Still Hating America.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I thought you were researching the Presidential Records Act to show it applied to these emails?

I think the act would apply to presidential business conducted by WH personnel even if they wrote it on their personal stationary. The owner of the server is irrelevant.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by andViolins
True. But we also know that computers don't save things in a very orderly fashion. Thus, depending on the size of the servers in question, it is highly unlikely that all of the "missing" e-mails have been "saved over" even if the e-mail program settings were deleting sent/trash items after 30/60/90 days.

aV

I'm not a super techie, but what it sounds to me like you're suggesting is a subpoena for every hard drive on every RNC server on which ingoing or outgoing email is or has been stored so that some forensic computer guy can go over the not-yet-overwritten bits to see what can be extracted.

Sure, in theory you can do that. And if you're doing it for one alleged child pornographer's PC, it might even be feasible. But I suspect you're going to run into a heck of a lot of practical and political obstacles in trying to get this stuff out.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I think the act would apply to presidential business conducted by WH personnel even if they wrote it on their personal stationary. The owner of the server is irrelevant.

• (2) The term "Presidential records" means 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.

I don't read that as protecting every email by every aide. And of course from what has been posted here we don't even know what level aide.

The purpose is to create a record of the President's term for history not to save every email for witchhunts.

[andViolins]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I'm not a super techie, but what it sounds to me like you're suggesting is a subpoena for every hard drive on every RNC server on which ingoing or outgoing email is or has been stored so that some forensic computer guy can go over the not-yet-overwritten bits to see what can be extracted.

Sure, in theory you can do that. And if you're doing it for one alleged child pornographer's PC, it might even be feasible. But I suspect you're going to run into a heck of a lot of practical and political obstacles in trying to get this stuff out.

I'm not a super techie either, but I would assume that there are relatively few e-mail servers at the RNC. Image those drives (4 servers? 5? I don't know. Could be only 1) and run them through enCase or some other forensic program looking for any and all e-mails (or hits on the names) from the individuals in question. It actually does not sound like that big of a job to me. However, I would again defer back to Anne Elk, who knows a ton more about this stuff than I do.

aV

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
If it's not sent through a white house server, why would the white house retain it? It's the RNC's server, over which the WH presumably does not have control, and for which the retention requirements, and therefore the retention settings, are likely quite different.

I work for a Big 4. I have also worked for two major oil companies in the past. In all three cases, all email coming in or going out through the company's gateway was saved to a dedicated server. My question was whether or not it is reasonable to expect the nation's Chief Executive to take a similarly conservative approach to preserving communications.

I guess, based on my personal expeerience, it seems odd that the people in the White House should be capable of making email disappear. At least not without going to a great deal of affirmative and specific effort to do so.

That was my only point.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
how could WH document retention policy apply to document it doesn't have control over? suggested standards?

I think Bush needs to learn "so what." Like "What if there is global warming? So what?" or "Yes, we fired some Prosecutors because we didn't like how they followed political orders. So what?" it would just be simpler for him.

See, I think it's great that you and I say that. In a President, maybe a little less so.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski

• (2) The term "Presidential records" means 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.

I don't read that as protecting every email by every aide. And of course from what has been posted here we don't even know what level aide.

The purpose is to create a record of the President's term for history not to save every email for witchhunts.

Thanks! Now explain how the emails in question would not apply.

Everyone's favorite comb-licker's in hot water over his girlfriend.


.

In the spirit of bipartisanship I certainly hope he can put this behind him and devote all of his considerable perspicacity to making the World Bank the best darn World Bank it can be.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Thanks! Now explain how the emails in question would not apply.

okay. what was the aide's position again- his day to day function? it reads to me like it doesn't apply to stuff beneath the President's radar screen, but I have a law degree, so I know enough to qualify that by saying that perhaps the statute has been interpreted somewhere, and such interpretation could change that.

How can you feel so strongly if you don't even know what the aide's level or job was?

hint: quit reading blogs and accepting their allegations as being accurate. you dad paid for your education- use it.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
okay. what was the aide's position again- his day to day function? it reads to me like it doesn't apply to stuff beneath the President's radar screen, but I have a law degree, so I know enough to qualify that by saying that perhaps the statute has been interpreted somewhere, and such interpretation could change that.

How can you feel so strongly if you don't even know what the aide's level or job was?

hint: quit reading blogs and accepting their allegations as being accurate. you dad paid for your education- use it.

How about the WSJ?

http://online.wsj.com/public/article...html?mod=blogs

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
How about the WSJ?

http://online.wsj.com/public/article...html?mod=blogs

that doesn't say these should have been protected. it says some people have said they should have been. That was the source for your strong opinion?

the White House fired some AGs for political reasons, yeah, so what?

[Adder]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
If it's not sent through a white house server, why would the white house retain it? It's the RNC's server, over which the WH presumably does not have control, and for which the retention requirements, and therefore the retention settings, are likely quite different.

If there is a subpoena out there, or even the possibility of a subpoena, they may have an obligation to preserve it.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I'm not a super techie, but what it sounds to me like you're suggesting is a subpoena for every hard drive on every RNC server on which ingoing or outgoing email is or has been stored so that some forensic computer guy can go over the not-yet-overwritten bits to see what can be extracted.

Sure, in theory you can do that. And if you're doing it for one alleged child pornographer's PC, it might even be feasible. But I suspect you're going to run into a heck of a lot of practical and political obstacles in trying to get this stuff out.

Depending on the email software involved, you can probably get by, or at least get a large portion of the way they by just imaging the individual users hard drive.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
that doesn't say these should have been protected. it says some people have said they should have been. That was the source for your strong opinion?

the White House fired some AGs for political reasons, yeah, so what?

When the WH starts using the US Attorney's office to try to influence elections, and starts using an obscure provision of the Patriot Act to install US Attorneys without Senate confirmation, I think that warrants investigation.

And when the WH officials implementing this using their non-WH email addresses in what looks like an attempt to avoid potential disclosure, I think that warrants investigation as well. The president's office shouldn't be run like an insider trading ring.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
When the WH starts using the US Attorney's office to try to influence elections, and starts using an obscure provision of the Patriot Act to install US Attorneys without Senate confirmation, I think that warrants investigation.

And when the WH officials implementing this using their non-WH email addresses in what looks like an attempt to avoid potential disclosure, I think that warrants investigation as well. The president's office shouldn't be run like an insider trading ring.

god bless. but start with the end. okay, bush himself directed the firings for purely political reasons. What are you going to do about it?

as to the "looks like" part of your paranoia, did you even read the article you cite? People doing political work have non-government email because of the Hatch act. that sounds proper.

that you want to investigate lots of stuff doesn't mean the Act requires these emails be preserved.