee to testify on the details of document obstructions in the Plame case. We will be requiring some more detail and perspective on the construction of the email policy revisions in 2004.
Foo wrote on April 12, 2007 4:56 PM:Oh! P.S. I had a job at a university where we regularly used the military DARPA-net -- this was c. 1987-88. I think e-mail has been in fairly common use in government since at least then.
adam wrote on April 12, 2007 5:01 PM:OMG, it's so easy to recover "lost" email. I just did a little test on my laptop. Just boot to any of the "live" Linux CDs out there, like Knoppix. I ran this simple command and was amazed at how much junk is on my laptop from ages ago:
strings /dev/hda1 | grep "@.*com"
This technique doesn't look at files and doesn't care if the hard drive is Windows, Mac, Linux, whatever. It reads every block on the drive and looks for email addresses ending in ".com."
It works on "erased" messages, too. Easy.
Diana Gleave wrote on April 12, 2007 5:38 PM:It seems to me that during the Clinton administration, the Republicans accused Vice President Gore of violating the Hatch Act because he had made fundraising phone calls to Buddhist monks from the Old Executive Office Building which is adjacent to the White House. The criticism was that Gore made the calls while on official government property. Which leads me to question where all the supposed correspondence on Blackberrys and laptops took place. Were these government employees on US Government property when this correspondence occurred? If so, weren't they in violation of the Hatch Act? Just wondering.
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 5:54 PM:it's impossible to believe that someone could unintentionaly delete from backups -- there must be a crime there, so not being a lawyer, I asked a friend who was:
"what do you do if you can't prove someone did something wrong, but you can prove that they purposely eliminated evidence that may have incriminated them?"
reply: "obstruction of justice."
Of course, the goodling interpretation seems to indicate that the decision to delete incriminating emails should be protected under the 5th amendment, and thus no crime was committed, ha.
mbbsdphil wrote on April 12, 2007 5:59 PM:"Inadvertent mishandling" means unintentional. It's designed to avoid criminal liability or to decrease penalties. Without intentional conduct there is usually no crime. There may be harm, such as that caused by negligence, for which there are penalties, but there is usually no crime.
"Sorry. My Mistake. I'll fix it. We'll fire the guy. We'll do it right next time." -- These phrases are all designed to curry sympathy with a public that uses them all the time for minor mistakes and social faux pas.
The Rovian Twist is to use this language for what looks like intentional, serial, criminal violations of federal law.
By using this language, Rove is using open negotiations to admit and settle these problems in the court of public opinion, long before any court of law ever sees the results of a special prosecutor's investigation. "Won't happen again. Sorry. Just politics. Nobody hurt, right?"
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 6:02 PM:Karl's focus is electoral math, what gets people to vote his way. He doesn't care how he does it. Remember, he works for the guy with the Pardon Pen.
fred c dobbs wrote on April 12, 2007 6:05 PM:people, keep your eyes on the ball.
Node of Evil wrote on April 12, 2007 6:12 PM:the bush crime family is expert at looting the u.s. treasury and placing the loot in their pockets and the pockets of their partners in crime. this is what they do best...look into the inner workings of the savings and loan debacle and you will see the same patterns and players over and over again. look into iran-contra and you will find the same patterns and players over and over again. this is why they want to get their hands on social security, same scam running again.
feith, ledeen, jeb, neil, north, poindexter, abrams, negroponte, gates, khoshoggi...this IS organized crime...and this is how it works.
'You think the Federal government can't decrypt any encryption used by the RNC?'
Well, if the RNC are fools then yes. If they're not, and they're using RSA over 256 bits and the government can decrypt it, then there's a lot of secret math out there. Factoring large numbers is an age-old problem and its difficulty is at the heart of most encryption on the web. Maybe they have solved it and they're not telling anyone. Anyways, you can do a pretty good job of "deleting" stuff if you wipe the free space and swap file on your hard drive 7-10 times with random data, there's software that will do this for you. Your main concern then is where you still have data; that may retain stray magnetism from the previous bits that were stored in the same place. Most people don't go to that effort, but if Karl Rove has been using email since 1988 and dirty tricks for much longer, I suspect he's savvy to these sorts of things.
Node of Evil wrote on April 12, 2007 6:18 PM:Ooops, 256 bits is a bit small; 1024 is more like it. The largest RSA Challenge number factored to date is around 640 bits, so if you go double of that you're likely to be secure for awhile (until someone makes a large enough quantum computer, anyway).
