Fitzgerald Hints White House Records Lost (I'll take DOJ for $800, Alex)

AP/Forbes ^ | 2-1-06 | Pete Yost

[STARWISE]

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald is raising the possibility that records sought in the CIA leak investigation could be missing because of an e-mail archiving problem at the White House.

The prosecutor in the criminal case against Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff said in a Jan. 23 letter that not all e-mail was archived in 2003, (((GET THIS: ***the year the Bush administration exposed the identity of undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame.***))))

(They aren't even faking journalistic integrity in leaving out the word "allegedly.")

Lawyers for defendant I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby this week accused prosecutors of withholding evidence the Libby camp says it needs to mount a defense.

"We are aware of no evidence pertinent to the charges against defendant Libby which has been destroyed," Fitzgerald wrote in a letter to the defense team.

But the prosecutor added: "In an abundance of caution, we advise you that we have learned that not all e-mail of the Office of Vice President and the Executive Office of the President for certain time periods in 2003 was preserved through the normal archiving process on the White House computer system." His letter was an exhibit attached to Libby's demand for more information from the prosecution.

Lea Anne McBride, a spokeswoman for Cheney, said the vice president's office is cooperating fully with the investigation, and referred questions to Fitzgerald's office.

(snip)

The Presidential Records Act, passed by Congress in 1978, made it clear that records generated in the conduct of official duties did not belong to the president or vice president, but were the property of the government.

(SNIP)

"Bottom line: Accidents happen and there could be a benign explanation, but this is highly irregular and invites suspicion," said Steve Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists government secrecy project.

[napscoordinator]

Well, this is not good; this is the same thing we raised holy hell about the Clinton White House doing.



I was thinking the same thing, but I guess because it is are side it is ok...sarc. I would not think the Republicans would pull a Clinton. Well wonders never cease.

[huck von finn]

"We are aware of no evidence pertinent to the charges against defendant Libby which has been destroyed," Fitzgerald wrote in a letter to the defense team.

[SkyPilot]

...which makes me wonder, why on earth did he convene a new grand jury in the first place?

Hell of a good question.

[SkyPilot]

Hi Howlin,

The fantastic news for Libby is that in this case, his lawyers said "Cough up this evidence Mr. Fitzgerald." And now it is the Special Prosecutor saying "Uhh, it is like, gone, and stuff."

Libby Lawyers Accuse Prosecutors of Withholding Evidence

[Perdogg]

The Headline should read "Yes, Fitzerald Has No Records"

[Perdogg]

"Yea, givem the chair!"

[Logical me]

"Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald is raising the possibility that records sought in the CIA leak investigation could be missing because of an email archiving problem at the White House."

Hey, Fitzzzzzzzz emails are no way safe. I have lost many. Computer glitches, Spams, etc. So what. Get off it? If they have been accidentally deleted, so what. If you rely on email you are heading for the loony bin.

[thoughtomator]

Having recently become intimately familiar with the innards of a government department's messaging system, it's fully plausible that the lack of archiving was due to total incompetence on the part of the e-mail administrators.

[lnbchip]

In the last 3 years - I have to say that I've lost a number of e-mails. I don't know the exact specifications of the WH e-mail system, but I do know that in the ordinary course of business. Papers get shuffled and accidentally shredded and e-mails accidentally get deleted. It just happens. As a CPA, I take great care in handling documents. But, I also have a shred box next to my desk. I don't keep duplicate copies of the same document - when I have 10 copies, I generally keep one and shred 9. Also, when e-mails come in I file them by client, etc. But, it's really easy to hit the delete button while trying to transfer and organize e-mails.

Can anybody shed light on how exactly the WH system works? I think we need to understand this to be able to place this story into perspective.

[Al Gator]

This is easy.

Fitz's case is dissolving right in his hands.

By pulling this little stunt, he knows the Ratz will clammer long and loud for something that isn't "lost" at all.

Trouble is, Rinos tend to believe every little accusation leveled at W. with no reservation.

BTW, this reporter, Pete, has convicted the White House of disclosing Palms non status.

What will he do when he finds out he lied?

[longshadow]

Can anybody shed light on how exactly the WH system works?

"Paging Laura Crabtree Callahan paging Laura Crabtree Callahan, please pick-up the WH courtesy phone...."

This feels like deja vu, all over again.....

[Fedora]

Thanks for the ping!

[KCRW]

"We are aware of no evidence pertinent to the charges against defendant Libby which has been destroyed," Fitzgerald wrote in a letter to the defense team.

Yes- I did read this part. Still not buying the standard Fitz's line. Why would Fitz's say anything, but this?

Fitz's case is getting weaker and weaker. It was convenient for Democrats to claim a computer glitch when it came to evidence against the Clinton's, they used it to their advantage- and America bought it. Once again- it is convenient to the Democrats to claim a computer glitch, the question is- will Americans buy it?

Not this American, I am not buying the "computer glitch" theory.

[piasa]

Don't know if you've fized the problem yet but it MAY be due to defualt settings on your scandisk feature. When your computer runs scandisk in its maintainance schedule to find errors, files with excessively long file names are flagged as errors. If you have "fix automatically" box or its equivalent checked, then the computer will "fix" the problem by moving the file and sometimes by truncating the file name. Problem is, it doesn't tell you where it moved the files but since the problem is long file names, the computer's going to move the file out of folders within folders to shorten the name, in other words, it's moving the files towards the "trunk" of the file heirarchy tree. The icon used to signify the files often changes, so as I recall, look for files with squiggly " ~ " after them and recover them by putting the correct suffix ".jpg, .txt, etc " on them.

To prevent unexpected file loos in this manner just uncheck that box. Just remember that files with long names will stop your scandisk feature in its tracks until you tell the computer what to do with the file [it will ask] or until you shorten the name, so a manual check of scandisk's operation is going to be in order on occasion.