Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Judge Demands Information About Missing White House Emails

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the time-to-come-clean dept.

Government 209

Lucas123 writes "A District Court judge has ordered the Executive Office of the President to tell the court by May 5 whether any e-mail server backup tapes were kept for a period from March to October 2003 to cover controversial issues such as reasons for starting the war in Iraq, the release of a former CIA operative's name and the US Department of Justice's actions. The White House has been working for months trying to fend off a lawsuit filed last May in federal court in Washington by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics. The judge cited what he called an apparent contradiction by White House CIO Theresa Payton as to whether backup tapes had been preserved. He also recommended that White House employees be ordered to turn over any flash drives or other portable media that may contain e-mails. The White House missing email scandal has been developing for some time now."

cancel ×

209 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

H.R. 5843 : Marijuana, Ron Paul, And You! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213544)

http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_5843.html [washingtonwatch.com]

H.R. 5843 is described as an "Act to Remove Federal Penalties for Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults". The bill has been introduced by US Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) and co-sponsored by US Presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX). If passed, this legislation would legalize the possession, use and non-for-profit of up to 100 grams (3.5 ounces) of Marijuana. Under this legislation, adults who consume Marijuana would no longer face arrest, prison or civil fines.

  This bill will not affect federal laws prohibiting the sale of Marijuana for profit, nor the import, export and cultivation of Marijuana. It will also not alter the legal status of Marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug according to the Controlled Substances Act.
It seems that on 4/17/08 the act was referred to House committee as well as the Committee on Energy and Commerce, we will keep a close watch on this one. We'd have a kinder, gentler America with legalized Marijuana, as well as a cash surplus from taxing it.

  "Not only should it be legalized, it should be mandatory." -Bill Hicks

http://smokedot.org/08/04/25/act-to-remove-federal-penalties-for-personal-use-of-marijuana [smokedot.org]

Perhaps someone could submit this as a Slashdot story? I'm too sober to do it because I just know the fucking anti-marijuana dipshits will vote this down and vote some spam article or worthless shit like "advice for math geek party" shit in..

Re:H.R. 5843 : Marijuana, Ron Paul, And You! (1)

x2A (858210) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213860)

What are you talking about? I reckon some MJ would be just the ticket for that math geek party!

Re:H.R. 5843 : Marijuana, Ron Paul, And You! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213948)

While I'm stoned as I'm typing this, you're only hurting the cause, fwiend.

ask TT&T and the NSA... they got everythig! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213598)

Why not just ask AT&T, the NSA, and all the telecoms that got their hands (or other appendages) caught in the cookie jar (data-pipe). They probably have some copies running around somewhere 8-/

Re:ask TT&T and the NSA... they got everythig! (4, Insightful)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213796)

If I had mod points, I would mod you up.

The Bush administration's deliberate use of the RNC e-mail system, and the amazing coincidence that the White House allowed the e-mail records to get overwritten (or at least claims they have).

It's a blatant coverup not unlike Nixon's 18 minute gap in a tape recorded conversation between him and H.R. Haldeman.

The American people need to demand Bush surrender all evidence or that he and his administration be held in contempt of court.

Re:ask TT&T and the NSA... they got everythig! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23215504)

We should, least we find ourselves in a corrupt political system... or have we been in it for a while already

Re:ask TT&T and the NSA... they got everythig! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213952)

Why can the Bush administration do illegal and unconstitutional things but be so high and mighty about their need to monitor every American citizen to make sure they don't do illegal things?

How can the Bush administration invade countries and kill innocent civilians (shock and awe) and not see it as terrorism?

What is the difference between a bunch of idiots crashing planes into buildings and another bunch of idiots sending bombers, fighters, tanks, and troops into a country to demolish their buildings and kill their people?

The sad reality is that companies like Blackwater have gone into Iraq and turn the cities into a shooting gallery. The troops, under the stress of IEDs, suicide bombers, etc, respond by also going on killing sprees.

What is the difference and what gives the Bush administration the right to kill what has been estimated as between 80,000 to 90,000 innocent Iraqis? http://www.iraqbodycount.org/ [iraqbodycount.org]

Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, Rice, et. al., have now killed over 4000 Americans and over 80,000 Iraqis in the name of fighting terror after 3000 Americans were killed on 9/11.

Does that make sense? I don't think so. All they have done is given terrorists more reasons to attack.

Re:ask TT&T and the NSA... they got everythig! (0, Troll)

Nathrael (1251426) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214616)

Let me guess...you're from Europe?

Re:ask TT&T and the NSA... they got everythig! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23214946)

You guessed wrong, Nathrael.

Re:ask TT&T and the NSA... they got everythig! (1)

Nathrael (1251426) | more than 5 years ago | (#23215124)

Oh, sorry then. I don't say that you haven't got a point, just that you exaggerated a bit (no offense meant of course), and I'm used to hear this from fellow Europeans.

Re:ask TT&T and the NSA... they got everythig! (1)

janrinok (846318) | more than 5 years ago | (#23215348)

So if Europeans say it then it has no point, or is critcism now only allowed from 'fellow Americans'?

Re:ask TT&T and the NSA... they got everythig! (1)

Nathrael (1251426) | more than 5 years ago | (#23215524)

No, but here in Europe, I just noticed that anti-Americanism is very much on the rise in many countries, and usually, not in a form of criticism, but like "oh noez, the USA, it must be bad".

Re:ask TT&T and the NSA... they got everythig! (5, Informative)

denton420 (1235028) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214660)

Your reply brings up some valid points. Let me help you tie it up in a nice neat little package that will bring you back to your last question.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/121004A.shtml [truthout.org]

Here you are, there is just one of BILLIONS of examples of why this make sense, and why there is a big difference between the two.

Oh and in case you were wondering, Dick and Bush have nothing to do with any of these companies getting billion dollar contracts. Anyone who tells you that is a democratic heathen.

