Comments (23)

electricphoto wrote on January 22, 2008 10:47 AM:

Did they really? Does anybody have any reason to believe that emails were not archived because Bush says they weren't.

No one has verified a single claim on this abomination. Until some law enforcement officials are allowed in to secure evidence -- isn't all this discussion of email systems just discussions of the latest Bush cover story.

When have they ever told the truth about anything?

Get a security expert on this and into their system and you'll find the real story - that of obstruction of justice and the destroying of evidence. Not some policy change about archiving....!

Anonymous wrote on January 22, 2008 10:52 AM:

Folks, do the history, Google Vistronix and Gore emails.

Deja Vue all over again.....

twc wrote on January 22, 2008 10:56 AM:

This is outrageous. Heads should roll, investigators should dig and dig some more, and indictments should issue. If this happened in state or local government there would be an outcry.

oldtree wrote on January 22, 2008 11:10 AM:

I must ask Paul, what is unclear to you? Was that rhetorical?
This is part of the impeachment process, another high crime, obstruction of justice in a case of treason.
Only thing, no one seems interested in impeaching the biggest criminal enterprise in history, our existing government.

litigatormom wrote on January 22, 2008 11:19 AM:

Deleting emails and over-writing back up tapes? That could conceivably be incompetence, although with the Bushies I highly doubt it.

But scrapping an archiving system and not replacing it? That's not incompetence. That's deliberate. If I were pressing a spoliation of evidence case, I would take that to the bank.

Mr. Purple wrote on January 22, 2008 11:28 AM:

Given that the information about the email back-up system has been coming out in piece meal, I would agree with electricphoto above and feel that the over sight on this leaves open a huge hole for Bush 2.0 to keep dumping uncomfortable emails whenever they want. Trust in terms of Bush 2.0 went out the window a looooong time ago. I hate the fact that my tax dollars pay their salaries in addition to the back up system that they "scrapped" and they just look the other way in terms of the Presidential archive law.

Tom in Houston wrote on January 22, 2008 11:44 AM:

This is consistent with reflexive republican hatred of all things Clinton. In particular, recall that the incoming Bush administration pretty much threw out EVERYTHING related from the Clinton administration. They viewed themselves as the ServPro of government: "Like It Never Happened." If there had been a closet full of gold in the White House when Clinton left, the Bushies would have been so blinded by hatered they would have thrown that out too.

steve duncan wrote on January 22, 2008 11:53 AM:

Something I rarely see mentioned is the fact several laws regarding Presidential records retention appear to have been broken. Can you admit you've destroyed records where perfectly adequate (but not utilized) systems existed for retention and then somehow claim you're not to blame for breaking said laws? Who is responsible for saying people are going to be pursued for this and then initiating the prosecution? And what to do if the missing records include the very evidence pinpointing the individuals responsible for failing to preserve everything? Certainly there's an office called "Records Management and Retention" or some such title with a department head and underlings that need investigated and called to account for their actions. Who are they? Who is talking to them?

elial wrote on January 22, 2008 12:23 PM:

An ad on the side of this page is asking me to clink to a link to lower my blood pressure.

A better strategy for me would be to never clink on a link about the Bush Administration.

mo2 wrote on January 22, 2008 12:39 PM:

The Bush/Cheney modus operandi is first to "raise questions about the veracity of xxxx" and second to say "Because there are questions about xxxx, we must yyyy" where yyyy = ignore the science or reasoning behind xxxx.

Anonymous wrote on January 22, 2008 12:47 PM:

@steve duncan

"...Certainly there's an office called "Records Management and Retention..."

There is an Office of Records Management in the White House. Their job is to manage everything (paper, email, etc) actively while a particular President is in power - and then package up everything and ship it to the National Archives.

Ironically, their acronym is WHORM (ie 'worm').

WHORM employees work for the Executive Office of the President. Under the current 'sep of powers' argument this WH employs, WHORM employees cannot be called by Congreess.

