White House: What Missing Emails?
| Thu Jan. 17, 2008 4:43 PM PST
Today, the White House dramatically changed its tune on the 5 to 10 million emails reportedly missing from its servers. Since early 2007, the administration has repeatedly acknowledged (to the press and Congress) that it had experienced a "technical issue" and that a still unknown quantity of emails might not have been archived, as required by the Presidential Records Act. But, asked by reporter about the missing emails today at a White House press conference, Tony Fratto, the deputy press secretary, contradicted the administration's previous statements.
Continues Below
Continued From Above
Q: ...I've taken a real sky view of this particular story, but— so it was wrong to say a few months ago that there were possibly millions of emails missing?
MR. FRATTO: I think those charges [of the 5 million missing emails] came from outside the White House. I think that's the charge of one of the—
Q: One of your colleagues [Perino] addressed those from the podium and suggested that that was accurate‹again, I'm taking—
MR. FRATTO: I'm not sure what was said on that. I can tell you today, though, that we have no evidence and we have no way of showing that any emails at all are missing.
Anne Weismann, the chief counsel of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), one of the groups suing the Bush administration to ensure the preservation of the missing emails, called Fratto's comments "an outrage."
"There's objective evidence that [there's an email problem]," she said. "The White House is apparently making statements left and right that are contradictory with each other."
Indeed, Fratto's take on the missing emails is at odds with what his boss, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino, has told the press on more than one occasion. On April 13, 2007, Perino told reporters that she "wouldn't rule out that there were a potential 5 million emails lost" by the White House. And three days later, on April 16, she told reporters, "We are aware that there could have been some emails that were not automatically archived because of a technical issue."
While Perino's statements stop short of directly confirming the problem, an August 30, 2007 letter (PDF) from Representative Henry Waxman, the chair of the House oversight committee, to Fred Fielding, the White House counsel, sheds more light on the situation. Waxman wrote:
On May 29, 2007, Keith Roberts, the Deputy General Counsel of the White House Office of Administration, and Emmet Flood, Special Counsel to the President, briefed Committee staff on the White House e-mail system and the missing e-mails. At the briefing, Mr. Roberts informed Committee staff that the White House had discovered in 2005 that an unknown number of e-mails may not have been preserved in the White House archive, as required by the Presidential Records Act.
Fratto's comments today certainly drew the attention of Waxman's committee today, which, noting that "statements made at today's White House press briefing contradict information provided to the Committee," scrambled to schedule a February 15 hearing to investigate White House compliance with the Presidential Records Act. Called to testify are Fred Fielding; Alan Swendiman, the director of the White House Office of Administration; and Allen Weinstein, the head of the National Archives, which is responsible for preserving presidential records.
In the coming weeks, congressional pressure could start to clarify matters. In mid-December, Waxman sent another letter (PDF) to Fielding, this one requesting "any documents relating to potential failures to archive or maintain Executive Office of the President e-mails during the Bush Administration, including documents discussing options for restoring or recovering lost e-mails." The White House has until February 1 to comply. House oversight spokeswoman Karen Lightfoot told me last night that she expects the administration will hand over the documents. If that happens, we'll know a lot more about what the administration knew about the missing emails and when it knew it. Lightfoot didn't drop any hints, but if the White House refuses Waxman's request, don't be surprised if a sternly-worded letter turns into a sternly-worded subpoena.
Comments
This administration has proven over and over that they will lie through their teeth whenever it is beneficial to their personal agendas. They have never been held accountable for the hundreds of lies in the past, why would they change their tactic now?
This is the most corrupt and criminal administration I have ever seen. And they are made even more dangerous by a congress that is impotent and lacks the courage to stand up to them. This country is in terrible trouble.
Submitted by William W. Wexler (not verified) on Fri Jan. 18, 2008 8:29 AM PST.
I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. Given the way these people operate, surely we didn't expect that they would leave us evidence of deliberately breaking a law, did we?
The only thing that surprises me about BushInc is that as far as I know, they haven't had anyone killed yet, but correct me if I'm wrong on that.
-Wexler
Submitted by capt (not verified) on Fri Jan. 18, 2008 8:35 AM PST.
"haven't had anyone killed yet"
If all humans count - thousands of our brave and best - tens if not hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghanistans.
That is without any regard for the deadly domestic policies.
Submitted by William W. Wexler (not verified) on Fri Jan. 18, 2008 10:30 AM PST.
Can't disagree with you there, capt... he's a homocidal maniac when it comes to foreign policy and his domestic policies cost lives as well.
However, I was referring to something more along the line of a contract killing.
-Wexler
No, Galt, the appropriate sculpture outside the GWB Library should be a HUGE phallus. Every time he screamed
'9/11!!!' everybody in America bent over. Perhaps the caption under the sculpture should be...
'In the Name of Freedom, They never asked for K-Y Jelly!'
Submitted by Dan Mortenson (not verified) on Fri Jan. 18, 2008 5:04 PM PST.
If I'm wrong sue me, but the post by Yu, above, appears to be either a spam post or a very personal blog entry -- talk of diving, cosmetology, and burial, but nothing to do with this forum (I used web-tranlation softw).
To the point, no actual thinking being can now be expecting to hear the truth, from the Perpetrator Administration. The only logical choice is over which lie is more revealing. In the current case, they made a tactical error by letting us know that any emails were missing in the first place.