Shilohcat wrote on April 12, 2007 7:02 PM:I live in Chattanooga and have been in IT for over a decade.
Files, including email, are not deleted, they are instead overwritten, first by a coded jibberish that gives the RAID controller permission to overwrite, and then by legitimate files.
Overwritten files can be and are recovered everyday. (Think of how the techs restored the Last Supper fresco by patiently removing newer layers.)
Even if the hard drive is physically smashed to bits, a patient and skilled forensics expert can restore the files it contained.
And then there are the backups. Exchange keeps your archives on the C drive by using pst files. When you see the ARCHIVE NOW? box, this is what is happening. But it is common amongst enterprise systems to bypass this backup and archive onto the server instead, a setup that I assume was done in this case, so probably no psts exist on local drives, but you never know with this crew.
But then, as several readers pointed out, you would still have backups on either tape and/or additional offsite hard drives. And not just one tape either; common practice is to perform daily incremental backups of data that has changed since the last backup, but full backups weekly. Based upon the size of the email storage and the number of files, it would not be uncommon to have multiple tapes containing duplicate emails.
Not the mention SmarData's own Disaster Recovery system that undoubtedly has off-site copies of backups.
So any attempt to delete emails is going to result in massive black holes in multiple backup systems.
I have also known Jeff Averbeck, President of SmarTech, personally for some years. He has helped the GOP with their IT since I've known him, going back to his previous IT firm, st3, which streamed the GOP convention online in 2000 on an emergency basis when the original carrier was unable to do so.
I'm sure the arrangement between Mr Averbeck and the GOP has been quite rewarding monetarily, but I greatly doubt that he is willing to go to the well for them once the subpeonas start flying.
We'll see.
Patriot Scholar wrote on April 12, 2007 7:22 PM:It is also possible to determine the exact date and time that emails were deleted, even if they were unrecoverable.
Mark B. wrote on April 12, 2007 7:34 PM:If the staffers used their personal e-mail accounts to talk abotu the paln to fire the U.S. Attorneys in order to avoid a Hatch Act violation, that seems tantamount to an admission that the firings were for partisan policital reasons. Otherwise the Hatch Act wouldn't be an issue.
Mark B. wrote on April 12, 2007 7:34 PM:If the staffers used their personal e-mail accounts to talk about the plan to fire the U.S. Attorneys in order to avoid a Hatch Act violation, that seems tantamount to an admission that the firings were for partisan policital reasons. Otherwise the Hatch Act wouldn't be an issue.
bcg wrote on April 12, 2007 7:52 PM:Even if the emails aren't recoverable from the systems that Rove himself used, they're still going to be on the systems used by their recipients. Every email, then, should have been recorded on at least two (not necessarily physically separate [an RNC address to another RNC address, for example]) accounts. If there's incriminating material out there, presumably it exists somewhere, at least in the files of someone who felt the need to cover their own ass.
bcg wrote on April 12, 2007 7:55 PM:Clarifying my last comment: it seems to that anyone who wishes to avoid a he/she said impasse after they turn states evidence will have retained supporting evidence to strengthen their testimaony and their hand in negotiations with the DA.
whizkid wrote on April 12, 2007 9:45 PM:The posting equating this admin to a crime family was on target. That chimpy was able to eliminate records regarding his awol from TANG - and then kneecap those who came near the truth says much about what we may see in the months ahead.
whizkid wrote on April 12, 2007 9:46 PM:But this is a new day and the WH is swirling down the shitter so fast they may not have the plumbers to fix things at this point.
The posting equating this admin to a crime family was on target. That chimpy was able to eliminate records regarding his awol from TANG - and then kneecap those who came near the truth says much about what we may see in the months ahead.
whidbeygrl wrote on April 12, 2007 10:12 PM:But this is a new day and the WH is swirling down the shitter so fast they may not have the plumbers to fix things at this point.
Bob Franken at CNN reports "there is no penalty for violating the Presidential Record Act, except for maybe another political penalty"
Anonymous wrote on April 12, 2007 10:18 PM:eearlier in the same story about WH e-mails, there is this:
"There are also messages to and from lobbyist Jack Abramoff, now in prison. At one point, according to investigators, after an e-mail was apparently sent by accident to the white house account of an assistant to Karl Rove, Abramoff fired another one saying, "Damn it, it was not supposed to go in the White House system."