But WHORM employees are not enforcers, either. If email records are being choked off, it's happening at a higher level. WHORM could only tell you if they were directed to destroy records they had already received.

Anonymous wrote on January 22, 2008 1:00 PM:

so much for Nancy and Harry to come out to say anything about it.

Thucydides Jr. wrote on January 22, 2008 1:11 PM:

I agree with Anon @ 1:00 P.m.

Ok, so we know, and have known for a while the Bush Admin. breaks laws. As evil as they are, the Dems have done little. Damn little. Nor will they pursue them after they leave office.

'The only thing necessary for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing.' -Edmund Burke.

So the next Repub thug wanting to be President must now be thinking: "Cool, if they let this guy get away with that much, how much could I get away with?"

After Bush come a Sulla, then a Triumvirate, then a civil war, then our own Augustus. All the while the Senate will cash its checks, honor the current power holder, and wring its hands as it become an irrelevent tool.

gonzone wrote on January 22, 2008 2:01 PM:

You can't save a great email retention system when the "W" keys are missing from all the computers! It just doesn't happen!
Aah, memories ...

Melvin wrote on January 22, 2008 2:15 PM:

Wring your hands. Gnash your teeth. Rend your garments.

I tell you with absolute certainty that nobody will be prosecuted for anything. Any "investigation" will be stalled, thwarted or aborted.

It will make you crazy if you think that there is anything on the level in this administration, or that someone might actually care about even a semblence of justice. Get over it, you big babies!

danger wrote on January 22, 2008 3:01 PM:

Are these the official whitehouse.gov emails or the gwb43.com emails that we are talking about?

pakaal wrote on January 22, 2008 3:06 PM:

"Bushies threw that out the window for no apparent reason"

Oh, come on now. Cheney's the one who specifically said he doesn't use emails because it leaves a trail of evidence. Everyone acknowledges they've been involved in illegal activities great and small from Day One. Yet there's "no apparent reason" why they threw out an archiving system that worked? There's a patently obvious reason why they needed to scrap it. It would have worked, is why.

jon hill wrote on January 22, 2008 3:20 PM:

From Democracy Now:

"The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has analyzed the 16 days when Cheney’s office claims it has no email archives. One of the days is Sept. 30, 2003 – the same day the Justice Department and FBI announced they were investigating who outed former CIA agent Valerie Plame. Cheney’s office is also missing e-mails from Oct. 4, 2003 – the day the Justice Department demanded that the White House turn over “all documents that relate in any way” to the leak of Plame’s identity"

Coincidence? Riiight...

Rodney wrote on January 22, 2008 3:41 PM:

Since the Bush Administration retained no documents, in violation of the law, shouldn't Congress vote to withhold any funding for a Bush Library?

JW wrote on January 22, 2008 3:47 PM:

"Whether deviousness or incompetence is to blame is unclear".

Bullshit it isn't "clear".

And you look silly extending the benefit of a doubt to that swineherd.

Bob wrote on January 22, 2008 7:54 PM:

When will congress assign a special prosecutor...one that cannot be kept from investigating due to executive privilege or state's secrets...you know, like with IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS!

Anonymous wrote on January 22, 2008 8:10 PM:

Anonymous wrote on January 22, 2008 12:47 PM:

"WHORM employees work for the Executive Office of the President. Under the current 'sep of powers' argument this WH employs, WHORM employees cannot be called by Congreess."

All Executive Branch personnel can be impeached. The Founders created impeachment, as a legislative tool to investigate-prosecute-remove people the Exective refuses to prosecute/remove.

David wrote on January 23, 2008 6:40 PM:

The Boston Globe's on-line reprint of the WaPo story has features one photo, of Al Gore(?). http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2008/01/23/white_house_e_mail_archiving_system_not_doing_the_job/

That's something one would have expected of News Corp. Did the print version of the Post do the same?