Welcome to PatsFans.com

WH E-mail purge probe also deepens

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PressCoverage, Jan 22, 2008.

  1. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,608
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    oops... this one isn't going away either...

    gotta ask... how does one "not intentionally" delete emails AND the backup tapes for them? ... reminds me of Austin Powers: "Oh! I fell ovah!! Oh! I fell ovah again!!"

    rotten to the core... most corrupt administration in history...

    White House Has No Comprehensive E-Mail Archive
    System Used by Clinton Was Scrapped

    By Elizabeth Williamson and Dan Eggen
    Washington Post Staff Writers
    Tuesday, January 22, 2008; Page A03

    President Bush's White House early on scrapped a custom archiving system that the Clinton administration had adopted under a federal court order. From 2001 to 2003, the Bush White House also recorded over computer backup tapes that provided a last line of defense for preserving e-mails, even though a similar practice landed the Clinton administration in legal trouble.

    As a result, several years' worth of electronic communication may have been lost, potentially including e-mails documenting administration actions in the run-up to the Iraq war.

    White House officials said last week that they have "no reason to believe" that any e-mails were deliberately destroyed or are missing. But over the past year, they have acknowledged problems with archiving, saving and finding e-mails dating from early in the administration until at least 2005.

    Controversy surrounding the Bush administration's policies intensified on Thursday, when the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee released details of a briefing by White House special counsel Emmet T. Flood, in which he disclosed that a 2005 White House study had identified 473 separate days in which no electronic messages were stored for one or more component offices. In the presidential offices, for example, not a single e-mail was archived on Dec. 17, 20 or 21 in 2003 -- the week after the capture of Saddam Hussein. According to the study summary that the committee released, e-mails were not archived for Vice President Cheney's office on four days in early October 2003, coinciding with the start of a Justice Department probe into the leak of a CIA officer's identity, which later led to criminal charges against Cheney's chief of staff.

    The committee's chairman, Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), has scheduled a Feb. 15 hearing to inquire about the gaps.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2008
  2. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,608
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    oh, and...

    Missing White House Emails Match Plame Time Frames
    t r u t h o u t | Report

    At 8 PM on September 29, 2003, former White House counsel Alberto Gonzales received a phone call from the Department of Justice (DOJ). Gonzales received formal notification that evening that the DOJ had launched a criminal investigation into the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson. Curiously, the Justice Department, which at the time was headed by John Ashcroft, officially launched the investigation on September 26, 2003, but Ashcroft waited more than three days before notifying Gonzales and the White House, whose high-level staffers were reported to be responsible for disseminating Wilson's affiliation with the spy agency to the media just two-and-a-half months earlier.

    ... <snip>
    The details the White House provided in last week's federal court filing about its email retention policy and the recycling of backup tape calls into question the integrity of the leak investigation conducted by special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, particularly as it relates to Karl Rove, in that it appears Fitzgerald may not have obtained all of the evidence in the case because the "recycled" backup email tapes may have contained further documents implicating other officials in the leak or, at the very least, discussed the matter.

    The story behind the single (Rove/Hadley) email that tied Rove to the Plame-Wilson leak is a complex one. It was (Rove lawyer) Luskin who apparently discovered the email Rove sent to Hadley. Yet, it took more than a year before the high-powered Washington, DC, attorney disclosed this crucial fact to Fitzgerald. And it was disclosed to the special prosecutor only when it became clear Cooper would lose his legal battle and would be compelled to respond to a subpoena demanding he reveal the identity of his source who told him Wilson worked for the CIA. Cooper testified his source was Karl Rove.

    ... <snip>
    But around the time Luskin said he located the email Rove had sent to Hadley, Fitzgerald had already become suspicious Rove was obstructing his investigation and might have destroyed evidence implicating him in the leak. In late January 2004, Fitzgerald sent a letter to then acting Attorney General James Comey seeking confirmation he had the authority to investigate and prosecute suspects in the leak case for additional crimes, including evidence destruction.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2008
  3. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    add this to the list .....

    its comical how unprofessional, unethical, and downright unlawful this administration has been.

    ha ha.... ha..
     
  4. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,608
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    again... i gotta ask, and maybe a staunch Bush League disciple here can clear it up for me with some substance:

    if they had nothing to hide -- no criminal leak, no politically ordered attorney firings -- why do White House email records, AND their backup tapes need to be purged?
     
  5. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    .


    Wonder if they used the same "re-cycling service" that the Clinton White House used before/during/and after the Monica Lewinsky "affair"!!!


    And, while we're on it: why did Sandy Burglar have to hide Top Secret documents from a classified national data archive?? Why did he have to shove documents down his pants?? He was National Security Advisor!! Why did he need to hide anything????

    What was THAT all about????


    Did we ever get any truthful answers on that whole deal????


    //
     
  6. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,183
    Likes Received:
    325
    Ratings:
    +816 / 26 / -33

    So I guess you have nothing to offer on this latest scandal by George and his crew.. divert, confuse on and on... don't answer the question..
     
  7. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0


    What's the point? Another witch hunt. For what?? If anybody wants to look at Geo Bush's laundry for dirt, more than enough comparable dirt in Clinton's old laundry is there, if not a lot, lot more.