Re:ask TT&T and the NSA... they got everythig! (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23215070)

"Oh and in case you were wondering, Dick and Bush have nothing to do with any of these companies getting billion dollar contracts. Anyone who tells you that is a democratic heathen."

Uh, yeah, sure. It's nothing but irony that Halliburton and the Carlyle Group are neck deep in Iraq?

And of course it's nothing but sound and patriotic business sense that Halliburton has been shown over and over to be supplying our troops with unsanitary water, food that isn't edible, or when it is edible and safe, overcharging like crazy for things like cream pies in a war zone. Or how about Halliburton drivers who refuse to drive supplies to troops because they are afraid of getting killed? This strands our troops.

Oh, and Cheney's company recently moved its headquarters to the Middle East and continue to operate off shore in the Cayman Islands to dodge taxes.

I'm sure that none of that matters to Dick Cheney - who still gets checks from Halliburton.

Yeah, you are right. Those evil democratic heathens who dare to expose the connections between the Bush administration and all of the things getting our troops killed and maimed in Iraq. How dare they?

Former CEO Cheney has no relation to Haliburton? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23215474)

Former CEO Cheney who is still being paid a salary and has thousands of stock options has no vested interest in the success of Haliburton? Really?

Re:ask TT&T and the NSA... they got everythig! (1)

jo42 (227475) | more than 5 years ago | (#23215000)

Why
Because the Bushies [think they] have God On Their Side.

Horse Gate Close Bolt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213610)

enough said.

Greg Palast? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213622)

Greg Palast already published many of these emails in his last book Armed Madhouse. The whitehouse sent them to whitehouse.org instead of whitehouse.gov who then forwarded the mails to Palast. Check out the book and read them yourself. Why the U.S. Congress seems completely unaware of this book's existence is beyond me, but that one student who was tazered at the Kerry rally had one.

Re:Greg Palast? (3, Funny)

pisto_grih (1165105) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214008)

When Bush was made aware of the books existence by a White House aide, he replied: "It don't faze me, bro."

Time (5, Insightful)

Narpak (961733) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213642)

The longer they manage to keep the law at bay the greater chance that whatever "evidence" remains is distorted, manipulated or just outright deleted.

Re:Time (2, Insightful)

hey! (33014) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214280)

Don't forget though -- it's the coverup that is often the key. It's easy to destroy evidence, it's harder to destroy evidence of destroying evidence, then destroy evidence of destroying evidence of destroying evidence, and so ad infinitum.

So first, you prove they're crooks. Then it's much easier to show the extent of their criminality, although this might involve. That's how the Valerie Plame case should have gone, but Scooter willingly took the fall, and Congress wasn't willing to take the next step and impeach Libby, probably anticipating a party line deadlock in the Senate.

Weird.... (1)

Mipsalawishus (674206) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213652)

Watergate - damning information on missing tapes.
Seagate - damning information on missing tapes.
Some things never change...

Re:Weird.... (1)

wITTus (856003) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213686)

which means that the thief is the same ;)

no problem (2, Funny)

wITTus (856003) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213654)

it was 99% spam

Data retention acts (1, Insightful)

chabotc (22496) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213674)

I find it somewhat amusing that in this day and age where data retention acts in various countries are often the topic of the next, the US government can't even keep it's own emails :-)

Re:Data retention acts (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213720)

Maybe I'm naieve, but I suspect they could if they wanted to ;)

Re:Data retention acts (5, Insightful)

je ne sais quoi (987177) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213726)

It's not the entire U.S. government that's the problem. Usually the government keeps pretty good records. The problem is this administration believes itself above law and order. It also has infected large portions of other parts of the government with it's political appointees whose only quality is loyalty the administration. Whatever was on those e-mails was likely to be more damning the "hand slap" they're getting now for erasing, er "losing" the e-mails. I suppose it could have been an innocent mix-up, but if the administration is so incompetent that they can't make back-ups of data they're required to, I suppose it's no suprise they've failed miserably in just about every other enterprise they've attempted in the last seven years (except of course, smearing their opponents, they're rather good at that).

Re:Data retention acts (-1, Offtopic)

jabster (198058) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213978)

this administration believes itself above law Lay off the kool-aid, dude. At least this administration hasn't had the FBI files of the opposing party "somehow" appear in the White House.

infected large portions of other parts of the government with it's political appointees
Gharsh! That's something NO OTHER President/Governor/Mayor has EVER DONE!!

administration is so incompetent that they can't make back-ups of data they're required to Huh? It's the government! Do you really expect gov't to be efficient or do things correctly? Seriously. Private companies don't/cant always back up everything that they're "required" to. If they can't, what makes you think any gov't department can?

And you probably want those same people to manage our health care!

Sheesh.

-john

Re:Data retention acts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23214046)

SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU STUPID PRO-REPUBLICAN SCUMBAG - explain & justify this BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WAR, ok? We DON'T WANT IT ASSHOLE: The monies could be far better spent creating federally funded jobs. Bush & Cheney are trash, plain & simple. White collar criminals of the highest order that surround themselves with their cronies who shield them like prostitutues selling their souls for a dollar. Everyone in this nation's sick of their shit.

Re:Data retention acts (5, Interesting)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214196)

It's the government! Do you really expect gov't to be efficient or do things correctly?

The Social Security has administration costs less than 10% of the average retirement fund. Yes, the government is 10 times better than private practice. Also, schools (when you exclude administration and things private schools don't do like transportation) are more efficient than private schools. The USPS will get my letter cross country for less than any other option. The organizations made by the government and falling under the government that are insulated from elections and such are quite efficient. It's when you have politicians involved that the government fails (elected school boards make problems, not solve them). If you could find a way to govern a democracy without elected officials messing it up, then you will have found the perfect government. But don't blame "government" for the problems that politicians make.