Of course that was in response to a request for some emails, to show who was in on deliberations regarding the firing of the US Attorneys (remember them?). Naturally they thought, "Hey, we'll tell 'em we pushed the delete button by mistake! And while we're at it, there are all these OTHER incriminating emails we could do without, too!" So they rolled out the story about mistakenly deleting hundreds of emails, forgetting how hard it is to actually lose an email, if a semi-competent professional is really looking for it, in the Executive Branch's legally-mandated cache of backup disks.
Now that they've had their noses rubbed in that fact (who knew?), they have a choice of fall-back stories. They could say that there ARE no backups -- oops, that wouldn't carry very well, in terms of basic competence and respect for law. Or they could say that all of the copies were accidently deleted AND THEN the backup disks were mistakenly dropped into a disk-shredder, but that might be just a few too many coincidences. Some scapegoat would have to be fired for emailing with their elbows. Or they could come clean and hand over the emails they said were deleted.....Nah!
But hey, there's always reality redefinition -- remember when the Shrub tried to change the public's programming ex-post-facto, by claiming that he'd never urged us to "Stay The Course" in Iraq? Well that didn't play, because too many people were paying attention the first time. But now it's different. No one's really keeping track of the lies anymore, so who's going to notice, if they change one of the whoppers they've already told?
Too bad about Dana Perino, who has to be made to look as if SHE told the first lie (she must have an unknown grudge against the prexy, to make up something so hateful!). But Presidential Spokespersons are basically disposable now anyway, since they get stuck telling the Shrub's lies for him, and eventually are forced to retire and write bitter memoirs of betrayal.
This might sound transparently ridiculous to you and I, but remember that thirty percent of American citizens still believe Bush's lies -- and when he changes his story they believe the new version just as they believed the old one. They've had lots of practice, to be sure, trying to make sense of the Bible's internal inconsistencies. These folks can believe that homosexuals should be forgiven -- at the very same time that they should also be stoned to death for doing what they've been forgiven for! Worshiping a schizophrenic God has put these voters in great shape for supporting this President.
However you frame it, we have an epidemic of incompetent (say it with me, children: "STUPID") citizens in our democracy. As much as anything, this is an important lesson to remember, even after this failed presidency retires to the shadows.
---------
Kill your TV, and free your mind.
Suggest we flood Speaker Nancy Pelosi's website or e-mail with Demands that Impeachment proceedings begin immediately.
She has delayed this process long enough. What more does she need to begin impeachment of Bush and Cheney?
If she is unwilling to take action, she should resign and allow a new leader to take charge.
i've applied the same Clinton test to so much of what the Bushies have done. Imagine if the Clinton Administration had outed a CIA operative who was investigating WMDS. Imagine had it been discovered that Clinton had planted a gay male prostitute and escort service operator in the White House Press Corps. Imagine if under Clinton a secret meeting with energy company heads had taken place and a year later energy costs had doubled and tripled while historical profits were being made by the same companies. Imagine if Clinton had subcontracted out almost half of our military operations. Imagine if it came to light that Clinton had conned the Evangelicals like Bushco did with Faith Based Initiative. It boggles the mind and shows the hypocrisy of the Right....
Isn't it amazing that nowadays you can destroy potential evidence (i.e., millions of e-mails), publicly contradict what your immediate colleagues are saying (i.e., Fratto and Perino) and get away with it? There is no leadership in the absence of moral courage, and this is a country bereft of any moral courage.
Yeah, so WHEN Bush doesn't hand over the documents and WHEN he refuses to comply with the subpeona (because that's what always happens), will Congress finally hold him in contempt, unlike all the other times when they chickened out? Hmmm, smells like it's impeachment time.
Lost emails aren't really lost. Let me explain: Imagine a bunch of road signs along the highway are cut down. They fall into the gutter, not lost just out of sight. It's the same with emails which can be retrieved with the right software. Tell that to the Whitehouse staffers and watch their artificial tans vanish in seconds.
I should say that Pelosi isn't impeaching Bush for two good reasons:
1. she knows that, even if she could push the bill of impeachment through the House (not a sure thing, I hate to tell you), it wouldn't pass in the Senate
2. there are other things (like winding the war in Iraq, or seeing if some of the past republican-passed idiot laws can be gotten rid of) that she has a chance of doing if she doesn't waste the House's time on this sort of pointless effort. remember: W has less than a year before we get to see him ride into the sunset (hopefully he'll ride out in front of a speeding 18 wheeler, but hope does not spring eternal there). let him be remembered for what he is" a fraud, failure and liar. impeach him and his supporters get to make it all into a "witch hunt" and him a hero. do you *really* want that for W??
"Technical Issue?" This administration has had technical issues since it entered power in 2001! The lack of Congressional counterweight is a Constitutional concern. The "loss" of emails is another indication for this administration's lack of concern for integrity and transparency. What do they have to hide? A lot. It is the responsibility of the press to keep tabs on those in power, and it too in large part has failed. Democracy as we knew it is under threat of being legislated away to the likes of the Patriot Act and general indifference.
george bush definitely
Submitted by dedicated game servers (not verified) on Sun Jun. 28, 2009 5:57 PM PDT.
george bush definitely deleted these emails. He is definitely trying to hide something. All of government is crooked.