    Who's going to look into the super secret high-tech transfers from the U.S. to China that took place during Clinton's watch??? When are we going to have a Congressional/Senate blue ribbon panel that connects the dots from communist China's high tech gains from the U.S. and Bill Clinton's campaign coffer gains??? A lot of people are still waiting for THAT investigation to get into gear.



    //
     
  8. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,608
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    LOL.... he's like a wind-up doll... pull Fog's string and he parrots the same 6 phrases.... just add 'D' batteries...

    -- "yeah? well what about Clinton?"
    -- "that sounds like evil communist thinking"
    -- "these Bush witch hunts will solve nothing"
    -- "you're a useless shytbum"
    -- "that's a 'fact' "
    -- "you'll learn"
     
  9. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    41,664
    Likes Received:
    277
    Ratings:
    +1,123 / 3 / -10

    My Dogs Better Than Your Dog

    :bricks:
     
  10. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0



    Yes, well, for every problem one needs the correct instrument. Those six are all one needs around here. But you gloss of the subtleties, alas.


    :singing:


    //
     
  11. fleabassist1

    fleabassist1 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,010
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    simpsons Did It.
     
  12. Stokes

    Stokes In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Believe me I'm not going to try defending the administration on this one, its another example of excessive and troubling secrecy. I do see it as a big problem. One question I have though is are they legally compelled to keep email records? this article mentions a federal order during the Clinton years, but can that be overridden by executive order or privelage? Just interested in the legality of it, I still think those records should have been kept.

    And come on Fog, it does no good to point out corruption in the Clinton administration as an excuse for the Bush administration. The fact is that NEITHER should have done the things they did, just because other administrations have been unscrupulous/unlawful doesn't make it OK for this one to be as well.
     
  13. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0



    Who's "excusing"?? If we judge one by a certain standard, then we must judge all. The Clintons are trying to get back into the White House. Have all the questions regarding THEIR "disappeared" e-mail, Sandy Burglar's theft of top secret documents, and the transfer of ultra secret weapons' technology to China/for huge campaign donations to the Clintons -- have any of these very serious questions been cleared up???? Until they are, the Clintons won't get my vote even if they are the only name on the ballot.

    When people start pointing fingers is when the mirrors come out.


    //
     
  14. Stokes

    Stokes In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    No I agree that the Clinton administration was bad too, all I'm saying is that when people are pointing out wrongful activities by the Bush administration it is best to answer the critisicm directly, either by presenting an opposing view or interpretation, or acknowledging wrongdoing. After answering the issue in that way then by all means point out how slimy the Clintons were/are, that's a favorite hobby of mine!
     
  15. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,183
    Likes Received:
    325
    Ratings:
    +816 / 26 / -33


    You may get better results by beating your head against the wall, Foggie has blinders on when it comes to anything that George and his crew has done.
     
  16. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0



    Well, see, the only problem with that line of thinking is -- and I've seen this a billion times, if not a trillion -- is that once you start talking about X, then nobody ever wants to evaluate Y in the same way. Oh, no. The focus never changes. It starts as: "X was 'so bad'"; and so, by comparison, "Y was a boy scout" (or girl scout) who "only" did a b-job, or "it's 'only' about sex-x-x-x!!!! What are you, a 'Puritan'???"

    You follow, Stokes?? The game never gets played the way you are thinking above; no, no. The game is "who can claim the 'High Moral Ground'", and there are no prisoners in this game. It's winner take all; loser is fertilizer. Ask Belichick how the guys who finish second feel. AS they say in NASCAR: "coming in second means you're the first one to lose".

    And, as we see, American politics is a contact sport that makes the NFL look like a shuffle-board for over 70-year olds game on the QEII.

    Understand??


    //
     
  17. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0



    Not true at all. I've expressed my problems with W in several of my earliest posts, but since it was just feeding a blood-fest I decided we needed to clear up some humongous unanswered questions about Bill and Hillary BEFORE we could so "righteously" go after Geo Bush.

    Fair is fair. Can't tar one without tarring 'em all; and not just in meaningless generalizations; we need specifics in each case.


    //
     
  18. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,608
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    you're doing the EXACT same thing the other way... YOU are excusing...

    Clinton's (unproven) misdeeds were innocuous compared to the hundreds of thousands killed, stripping of civil liberties here at home, false fears, faith-based legislation, devastation of our armed forces, and on and on and on, as a result of Bush League violations (as obvious as the OJ evidence).... and you know it....

    you're being disingenuous to the core by not acknowledging that fact, and by constantly running to the support of Boy King and his criminal minions... about all you have are some dubious real estate deals and a few other curious situations (investigated, dismissed) that affected maybe 20 people... certainly not the entire planet, and certainly not garnering disdain for the U.S. on the scale that your clown in office has affected...

    you're not fooling anyone around here... your tactics mirror Karl Rove's.... it's what you people do

    such a liar.... bearing false witness is a sin, no?.... when have you "expressed problems" with Boy King? when? or, was it merely the times when he wasn't cruel enough to Brown people? wasn't conservative enough with fiscal spending? please... you've yet to condemn George W. Bush for anything regarding his lies in tWoT or the fraudulent Iraq mess... not once that i've seen, and "SPECIFICS" HAVE been given... alternately, you squawk like an annoying tropical bird about Clinton any chance you get, hourly, even if Clinton has nothing to do with the topic being discussed...
     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2008

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>