[Howlin]

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

[STARWISE]

I don't believe the WH would've done anything subversive .. but I sure understand what you're saying.

[Just Lori]

Well did you see the ad or not? =)

[Lancey Howard]

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

It's certainly wise to avoid hypocrisy, but Fitz isn't exactly jumping up and down about anything. I am not at all sure that I believe him. Let's see what the White House says.

[Lancey Howard]

"A particular subset of records sought in a controversial prosecution have gone missing," Aftergood said. "I think what is needed is for the national archivist to ascertain what went wrong and how to ensure it won't happen again."

The story contradicts itself. On the one hand, it says that the Nation Archives" takes custody of records "after the President leaves office, but then the guy quoted above seems to be blaming the archivist.

By the way, did you notice who the author of this piece was?

[YaYa123]

My first reaction was to share your discomfort, but then I remembered this email story isn't new. Way back last summer and fall there were " Karl Rove/White House/lost email" stories all over the MSM. So it's not new, and to have it conveinently re-appear on a slow news day, smacks of politics to me.

But just to refresh memories, the following is a good read.


http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/digitaldiscovery/digdisc_library_6.html

[mewzilla]

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

But Fitzgerald is using the conditional. They may have been lost.

What I'd like to know is if he doesn't know for sure, why is he opening his yap?

[Mo1]

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

The difference here is that it's Libby's lawyers that are accusing the prosecutors

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

In Clinton's case it was the other way around ... it was the prosecutors that were accusing the Clinton's

[af_vet_rr]

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

Considering how much the technology has advanced since the Clinton days, and considering how much the WH, GAO, National Archives, Congress, USSC, etc. etc. etc. spend on archiving systems, I have a hard time believing that it's accidental. It was automated years ago, with lots of redundancy.

It's not just being archived because it's the law either, it also helps in case there are security breaches, to track down who, what, when, and where (something that definitely could have been used in the early days of Clintons first term).

It's 2006, not 1996, you can't simply go "oops, computer ate it", because there is a heckuva paper trail (or rather electronic trail) these days.

[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.

[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