Furthermore (1)

bussdriver (620565) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214976)

Furthermore, elected officials and the government they run is FOR AND BY THE PEOPLE; therefore, the government reflects its citizens MORE in a representative democracy than most other forms of government.

Blaming government is ultimately blaming its people.

Re:Data retention acts (-1, Flamebait)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214282)

Well said John :) If I had the points I'd deffinitely mod you up. All these idiots who are currently demonizing the Bush admin seem to have been born in 2001. Either that, or their memory is so faulty that they've forgotten all the scandals of past administrations.

Re:Data retention acts (5, Insightful)

rtb61 (674572) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214502)

That is either a serious error in judgement, or sheer political bullshit. This partisan b$ has to stop, regardless of which party, which gender or whihc race, corrupt politician should be pursued, prosecuted and incarcerated.

The sickening party lie, that somehow it is acceptable today because someone from another political party did it a decade ago but not quite so bad is just a disingenuous lie.

All those absolutely corrupt idiots who fail to demonise any corrupt official often have their snout right in the trough with them.

Quailty government is all about the continual audit and review of every action of government and where applicable, the public disclosure of those actions so that htye can be publicly debated and based upon those debates, far more sensible choice about who you should elect.

It is the standard lie of the politically corrupt to claim all politicians are corrupt whilst they and the slimy cronies cook elections to ensure the worst and most criminally politicians of the lot get elected. So why mod idiots who say do nothing, idiots who look at failures a decade ago while ignoring what is going on today, or disingenuous idiots who would allow their own country to fail as long as they profit.

Re:Data retention acts (1)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214592)

The sickening party lie, that somehow it is acceptable today because someone from another political party did it a decade ago but not quite so bad is just a disingenuous lie.
You sure like to repeat yourself a lot.

Anyway, nobody ever suggested it was ok. I just find it amusing, seing as how 90% of the complaints we hear are motivated only by the political ideology of the person doing the complaining. When democrats are in power, republicans demonize them while the democrats stay silent, or make half-assed excuses for their leadership. When Republicans are in power, Democrats demonize them while republicans stay silent, or make half-assed excuses for their leadership. The whole thing is quite silly, and never really gets any results. If you want to change things, you have to approach these things in a rational manner, instead of screaming your head off about the BUSHITLERNAZI IN AMERIKKKKA!!!

Re:Data retention acts (4, Insightful)

toddestan (632714) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214584)

Well said John :) If I had the points I'd deffinitely mod you up. All these idiots who are currently demonizing the Bush admin seem to have been born in 2001. Either that, or their memory is so faulty that they've forgotten all the scandals of past administrations.

Either that, or they don't buy the "But they did it too!" argument you typically hear from children on the playground.

Re:Data retention acts (1)

rootofevil (188401) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214588)

the scandals of most previous administrations pale in comparison to those of our current leadership.

others are just close. i cant think of one that was worse.

Re:Data retention acts (2, Insightful)

BirdDoggy (886894) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214788)

People who criticize the Bush admin are not necessarily idiots. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to do so and these data retention "problems" are definitely one of them. And no, no one has forgotten past administrations' scandals, it's just that past administrations' scandals do not legitimize the actions and practices of this administration.

Re:Data retention acts (1)

DavidTC (10147) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214382)

At least this administration hasn't had the FBI files of the opposing party "somehow" appear in the White House.

No, it's just wiretapped unknown phones and emails, for years, in violation of the law. Phones and emails that could trivially include the opposition party. The difference is, unlike the Clinton Whitehouse which operated in the open and within the laws allowing oversight, the Bush Whitehouse does not. Hence, the Clinton WH was caught.

And you probably want those same people to manage our health care!

Republicans: Proving, as they do every time they're in office, that the government is completely incompetent, intrusive, uncaring, and criminal, exactly like they've been saying. It's almost magic!

See, the thing is, we don't want Republicans managing health care either. (Of course, in actuality, we want doctors managing health care, and the government paying them for their services.)

Re:Data retention acts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23214534)

Lay off the kool-aid, dude. At least this administration hasn't had the FBI files of the opposing party "somehow" appear in the White House.
Do you not see a difference between breaking the law and lying about it, and saying that the law does not apply to you and so http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/washington/27intel.html?_r=1&oref=slogin [nytimes.com] breaking it is not a crime?

infected large portions of other parts of the government with it's political appointees Gharsh! That's something NO OTHER President/Governor/Mayor has EVER DONE!!
All politically appointed positions are just that. However, usually political appointees are expected to have some domain knowledge, and to actually perform the functions of their position. Think FEMA--can't Manage an Emergency, EPA--won't Protect the Environment, DoJ--writes letters justifying ignoring the law, fires prosecutors who won't press politically motivated cases. The list could go on.

administration is so incompetent that they can't make back-ups of data they're required to Huh? It's the government! Do you really expect gov't to be efficient or do things correctly? Seriously. Private companies don't/cant always back up everything that they're "required" to. If they can't, what makes you think any gov't department can?
This is not field theory, or even rocket science. If our IT staff couldn't handle making backups, they'd be out of work. And for good reason. If they were found to have deliberately destroyed backups, they'd be prosecuted. Possibly even the person(s) who ordered such destruction would be investigated:-D

And you probably want those same people to manage our health care!
Hmmm. An interesting suggestion. One could unemotionally examine the pros and cons of a single-payer system, and look at how it has worked in other circumstances and cultures. If there are advantages to it that outweigh the disadvantages, why not?

Sheesh.
Relax, man--have a nice day.

Re:Data retention acts (1)

gizmo_mathboy (43426) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214050)

While this is a bit off-topic, this administration didn't infect other parts of government it infected it's own part of government.

The Executive just put forth people it wanted and the Congress went along (still is in my opinion even thought the Democratic party nominally controls it) with the nominations and general incompetence).\\

The unfortunate bit is that those parts of government run by the Executive (FDA, Federal Reserve, FEMA, Department of Justice and such) have a rather fundamental impact on our lives.

