Judge demands answers on White House’s missing e-mails.
Judge demands answers on White House’s missing e-mails.
A federal judge today ordered the White House “to reveal whether copies of possibly millions of missing e-mails are stored on computer backup tapes.” The AP reports:
Facciola gave the White House five business days to report whether computer backup tapes contain e-mails written between 2003 and 2005.
The time period covers the Valerie Plame affair in which at least three presidential aides were found to have leaked Plame’s CIA identity to the news media.
“Do the back-ups contain the e-mails said to be missing?” Facciola asked.
In a four-page order, Facciola said he needs to know “if the missing e-mails are not on those back-ups.”
Facciola noted the importance of acting quickly since e-mails that might be retrievable from individual computer workstations in the White House “are increasingly likely to be deleted or overwritten with the passage of time.”
CREW has more on the judge’s order.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
66 Responses to “Judge demands answers on White House’s missing e-mails.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I demand answers regarding Jeff Gannon's visits to the White House!
January 8th, 2008 at 3:35 pmAccountability from the Bushies? Don't hold your breath, Judge Facciola!
January 8th, 2008 at 3:35 pmIf those computer back-up tapes existed this morning, they probably don't exist now. I imagine several lit cigars tossed nonchalantly into wastebaskets where those pesky back-up tapes happened to wander did the trick.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:36 pmFrom the article:
"In asking that the complaints be dismissed, the Bush administration says the president's record keeping practices under the Presidential Records Act are not reviewable by the courts."
The White House says they can't produce the records stipulated by the act, but that their practices are not reviewable by the judicial branch???? WHY????
This seems pretty basic to me. Congress writes the laws, the president signs and implements the laws and the courts review the goverment's performance under the laws, right???
All except this bit???
January 8th, 2008 at 3:36 pmFacciola noted the importance of acting quickly since e-mails that might be retrievable from individual computer workstations in the White House “are increasingly likely to be deleted or overwritten with the passage of time.â€
----------------------------------------------
Um...yeah. This is why the White House can't comply with the order until the deletion/overwriting procedure is complete.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:37 pmMaybe the dog ate their homework...
January 8th, 2008 at 3:40 pmGood luck with that, Judge. Where have you been? Haven't you heard this WH thinks they're above the law? You've just given them five business days to say, "Executive Privilage".
January 8th, 2008 at 3:40 pmBushitCo reply:
Go Facciola yourself.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:41 pmThis judge will have to be strong and courageous. The White House will delay and politicize this thing all the way. The players in the White House and those who have since departed that took part in the sliming of Plame' will do everything they can to stone wall the actions of the judicial branch. The White House should be in contempt of court on this matter and those not responding should be arrested and brought before the judge.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:41 pmFacciola noted the importance of acting quickly since e-mails that might be retrievable from individual computer workstations in the White House “are increasingly likely to be deleted or overwritten with the passage of time.â€
Um, considering this deleting was first known months ago (what, 6 months, a year?), they've had all the time in the world to do whatever they want with them. This should have been acted upon the moment it was found out.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:42 pmDamn activist judges!
All power rests with the unitary executive!
January 8th, 2008 at 3:42 pmA Bush administration spokesperson replied, "Ah ha ha ha!"
January 8th, 2008 at 3:43 pmThis judge will have to be strong and courageous.
Comment by williamf
How about sending some U.S. Marshalls over to the WH to collect them. That is a simple solution to this rather simple task.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:44 pmHow about sending some U.S. Marshalls over to the WH to collect them.
How about Chuck Norris?
January 8th, 2008 at 3:45 pmI demand answers regarding Jeff Gannon’s visits to the White House!
Comment by ForTruth
Except those late night visits to Karl Rove. I don't any of us want to know about those.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:46 pmMissing e mails , destroyed torture porn , secret government with secret reasons for the deaths of a million Iraqi citizens and 4000 American GI's ................... waaaa laaaaaa ...............secret democracy .
January 8th, 2008 at 3:46 pmTomorrow morning's head line:
Low level IT geek fired for misplacing backup tapes...
January 8th, 2008 at 3:47 pmHow about sending some U.S. Marshalls over to the WH ...
How about Chuck Norris?
Comment by RUCerious — January 8, 2008 @ 3:45 pm
ha! i was just thinking "texas rangers" - their "jurisdiction is where-
January 8th, 2008 at 3:48 pmever they happen to be"...
How about sending some U.S. Marshalls over to the WH to collect them.