Bob Franken at CNN reports "there is no penalty for violating the Presidential Record Act, except for maybe another political penalty"
JustAmazed wrote on April 12, 2007 11:09 PM:eearlier in the same story about WH e-mails, there is this:
"There are also messages to and from lobbyist Jack Abramoff, now in prison. At one point, according to investigators, after an e-mail was apparently sent by accident to the white house account of an assistant to Karl Rove, Abramoff fired another one saying, "Damn it, it was not supposed to go in the White House system."
Regrading the firing of a respected National Archivist with Allen Weinstein, the following is from the National Archives page describing the Presidential Records Act of 1978:
"... the Presidential Records Act ... Allows the incumbent President to dispose of records that no longer have administrative, historical, informational, or evidentiary value, once he has obtained the views of the Archivist of the United States on the proposed disposal."
So, putting a crony (toady) in that seat allows disposal of any record.
bill wrote on April 13, 2007 9:42 AM:Abundance of Caution
Stinky wrote on April 20, 2007 7:40 PM:Several comments have mentioned a key element in the White House defense of their use of RNC email rather than official White House email. Scott Stanzel at the White House press briefing suggested that some White House employees used RNC email when they "communicated about official business" in order to avoid "inadvertent violations" of the Hatch Act.
Note that he wasn't claiming that they communicated official business but rather that they communicated "about" official business. They only needed to concern themselves with the Hatch Act if their business was political. Official White House email couldn't be used for political purposes.
In other words, White House officials pretty much knew, had good reason to believe, that their business was political so they exercised caution by making sure they weren't conducting political business on government email accounts.
So even if officials at the Justice Department didn't know this attorney firing business was political, Stanzel has confessed that the White House officials involved had pretty significant reason to believe it was.
http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/jahsoma.html jahsoma [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/jahsoma.html]jahsoma[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/hayashida-architects.html hayashida architects [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/hayashida-architects.html]hayashida architects[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/handystik.html handystik [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/handystik.html]handystik[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/handybits-encryption.html handybits encryption [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/handybits-encryption.html]handybits encryption[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/handwrist-restorer.html handwrist restorer [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/handwrist-restorer.html]handwrist restorer[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/las-ruinas-circulares-english.html las ruinas circulares english [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/las-ruinas-circulares-english.html]las ruinas circulares english[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/handshaking-lemma.html handshaking lemma [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/handshaking-lemma.html]handshaking lemma[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/handy-andy-widow-malone.html handy andy widow malone [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/handy-andy-widow-malone.html]handy andy widow malone[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/haneman-hospital-philadelphia.html haneman hospital philadelphia [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/haneman-hospital-philadelphia.html]haneman hospital philadelphia[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/i-wanna-be-a-baller-shotcaller.html i wanna be a baller shotcaller [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SellaPb6715/i-wanna-be-a-baller-shotcaller.html]i wanna be a baller shotcaller[/url]
driver wrote on April 23, 2007 5:47 PM:http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/texas-holdem-poker.html texas holdem poker [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/texas-holdem-poker.html]texas holdem poker[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/yahoo-free-online-poker-game.html yahoo free online poker game [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/yahoo-free-online-poker-game.html]yahoo free online poker game[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/pechanga-casino.html pechanga casino [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/pechanga-casino.html]pechanga casino[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/poker-players.html poker players [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/poker-players.html]poker players[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/poker-titan.html poker titan [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/poker-titan.html]poker titan[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/layout-myspace-poker.html layout myspace poker [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/layout-myspace-poker.html]layout myspace poker[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/hard-rock-casino.html hard rock casino [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/hard-rock-casino.html]hard rock casino[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/bunny-poker.html bunny poker [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/bunny-poker.html]bunny poker[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/las-vegas-motor-speedway.html las vegas motor speedway [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/las-vegas-motor-speedway.html]las vegas motor speedway[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/poker-book.html poker book [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/poker-book.html]poker book[/url]
Loy wrote on April 23, 2007 5:47 PM:http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/reno-casino.html reno casino [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/reno-casino.html]reno casino[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/play-free-casino-game.html play free casino game [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/play-free-casino-game.html]play free casino game[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/online-poker-free-roll.html online poker free roll [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/online-poker-free-roll.html]online poker free roll[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/las-vegas-real-estate.html las vegas real estate [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/las-vegas-real-estate.html]las vegas real estate[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/liar-poker.html liar poker [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/liar-poker.html]liar poker[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/las-vegas-mls.html las vegas mls [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/las-vegas-mls.html]las vegas mls[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/online-poker-pro-screen-name.html online poker pro screen name [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/online-poker-pro-screen-name.html]online poker pro screen name[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/3-card-free-online-poker.html 3 card free online poker [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/3-card-free-online-poker.html]3 card free online poker[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/las-vegas-attorney.html las vegas attorney [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/las-vegas-attorney.html]las vegas attorney[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/3-card-poker.html 3 card poker [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BrownBette9175/3-card-poker.html]3 card poker[/url]