Re:Data retention acts (1)

perlchild (582235) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214094)

In a case of destruction of evidence, how do you deal with lack of evidence?

For some cases, I think the onus of proof should be on the individuals responsable(to show they showed due diligence, at least).

Re:Data retention acts (1)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213964)

Its not that they can't its that they don't want to.

Greg Palast's Armed Madhouse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213676)

Several of the emails in question appear in Greg Palast's book, Armed Madhouse. Why the entire U.S. congress and judiciary seems unaware of the existence of this book is beyond me because "don't taze me dude" was holding a copy while being electrocuted.

Public information? (4, Insightful)

Fuzzums (250400) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213696)

At least it's good to know a government is willing to go a long way to keep you from knowing if they fucked up.

For the Future... (5, Insightful)

txoof (553270) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213698)

It's fairly obvious that the tapes have been misplaced (misplaced into the shredder next to the giant electro-magnet and then shot into the sun). There's really no hope of seeing them again. If a copy turns up, it will only be because of a sudden outbreak of morality on some stooge's part, not because a court orders it.

That being said, what can we do to ensure this doesn't happen again? One obvious method would be to have each branch of government actually run the backup for another branch. For example, the Judicial would backup the Legislature, the legislature would backup the Executive, and the Executive the Judicial.

I know this has flaws; how do we keep everybody from peeking into the backups, for example. I'm sure the Legislative branch wouldn't want the Executive branch to be flipping through its emails, and vice-vice-versa for the other branches.

In any backup scenario, those that could be incriminated by the backups, should NEVER be allowed to manage them. An independent organization should be tasked with managing the IT behind the scenes, it should not be left in the hands of the administration. Someone like the library of congress, the secret service or some agency that is not directly under each branch's control would be vastly superior.

Let's figure out which scape-goat will be ritually sacrificed for this screw up, then move on to a real solution that makes this sort of thing a whole lot more difficult in the future.

Re:For the Future... (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213736)

The problem with that is, who runs the independent organization?

Anything in government is susceptable to private interests. Let's say you get a guy who is secretly pro-PETA heading the thing. For all we know, he could be trolling through the backup tapes looking for evidence of animal rights violations in the U.S. government.

The best way is a divided trust scheme. During the Berlin Wall days, the guards were sent in patrols of three - it made it harder for guards to escape or let people escape. (It's easier to convince one person than it is to convince two.) Constant rotations kept the guards off balance and prevented them from formulating long-term plans.

It would really be hard to form an organization that can do something like this, as it is almost impossible to avoid corruption. Whoever appoints them has control over the people who have control over the data. All it takes is one person with access to the tapes to make a problem go away.

Re:For the Future... (2, Informative)

dark_15 (962590) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213786)

There are Vendors such as Iron Mountain [ironmountain.com] that will do this. Of course it will be at the government 'discount' of twice the price as normal, but at least they be bound by contract to not tamper with tapes.

Re:For the Future... (3, Insightful)

Narpak (961733) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213810)

What is needed is a Government for the People By the People; where the people have good solid oversight over all the actions taken, laws enacted, appointments made; and the background for these decisions. If the Governing body is not transparent then it can not be trusted to be just or democratic. All decisions made behind closed doors are suspect, though in some cases it is justified for the public good; however "for the public good" is a concept that can all to easily be abused by those hungering for power and wealth.

Re:For the Future... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213852)

Agreed on your point that after three unique incidents of problems retaining data (I think using RNC servers, lost backups and shredded pc's) it would take a miracle to find the data.

However what alternate solutions are going to hold an admin accountable when they refuse to be accountable and problems are not be followed up?

Assuming democrats get power in 08, investigations need to be held then when bush cannot simply pardon anyone who could be threatening. Sidestep the RNC silver or lead approach. If courts can do anything now, more power to them.

Re:For the Future... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213890)

Let's figure out which scape-goat will be ritually sacrificed for this screw up, then move on to a real solution that makes this sort of thing a whole lot more difficult in the future.

Move forward with serious prosecution/jail time for the IT department responsible for the backups; get them to squeal on the managers who ordered it.

Re:For the Future... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213902)

Hey just delete the other guys stuff and claim a conspiriakii!!!

Re:For the Future... (1)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213932)

Thats a nice little plan until the backups get miss used. The Executive / Legislative / Judical brances do have the need to keep secrets from each other. Some of that actually protects or liberties.

For instance if the FBI(executive) was investigating senators(Legislative) takeing bribes would you want the senate to know when they were getting to close?

As soon as that happens everyone will be saying each branch should handle their own data backups.

Don't anybody suggest encrypting all the backups because that just puts you back to the original problem, "Well gee golly we can't remember the cipher key for the life of us, shucks..."

Records that are incriminating have been getting lost ever since the first people started keeping records. The only solution is an economic one. You have to enumerate the people responsible for all backups and make the penalties for thoes records going missing more severe for that individul then anything his boss the person who would want them to go missing might do to that person if they refuse. Now the trouble is if you do that nobody will want the job.

Re:For the Future... (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213988)

There's three branches. Develop a standard server that encrypts the backups for branch A and sends the data to branch B and the key to branch C. Then, B & C can confer if they think there is a problem with A, but they can't act independently.

Re:For the Future... (1)

DavidTC (10147) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214402)

This is all getting silly. The way to backup government data is the way it's always been done: Operate competent IT departments.

The fact the Bush WH switched companies to ones that mysteriously did not make backups, and used the RNC email to operate entirely outside the law, is not a problem with the system. The problem with the system is that Congress did not impeach the lot of them when this was revealed. (The lack of impeachment is, in fact, the only current problem with the system.)

Re:For the Future... (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214860)

I haven't actually been paying close enough attention to have an opinion on whether impeachment is justified, but I agree that it is the correct mechanism. I was just pointing out that encrypting the backup and sending it to another branch of government was not particularly problematic from a data security point of view.