How about Chuck Norris?
Comment by RUCerious
No, he's too busy sandwiching Huckabee between himself and his blond bimbo wife.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:48 pmShoeless, no, that's Larry Craig and his wife. ;-)
January 8th, 2008 at 3:52 pmUgh, now we have Obama girl vs. Giulianni girl in a video. How ironic that I was just thinking that the only thing this election cycle is missing is the Dancing Itos.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:54 pmNo, he’s too busy sandwiching Huckabee between himself and his blond bimbo wife.
Comment by shoeless — January 8, 2008 @ 3:48 pm
Just had to go look at Chuckie's web site. Under his biography, not one mention of getting married, or wife. Nada Zip...
January 8th, 2008 at 3:54 pmComment by Ms_Joanne — January 8, 2008 @ 3:52 pm
That's not Larry Craig's wife - that's a BEARD!
January 8th, 2008 at 3:55 pmCheney doesn't want anyone to find his snuff-tape collection.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:55 pmFacciola gave the White House five business days to report whether computer backup tapes contain e-mails written between 2003 and 2005.
Five days later: Crickets chirping.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:58 pmBushitCo reply:
Go Facciola yourself.
Comment by RUCerious — January 8, 2008 @ 3:41 pm
beat me too it!
January 8th, 2008 at 3:59 pmSecret evidence , in secret prisons .
January 8th, 2008 at 3:59 pmSecretive administration officials , secretly collecting secret info on certain secret citizens who secretly conspire to reveal what isn't any longer secret .
Oh bring back the days of presidential secretions !!!
correction - beat me TO it!
January 8th, 2008 at 3:59 pmFive days later: Crickets chirping.
Comment by Menehune\
...and six days later - subpoenas! Cha Cha Cha!
January 8th, 2008 at 4:02 pmThe datas there if they want it, but I’m betting Bush had them delete the backups.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — January 8, 2008 @ 4:02 pm
Last famous words:
Quick, shred those emails!
January 8th, 2008 at 4:03 pmcomment by rocks 911 @ 3:42 pm
I hope you were being sarcastic on that.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:05 pmI smell smoke.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:09 pmJust had to go look at Chuckie’s web site. Under his biography, not one mention of getting married, or wife. Nada Zip…
Comment by RUCerious
Oh, I just assumed that was Norris' wife on the other side of Huckabee. Maybe it's just some hussy they are having sex with.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:09 pmI smell smoke.
Comment by hellinabucket — January 8, 2008 @ 4:09 pm
I think I may see a gun...
January 8th, 2008 at 4:10 pmI’m betting Bush had them delete the backups.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — January 8, 2008 @ 4:04 pm
There's a bet I wouldn't take on a bet!
January 8th, 2008 at 4:11 pmIf they are not, then someone manually deleted them, then they broke the law.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — January 8, 2008 @ 4:06 pm
no, it was an accident.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:12 pman honest mistake.
no, really!
it won't happen again.
they promise.
Ooops, I meant I wouldn't bet AGAINST that, Bartles...
January 8th, 2008 at 4:12 pmThe Vice President's Office burned down for a reason, DAMMIT!
January 8th, 2008 at 4:12 pm…and six days later - subpoenas! Cha Cha Cha!
Stratrat...I wish I had your faith! My faith that any of these crooks will ever be brought to justice has long since been buried under a pile of sternly worded letters.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:13 pmStratrat…I wish I had your faith! My faith that any of these crooks will ever be brought to justice has long since been buried under a pile of sternly worded letters.
Comment by Menehune
I know. That's why I threw in the dance steps (cha, cha, cha). The Bush adminstration will dance their time away - waiting for 1/20/2009.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:20 pmUncle Ho,
Yes I was.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:20 pmThe Judge needs a consultant to advise him as he goes. He needs to grab someone from NSA, or DHS, one of their tech guys, who knows email, and then the Judge will get the answers he, and all of us, are looking for.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — January 8, 2008 @ 4:16 pm
How about Daryll?
January 8th, 2008 at 4:21 pmcheck out the wiki bio on chuck norris...
January 8th, 2008 at 4:22 pmhe IS married, his second wife...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Norris
#39: Strangely, the emails disappeared from the backups after Rosemary Woods visited the White House...