driver wrote on April 25, 2007 8:16 AM:http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/hamiltoncountyohioauditor.html hamiltoncountyohioauditor [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/hamiltoncountyohioauditor.html]hamiltoncountyohioauditor[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/hamline-university-piperline.html hamline university piperline [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/hamline-university-piperline.html]hamline university piperline[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/hamlet-maddness.html hamlet maddness [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/hamlet-maddness.html]hamlet maddness[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/last-will-and-testament-of-rosemary-redmon-cosby.html last will and testament of rosemary redmon cosby [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/last-will-and-testament-of-rosemary-redmon-cosby.html]last will and testament of rosemary redmon cosby[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/hamlet-plot-summery.html hamlet plot summery [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/hamlet-plot-summery.html]hamlet plot summery[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/last-of-the-mochicans-soundtrack.html last of the mochicans soundtrack [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/last-of-the-mochicans-soundtrack.html]last of the mochicans soundtrack[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/last-unicorn-waterville-me.html last unicorn waterville me [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/last-unicorn-waterville-me.html]last unicorn waterville me[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/ladybarn-primary-school.html ladybarn primary school [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/ladybarn-primary-school.html]ladybarn primary school[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/haminaptra.html haminaptra [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/haminaptra.html]haminaptra[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/hammerbox-numb.html hammerbox numb [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/SwartzIr8537/hammerbox-numb.html]hammerbox numb[/url]
Bob wrote on May 1, 2007 2:23 PM:http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-stk-ogre-1-video.html halo 2 stk ogre 1 video [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-stk-ogre-1-video.html]halo 2 stk ogre 1 video[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/lady-sonia-passwordz.html lady sonia passwordz [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/lady-sonia-passwordz.html]lady sonia passwordz[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-headlong-golden-warthog.html halo 2 headlong golden warthog [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-headlong-golden-warthog.html]halo 2 headlong golden warthog[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/hayono-isman.html hayono isman [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/hayono-isman.html]hayono isman[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-glitchse.html halo 2 glitchse [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-glitchse.html]halo 2 glitchse[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/lather-salon-calgary.html lather salon calgary [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/lather-salon-calgary.html]lather salon calgary[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/latexdollhouse.html latexdollhouse [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/latexdollhouse.html]latexdollhouse[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/latin-adultery-carman.html latin adultery carman [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/latin-adultery-carman.html]latin adultery carman[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-jackal-sheild.html halo 2 jackal sheild [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-jackal-sheild.html]halo 2 jackal sheild[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halmich-hernandez.html halmich hernandez [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halmich-hernandez.html]halmich hernandez[/url]
Bob wrote on May 1, 2007 2:24 PM:http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-stk-ogre-1-video.html halo 2 stk ogre 1 video [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-stk-ogre-1-video.html]halo 2 stk ogre 1 video[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/lady-sonia-passwordz.html lady sonia passwordz [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/lady-sonia-passwordz.html]lady sonia passwordz[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-headlong-golden-warthog.html halo 2 headlong golden warthog [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-headlong-golden-warthog.html]halo 2 headlong golden warthog[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/hayono-isman.html hayono isman [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/hayono-isman.html]hayono isman[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-glitchse.html halo 2 glitchse [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-glitchse.html]halo 2 glitchse[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/lather-salon-calgary.html lather salon calgary [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/lather-salon-calgary.html]lather salon calgary[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/latexdollhouse.html latexdollhouse [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/latexdollhouse.html]latexdollhouse[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/latin-adultery-carman.html latin adultery carman [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/latin-adultery-carman.html]latin adultery carman[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-jackal-sheild.html halo 2 jackal sheild [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halo-2-jackal-sheild.html]halo 2 jackal sheild[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halmich-hernandez.html halmich hernandez [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/BerleByrne0209/halmich-hernandez.html]halmich hernandez[/url]