Re:For the Future... (1)

phorm (591458) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214384)

I know this has flaws; how do we keep everybody from peeking into the backups

Encyption, with the keys put in a special location only available under special orders, and to be passed on to the presidential successor?

Or just have them done by a neutral third-party... unfortunately when politics and money are involved, neutral (and being trustworthy enough not to leak the data to a third-party) is a pretty hard thing to find.

Perhaps an arrangement with another country? Maybe the US/Canadian governments can arrange a backup-sharing plan with some form of encryption to discourage snooping.

Re:For the Future... (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 5 years ago | (#23215460)

Have the done by the EFF. With their record of vigorously fighting to protect the right to privacy in the digital age they are the only ones I'd trust to do it. And slightly OT, don't you just love how they tried to impeach Clinton for getting a BJ and lying about it(Like he was going to say "Sure,I had Monica on her knees every afternoon with my weenie in her mouth and my cigar in her coochie" while Hillary is watching.Hell,look at Hillary.I'd be afraid she'd pull a Bobbit on me.) but a president that destroys evidence while starting an unnecessary war that has caused the death of thousands and the impeach word isn't even on the table.


In a way though,it kinda fits with the f*cked up way America acts with regards to sex and violence. I believe it was Joe Bob Briggs who said "You can't show a tit in America unless there is a knife sticking out of it." But that's my take on the subject,YMMV

Re:For the Future... (2, Interesting)

nbritton (823086) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214884)

I know this has flaws; how do we keep everybody from peeking into the backups, for example. I'm sure the Legislative branch wouldn't want the Executive branch to be flipping through its emails, and vice-vice-versa for the other branches.
That's not a flaw, that's accountability. And why not have the GAO [wikipedia.org] do all the backups?

Re:For the Future... (2)

Mike1024 (184871) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214892)

That being said, what can we do to ensure this doesn't happen again?

We could disincentivise future crimes of this type by classifying them as treason; employing "non-torture enhanced interrogation techniques" such as waterboarding in investigating said crimes; and establishing a compulsory minimum sentence of death.

The problem with the president's crimes is he can block investigations under national security rules and pardon people in the unlikely event their crimes are proven. In other words, there is no non-trivial disincentive to committing crimes when ordered to by the president.

We need to correct this situation by creating substantial, unavoidable penalties which will dissuade rational people from committing these crimes. Of course, criminals who cooperate with the investigation by testifying against their superiors would receive reduced penalties so there would be an incentive to secretly gather CYA proof when committing these crimes.

IT Infrastructure at the Gov (3, Interesting)

Identita (1256932) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213712)

Keeping backup tapes for more than 2-3 years including housing all corporate email on worm drives has been a common practice at large companies for years now. Those practices obviously don't apply to the White House. Of course the CIO will likely take the fall, get fired and be rewarded with a post as the new CIO at Exxon.

Re:IT Infrastructure at the Gov (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213758)

WRONG. At Microsoft ( I work there ), we are told that the policy is to NOT keep any emails UNLESS 1) there is a business reason to do so or 2) court order as removing them after ordered is a crime (destruction of evidence I presume).

Calling our tech support to get a deleted email back, they said nope, cannot happen.

That is REALITY. Why? DoJ. Discovery, every corp fears it and SHOULD and WILL not retain anything that aids their asses being put in the ass grinder unless required by law. The minimum required.

What you are saying is pure bullshit plucked from cloud 9. No company in their right mind will retain emails unless for those reasons stated.

Re:IT Infrastructure at the Gov (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213908)

"At Microsoft"

The OP was speaking about legitimate businesses.

Re:IT Infrastructure at the Gov (1)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214032)

Any organization should have a retention policy that eventually includes destruction.

Why? Tapes rot on shelves, so does WORM disk, so does paper. You don't want to get caught with your pants down because you don't have something you policy says you should, especially if your a public company, it would be a SARBOX violation.

Data should be kept for as long as you one need it, and two can reliably keep it. At the end of that period it should be destroyed because you don't want to waste engery trying to control it any more. There is no reason to keep renting more and more storage space to keep a bunch of tapes under lock and key. In fact I kinda think for the sake of everyone privacy. It should be a legal requirement for ALL companies public and private to have a defined policy that requires the destruction of data at some point, information should never be kept forever.

   

Re:IT Infrastructure at the Gov (3, Insightful)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214106)

WRONG.

Tell me what the official policy is on dara recovery? If the servers with email on them were to explode, is the stance that "those emails are lost"? Or is there a backup strategy in which tapes with data are kept? If these tapes are kept, and an email is subsequently deleted, it could be recovered from these tapes. The email undelete policy is irrelevant to the questions being asked here. The court isn't saying "as long as it's within your policy to undelete, please undelete the messages we want. They are saying "we know you back up your servers, produce those backups now." To which the response is "against our policy, those tapes were destroyed. We don't know when, by whom or how, but we can't produce that which we, by policy and law, are required to have." Do you understand the issue now? Your limited experience with one company's undelete policy is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

No company in their right mind will retain emails unless for those reasons stated.

Most companies in their right mind keep email backups for 7 years as documentation in case of specific audit types that can go back 7 years. To delete them if they stored documents or contained specific information is illegal, and most people that play in the corporate IT world know this.

Re:IT Infrastructure at the Gov (1)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214418)

And who enforces this all-powerful data retention policy?

I work for one of the largest businesses in the world, with more layers of corporate management this, division that, and subsidiary the other than I can count even for the tiny part I work in. We have so many corporate rules and regs that I don't even know what we have them for, never mind what they say. I suspect we have such a policy on data retention as well, but I bet if you asked around my office, no more than two people would actually know where to find it or what it said. For everyone else, their e-mail is just sitting on a server indefinitely until they delete it, and who goes through their e-mail every day checking every message older than x years in case it's no longer needed and should be obliterated per the data retention policy? Any business that really did things like that would never get any work done.