January 8th, 2008 at 4:23 pmrocks911; Whew! you were starting to worry me. The sad part is, there really ARE blind sheep who really feel that way. Look at all the millions who supported Hitler right to the bitter end. Scary.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:31 pmhe IS married, his second wife…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Norris
Comment by katy — January 8, 2008 @ 4:22 pm
I don't understand.
He's divorced.
How can Huckabee stand to be in the same room with this fornicating adulterer? He's destined to burn in hell for all eternity, yet Huckster deems him acceptable for a endorsement?
January 8th, 2008 at 4:33 pmLawdy.
perhaps the judge should write a letter to the White House.
That seems to be all the rage from those that do-jack-shit-for-Democracy-but-like-to-pretend-that-they-do these days.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:34 pmHow can Huckabee stand to be in the same room with this fornicating adulterer?
Comment by RUCerious — January 8, 2008 @ 4:33 pm
envy
January 8th, 2008 at 4:39 pmI don’t understand.
He’s divorced.
How can Huckabee stand to be in the same room with this fornicating adulterer? He’s destined to burn in hell for all eternity, yet Huckster deems him acceptable for a endorsement?
Lawdy.
Comment by RUCerious
It's the Republican way. At the time of their marriage, Chuck was 58 years old and Gena was 30 years old.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:41 pmContempt of Court is an impeachable offense.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:46 pmUnless you have Nancy Pelosi as the Speaker of the House, that is.
It’s the Republican way. At the time of their marriage, Chuck was 58 years old and Gena was 30 years old.
Comment by shoeless — January 8, 2008 @ 4:41 pm
Holy crap! Hell, I'm not worrying about an 18 year difference anymore.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:49 pmAdmit it Z, as long as the difference is the guy younger than you!!
January 8th, 2008 at 4:51 pmAdmit it Z, as long as the difference is the guy younger than you!!
Comment by RUCerious — January 8, 2008 @ 4:51 pm
Naturally. ;)
January 8th, 2008 at 4:53 pmHoly crap! Hell, I’m not worrying about an 18 year difference anymore.
Comment by Zooey — January 8, 2008 @ 4:49 pm
I'm 49 and my current girlfriend is 30, heh
January 8th, 2008 at 4:55 pmThere you go with that cougar stuff again
January 8th, 2008 at 4:55 pmOh yeah? What is the Judge going to do? Hold them in contempt? Send the police to arrest them?
(Shh, don't disturb my dream please)
January 8th, 2008 at 4:57 pmHe’s divorced.
How can Huckabee stand to be in the same room with this fornicating adulterer? He’s destined to burn in hell for all eternity, yet Huckster deems him acceptable for a endorsement?
Lawdy.
Comment by RUCerious — January 8, 2008 @ 4:33 pm
I guess I would really burn, divorced 5 years and not planning on re-marrying soon, too much fun being single again being a "fornicating adulterer". lol
January 8th, 2008 at 5:01 pmNow the swift-boating of the judge begins
January 8th, 2008 at 5:04 pmWayne, make sure your adulterationism includes healthy doses of fornicatitude.
January 8th, 2008 at 5:10 pmBartles, see my # 17...
January 8th, 2008 at 5:11 pm5 to 10 million emails will be too hard to swallow that some technogeek fatfingered it all away.
without the emails it's obstruction of justice. this is the trail that will lead to the legacy of GWB.
January 8th, 2008 at 5:35 pmGWB's legacy will be ongoing investigations.
January 8th, 2008 at 5:50 pmHoly crap! Hell, I’m not worrying about an 18 year difference anymore.
Comment by Zooey — January 8, 2008 @ 4:49 pm
I’m 49 and my current girlfriend is 30, heh
Comment by Wayne — January 8, 2008 @ 4:55 pm
------
Meh. Barely scandalous. The universal sketchy old dude calculation is half your age + 7 (rounded down).
Go find a 31 y/o you cradlerobber!!!!!
January 8th, 2008 at 6:11 pmGo find a 31 y/o you cradlerobber!!!!!
Comment by deebaser — January 8, 2008 @ 6:11 pm
No!! ;)
January 8th, 2008 at 6:12 pmWho can arrest the White House for contempt? Even Nixon obeyed a Supreme Court order--but, unlike W, he wasn't on a Mission from God, Iguess.
January 8th, 2008 at 7:24 pmThw WH knows the phone number of the Geek Squad. They used them already to trash laptops.
January 8th, 2008 at 10:02 pmhttp://wonkette.com/politics/cast-of-idiots/investigating-the-investigator-327405.php