Roy wrote on May 3, 2007 12:34 PM:http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-rudderow.html lauren rudderow [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-rudderow.html]lauren rudderow[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-zelman-texas.html lauren zelman texas [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-zelman-texas.html]lauren zelman texas[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/half-a-liter-in-cups.html half a liter in cups [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/half-a-liter-in-cups.html]half a liter in cups[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-zelman-and-ashlee-simpson.html lauren zelman and ashlee simpson [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-zelman-and-ashlee-simpson.html]lauren zelman and ashlee simpson[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-simonutti.html lauren simonutti [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-simonutti.html]lauren simonutti[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/half-a-liter-in-teaspoons.html half a liter in teaspoons [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/half-a-liter-in-teaspoons.html]half a liter in teaspoons[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-abramsohn.html lauren abramsohn [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-abramsohn.html]lauren abramsohn[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-schwartzreich.html lauren schwartzreich [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-schwartzreich.html]lauren schwartzreich[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-vannozzi.html lauren vannozzi [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/lauren-vannozzi.html]lauren vannozzi[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/laurenafton-password.html laurenafton password [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/MeijiAymer4896/laurenafton-password.html]laurenafton password[/url]
Settor wrote on May 3, 2007 6:50 PM:http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/laureston-house.html laureston house [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/laureston-house.html]laureston house[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/halepaska.html halepaska [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/halepaska.html]halepaska[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/laurice-teague.html laurice teague [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/laurice-teague.html]laurice teague[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/haleeb-foods-limited.html haleeb foods limited [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/haleeb-foods-limited.html]haleeb foods limited[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/haleluiah.html haleluiah [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/haleluiah.html]haleluiah[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/laureys-catering.html laureys catering [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/laureys-catering.html]laureys catering[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/laurustine.html laurustine [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/laurustine.html]laurustine[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/74ls00-datasheets.html 74ls00 datasheets [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/74ls00-datasheets.html]74ls00 datasheets[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/laurial-plaza.html laurial plaza [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/laurial-plaza.html]laurial plaza[/url] http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/lady-mcbeths-bane.html lady mcbeths bane [url=http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KlanNoll4065/lady-mcbeths-bane.html]lady mcbeths bane[/url]
Arnold wrote on May 5, 2007 2:27 AM:http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/chiarelli-landmark-associates-inc.html chiarelli landmark associates inc [url=http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/chiarelli-landmark-associates-inc.html]chiarelli landmark associates inc[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/chamberlian-garage-door-openers.html chamberlian garage door openers [url=http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/chamberlian-garage-door-openers.html]chamberlian garage door openers[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/cheesman-canon-flows.html cheesman canon flows [url=http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/cheesman-canon-flows.html]cheesman canon flows[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/7805-cct.html 7805 cct [url=http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/7805-cct.html]7805 cct[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/cayan-islands.html cayan islands [url=http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/cayan-islands.html]cayan islands[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/champian-5500-watt-generator.html champian 5500 watt generator [url=http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/champian-5500-watt-generator.html]champian 5500 watt generator[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/dayspring-email-carss.html dayspring email carss [url=http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/dayspring-email-carss.html]dayspring email carss[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/cerdo.html cerdo [url=http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/cerdo.html]cerdo[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/audochron-chiming-clock.html audochron chiming clock [url=http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/audochron-chiming-clock.html]audochron chiming clock[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/paul-chivers.html paul chivers [url=http://hometown.aol.com/g5u6l/paul-chivers.html]paul chivers[/url]
Crazy wrote on May 5, 2007 7:44 AM:http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/cairnwood-inc.html cairnwood inc [url=http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/cairnwood-inc.html]cairnwood inc[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/cabinas-in-costa-rica.html cabinas in costa rica [url=http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/cabinas-in-costa-rica.html]cabinas in costa rica[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/biba-caggiano-dvd.html biba caggiano dvd [url=http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/biba-caggiano-dvd.html]biba caggiano dvd[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/lake-bucannon-homes.html lake bucannon homes [url=http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/lake-bucannon-homes.html]lake bucannon homes[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/reach-caleigh-peter.html reach caleigh peter [url=http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/reach-caleigh-peter.html]reach caleigh peter[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/buyin-runescape-items-with-visa.html buyin runescape items with visa [url=http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/buyin-runescape-items-with-visa.html]buyin runescape items with visa[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/home-buit-welder.html home buit welder [url=http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/home-buit-welder.html]home buit welder[/url] http://hometown.aol.com/t5a6r/rodeo-bullfighters.html rodeo bullfighters [url=http