Re:IT Infrastructure at the Gov (1)

snarfer (168723) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214634)

It is the POLICY of your company to destroy e-mails because the DOJ - Department of JUSTICE - might want to see them? You destroy e-mails because LAW ENFORCEMENT might be a problem? As a POLICY?

I wonder if you understand that you are describing a criminal conspiracy here? On the face of it, from your description this is a criminal enterprise.

Re:IT Infrastructure at the Gov (1)

rcallan (1256716) | more than 5 years ago | (#23215344)

I realize this is off topic, but what are the options for cheap worm drives? I've looked and it seems like all the commercial offerings target businesses. I would love to have a truly permanent storage for my documents and collected media. Why don't they make a drive with a standard form factor that I can afford, both in terms of cost/GB and cost of the drive itself?

Furthermore, it seems like the most common solution for this today is to use different drivers which don't allow rewriting with an ordinary hdd. This is not what I'm looking for.

WARNING: digression

This may be a pipedream, but I am looking for something where it is impossible to alter the history of the drive without physically destroying the medium. Magnetic tape is still erasable, and I think this is suboptimal.

What I am am wishing for, abstractly, is an array of fuses (1TB*8 of them:)). Each fuse is a FSM with 3 states: BLANK, ZERO, and ONE. each fuse starts as BLANK, and a write operation causes a transition to ZERO or ONE. These are the only two transitions.

Intuitively it seems like it should be possible to store this state chemically, and read and write to it electrically/magnetically somehow (as an ee/cs person, the chemical part is the magic part of me:)).

To go even further, you don't need a guarantee that when you try to write ZERO or ONE that you will end in the desired state, since you can just read what you just wrote to verify it wrote what you wanted. If it didn't, then write to the next block saying that the last block is bad (even if that write fails, you can then say the last two blocks are bad, and so on).

I envision this system as a lower step on the memory hierarchy, below the hdd (with an hdd effectively acting as a cache). What prevents this from existing/ being popular?

public records? (1)

DragonTHC (208439) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213760)

I was under the impression that all correspondence sent and received by the white house was public record unless classified and required to be archived as such. even classified correspondence is required to be archived. The white house staff knows this. The president even knows this. Anything else is a violation of the law.

Re:public records? (1)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213870)

Here is a copy of the FOA (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/5/usc_sec_05_00000552----000-.html). But I don't see anything about emails, but let us know if you do. I seriously doubt the current or any administration would put such information in their email. I picture more face to face in dark alleys meetings.

Re:public records? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23215192)

Here is a copy of the FOA

That's a real interesting law there. Too bad it only deals with which government proceedings have to be made public, and has nothing to do with this particular issue of what must be recorded. Try Title 44, Chapter 22 [cornell.edu] (the Presidential Records Act), which requires that the executive branch maintain the executive branch's "Presidential records" meaning

documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, created or received by the President, his immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise and assist the President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.
where documentary material means

all books, correspondence, memorandums, documents, papers, pamphlets, works of art, models, pictures, photographs, plats, maps, films, and motion pictures, including, but not limited to, audio, audiovisual, or other electronic or mechanical recordations.
and yes, email is electronic correspondence. While one would assume that the Vice President would have been included in "his immediate staff" or an "individual of the Executive Office" that would "assist the President", SS 2207 specifically applies the law to the Vice President, probably to ensure that the law applies to the staff and assistants of the Vice President as well.

Dig deep enough and maybe the honesty of 9/11 ... (2, Interesting)

3seas (184403) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213780)

... might just come out. This instead of focusing on this distraction of, and excuse used, for invading iraq.

Hint: Wrongful World Stock Market Manipulation [pbs.org]

Follow the money winners and losers, Dot com boom and bust, worldcom, enron, etc..

9/11 WTC building #7 containing SEC investigation evidence..... Building #7 intentionally destroyed.

Re:Dig deep enough and maybe the honesty of 9/11 . (2, Insightful)

Mix+Master+Nixon (1018716) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213914)

Nobody "credible" will dig, and those who demand that digging be done will merely be ridiculed as crazy. Which I guess is true; you'd have to be crazy to think that the truth (whatever it might be) will come out on this, but you'd have to be stupid to think that on this one particular issue this administration is at all trustworthy when they've been caught brazenly lying about pretty much everything else they've ever done since they took power - and it was taken, not given. This is no different. Just because I don't know and can't prove what happened doesn't mean that I have to accept as gospel the words of the biggest bullshit artists of them all.

Re:Dig deep enough and maybe the honesty of 9/11 . (2, Informative)

Fuzzums (250400) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213956)

I can perfectly understand Iraq was all about securing oil reserves for the future. Same for Afghanistan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline [wikipedia.org] .

Butwhat's wring about being honest about is, instead of coming up with lame excuses like "terrorism", "W's of MD" or "suffering people".

Just say "Hey, we need to get rid of Sadam because we need his oil and he wouldn't let us have it". I'm sure we'll understand and see the reason in that.

After all. Camels don't run on oil, so why would they need it anyway?

Re:Dig deep enough and maybe the honesty of 9/11 . (1)

3seas (184403) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214010)


As a counter to terrorism.... knowledge begets knowledge and specific knowledge begets its own with tunnel vision

What the World Wants [unesco.org] and from this we can pretty much knopw that its some fraction of a percent of the population on this planet that are in positions of abusing the rest of us with positions of power and dishonest use of that power.

Re:Dig deep enough and maybe the honesty of 9/11 . (1)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214424)

I can perfectly understand Iraq was all about securing oil reserves for the future. Same for Afghanistan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline [wikipedia.org] [wikipedia.org].
*sigh* I can perfectly understand ignorant people believing such silly assertions. What I can't understand is someone like you stating it, and then linking to an article which all but disproves your statement. You're effectively saying:

"Afghanistam was all about the oil! So here's a link which talks about a natural gas pipeline which hasn't been built, but may some day (maybe) be built in order to serve countries which didn't even fight in Afghanistan."

Talk about a nonsequitor. Have someone check your temperature - you're probably running a fever.

Just say "Hey, we need to get rid of Sadam because we need his oil and he wouldn't let us have it". I'm sure we'll understand and see the reason in that.
If we really wanted the oil, there'd be much more efficient ways to get it. Such as:

1) Subverting the oil-for-food program like everyone else was doing.
2) Threatening Sadam with invasion.
3) Just going in, securing the oil, and ignoring the rest of the country. Which could have been done with a quarter of the manpower, and a tenth of the casualties.

I also find it fascinating that, even after years of trying to help these nations rebuild at a cost of billions of dollars, while taking none of their natural resources, people like you still seem to think it's perfectly logical to claim that all we want is the oil. I don't quite understand how you can believe in such an absurdity. Luckily your numbers seem to be dwindling, otherwise I'd be really concerned.

Re:Dig deep enough and maybe the honesty of 9/11 . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23215416)

I can believe that it's possible it wasn't for oil. But just curious, what was it about then?

Re:Dig deep enough and maybe the honesty of 9/11 . (0, Troll)

jabster (198058) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214002)

Rosie?

Is that you?

It's me. Michael.

The "documentary" film maker.

Good to hear from you again.

Re:Dig deep enough and maybe the honesty of 9/11 . (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23214330)

fail.

Re:Dig deep enough and maybe the honesty of 9/11 . (2, Insightful)

initialE (758110) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214190)

You'd have to go quite far to convince someone to kill himself and a load of innocent passengers in order to protect your own damning evidence though. How on earth would anyone pull it off?

Re:Dig deep enough and maybe the honesty of 9/11 . (0, Troll)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214542)

God dammit, isn't there any forum that you 9/11 Denier lunatics won't pollute with your idiotic spam? Yes, the September 11th attacks were coordinated at a cost of millions of dollars, causing billions in direct damage, killing thousands of people, and probably causing trillions in indirect long-term damage by harming the economy and the national psyche, all so that a few people could make a few million dollars on the stock market. Meanwhile, the CIA demolished a $700,000,000 building so that they could destroy records. Apparently they never heard of a paper-shredder. Or a "delete" key.

What I want to know is who the fuck put Dr. Evil in charge of this operation?

Also, what idiots modded you up? I mean, I suppose that your comment is "interesting" in the same way that a wheelchair hurdle race would be "interesting", but c'mon, that's hardly what that mod category is meant for.

Re:Dig deep enough and maybe the honesty of 9/11 . (3, Insightful)

jimicus (737525) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214838)

Come on, that's just starting to stink of loopy conspiracy.

If there really was a conspiracy to destroy a whole bunch of documents, you're seriously telling me the simplest, easiest plan they could come up with was "Let's find and finance a bunch of nutjobs to fly planes into buildings - and make sure that two of those buildings are the towers of the WTC"?

This is really about Fraud by Lawyers-Not RIAA (-1, Offtopic)

Danathar (267989) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213872)

Although the RIAA has a lot to answer for, I think the real snakes in all this are the companies monitoring and the Lawyers going after people.

What I think is REALLY happening is that the said aforementioned companies/lawyers are selling the RIAA that they can truthfully get people AND make a difference in piracy when THEY (the lawyers and monitoring companies) probably are telling fibs.

Basically they see a way to make some dough at the RIAA's ineptitude and greed by cooking numbers at their meetings with the RIAA telling them how good they are doing at getting people.

That's just my theory, that the lawyers and companies like mediasentry are driving this primarily.

Re:This is really about Fraud by Lawyers-Not RIAA (1)

Danathar (267989) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214336)

Ooops...wrong thread :)

You and what army? (1)

RealGrouchy (943109) | more than 5 years ago | (#23213904)

A District Court judge has ordered the Executive Office of the President to tell the court by May 5...
Or else what?

- RG>

Re:You and what army? (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214270)

Or else what?

Possible contempt charges against certain officials I'd think. Which they'll ignore. The real fun is going to happen when this president leaves office, and all those who participated in various illegal acts are still on the hook, but without anyone in the executive branch willing to protect them. I honestly think a lot of them are Monica Goodling types, naive flunkies who don't realize that their actions could have very personal consequences to them individually down the road. [wikipedia.org]

The Emails have already been published! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23213998)

and /. already ate this comment twice, but I'll try one last time.
These emails have been published in the book Armed Madhouse by Greg Palast. Whitehouse staffers mistakenly emailed whitehouse.org instead of .gov who then forwarded the mails to Palast. It is surprising that the entire U.S. Congress and judiciary is unaware of this book when the famous "don't taste me, dude" student was holding in clearly in the video where he was tazed.

I have the information (4, Insightful)

AlHunt (982887) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214028)

Here it is:

a) We short circuited the whitehouse email by using GOP addresses
b) There was stuff we didn't want anyone to know in there
c) We deleted it all and trashed the server storage just in case

Does that answer your question?

Re:I have the information (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23215194)

No, it does not answer my question. My question, in light of the above, is

Why are these people in the White House instead of the Big House?

America needs to hang some traitors operating as elected officials and their employees.

It has happened before, and they didn't learn (2, Insightful)

MyNameIsFred (543994) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214058)

In my mind, the amusing thing is that this has happened before... under the Clinton administration. Remember Travelgate? [bbc.co.uk] Remember the lost emails [nytimes.com] that the White House couldn't find? You would think someone would learn. Or should I believe that maybe Democrats and Republicans have something to gain from poor email archives?

Re:It has happened before, and they didn't learn (4, Informative)

DavidTC (10147) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214694)

That was actually a system problem that, rather importantly, did not ultimately result in any lost email.

Read it carefully, it says the backup wasn't storing email 'properly', whatever that means. I suspect format problems, the email system at the time was using a VAX. So they couldn't just 'restore' the email, they had to munge it to make it usable in whatever format Congress thought it was supposed to be in.

But in the end, all the email was recovered after a few months.

It is rather funny to read Republican complaints about a delay of months in turning over email in an investigation about Hillary Clinton possibly lying about firing people in the WH travel office, who are part of the WH staff and can be fired at will.

The WH claimed there were financial irregularities and that the FBI confirmed it, the people were quite correctly fired. The right claimed the Clintons made it up so family friends could take over or some really stupid nonsense, and used the FBI 'improperly'. The whole investigation was a precursor to Blowjobgate, where the Republicans do a bunch of investigating, throw wild accusations around, found nothing wrong, and finally get someone (Hillary, in this case) to state something (That she didn't have a lot to do with it.) and then investigate her for perjury. At worse, it was a little bit of attempted nepotism and then denial of said attempted nepotism...that showed up after it was realized that the WH travel office had been 'skimming'. Along with a bit of an overreaction of mass firing by the Clinton administration, which it corrected by rehiring the innocent people.

Yet the GOP is now blithely accepting the total loss of emails in an investigation of the politicalization of the justice department, which is, if not illegal, at least worth investigating, unlike some supposed issues in the WH travel office. And constantly refusing to investigate anyone for lying to Congress, which the Bush WH has done so repeatedly. (The most obvious, but not only, time is in the lead-up to Iraq, and it's worth noting lying during the State of the Union counts as lying to Congress.) And refusing to investigate nepotism and conflicts of interests, of which the current Administration has a lot more.

Re:It has happened before, and they didn't learn (2, Insightful)

dpilot (134227) | more than 5 years ago | (#23215254)

That's all because the Republicans are the RIGHT wing, and therefore whatever they do is RIGHT. Whatever Bush does is RIGHT, because he's President and he's a Republican. By the same token, whatever Clinton did, and whatever the next Democratic President does, will be an abuse of power, because he/she's a Democrat, and that WRONG reverses the President's RIGHT, making it even worse.

And if you can't follow and buy into this clear chain of logic, you must be a liberal treasonous traitor.

What's really scary is that most times it's not put this simply or sarcastically, but apparently nearly half the nation has bought into this drivel.

But then early this year, McCain kissed the right a$$, and has been anointed by the same kingmakers that anointed Bush. The press is reporting on the angst and horseracing aspects of Clinton vs Obama, and is writing them off in November, "because irreparable damage has been done during the extended primary season," snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Hello President McCain... Bomb Iran, bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.

Re:It has happened before, and they didn't learn (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23214748)

"All of this has happened before and all of this will happen again." - BSG

What I don't get is that all these people are just sitting there. Afghanistan was invaded, but they didn't bother to actually track down Bin Laden. Iraq was invaded based on absolutely no evidence and the entire region has been unstable ever since, but no one cares. The constitution has been bypassed and civil rights have been infringed, all in the name of the socalled "War on Terror", prompting other nations to follow this wonderful example. Evidence of this administration's mistakes are deliberately being hidden. But talk about impeachment is out of order, for some reason. Why? I don't get it. The US was formed just because the citizens of a British colony didn't feel it was right to pay taxes, but not be represented in London. Where is the kind of moral outrage that you would expect from this?

Re:It has happened before, and they didn't learn (1)

greg_barton (5551) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214806)

As a slasdot poster I assume you know what an "order of magnitude" is.

The current email scandal is several orders of magnitude worse than Travelgate. Comparing the two is just silly, like saying Warren Buffet and I are the same because we both own stock...

Copies of emails proliferate (4, Insightful)

bartwol (117819) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214200)

A challenge for many record retention policies, especially with email, is to prevent the proliferation of copies and avoid "unplanned retention." Many (most) of the emails being sought in this case were long iterative threads with large cc lists. When you factor for network distribution mechanisms and the variety of personal practices (use of various POP clients, personal folder management, people who still insist on printing stuff, desktop archive and cache settings, etc.), it is quite humorous and implausible to believe that the emails are gone. In fact, you can't practically make them go away.

You can, however, wipe the server and make the "Backup Tape" go away, and then try to keep people focused on that.

No, the rabbit really isn't in the magician's hat, and no, the rabbit didn't really disappear.

Sounds Like Al Gore Deja Vu (1)

bxwatso (1059160) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214238)

Can someone link to the /. thread where everyone evicerated Al Gore for his Buddist Temple fundraiser? As I recall, he claimed that the key emails from the time of that crime were lost too.

Or does the Clinton administration get more of a benefit of the doubt?

Re:Sounds Like Al Gore Deja Vu (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23215288)

Presidential Records Act specifically excludes records regarding the election process of themselves or other people, as long as those records don't involve the constitutional duty of the President or Vice President.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode44/usc_sec_44_00002201----000-.html [cornell.edu]

materials relating exclusively to the Presidentâ(TM)s own election to the office of the Presidency; and materials directly relating to the election of a particular individual or individuals to Federal, State, or local office, which have no relation to or direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode44/usc_sec_44_00002207----000-.html [cornell.edu]
States that Vice Presidents' records are included in the Presidents' records and archived with them unless the archivist agrees otherwise.

This would presumaly include election fundraising.

correct Zimbabwe presidential vote totals (1)

rwwyatt (963545) | more than 5 years ago | (#23214618)

will show up before the missing emails do.

Yet another chapter.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23214742)

...of the MEP (Most Evil President) and MEVP (Most Evil Vice President).

Why not subpoena the FBI? (1)

nullchar (446050) | more than 5 years ago | (#23215122)

What is the big deal here? It should be easy to retrieve "lost" email from Carnivore [wikipedia.org] .
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>