Waxman Hearing on White House Emails

Available here.

We’re having a fight already. Waxman moved to enter the report of Steven McDevitt into the record. This is the guy who reported that all the emails were missing. Apparently, from 2002-2006, he was responsible for managing White House system.

Waxman says we’re going to vote to put McDevitt’s testimony into the record.

Waxman: If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. But that’s what WH did. Dismantled a functioning system and replaced it with something inadequate. Initiated its own study of missing emails in 2005, but now dismisses its own work as incompetent.

Davis: Committee is entitled to getting the emails. It’s the characterizations which we differ in opinion. 2002-2006 he was responsible for managing system. In his opinion 400 days of emails went missing. We learned that many of these were misfiled. McDevitt responded to interrogatories, he replied with 25 pages of answers. We spoke with McDevitt on Sunday afternoon. Reluctant to give testimony on the record. Our staff made it clear we want to examine him on the record. Personal investment in various technologies. We remain skeptical of the content of his interrogatories. White House says technical flaws in the 2005 search. 473 day gap reduced to 202. WH restoration effort continues and should continue.

Waxman: Jan 30, McDevitt, scheduled interview, WH contacted him, told him not to discuss with the committee. McDevitt emailed, based on WH, there’s practically nothing I’m authorized to discuss. Given limitations placed by WH Counsel, he said it didn’t make sense to come in for interview. Majority and Minority sent him questions. He responded in writing. WH had chance to review those answers, cleared them without redactions. AFTER they got the answers, minority wanted to speak with him in person. Majority went to some length to accommodate them. Sunday night, Minority and Majority called to see whether he would come in for deposition. Answered 1.5 hours of questions from Minority. Minority now says it’s unfair to use any information bc they didn’t get oppty to question him. If Minority has a beef with anyone, it should be WH Counsel’s office.

Davis: We believe he doesn’t want to testify. We can reach accommodation.

Waxman: Others agreed to come, McDevitt refused to come in, but that’s because WH Counsel told him he couldn’t say anything. This is not just what McDevitt said, but also archives.

Davis: We join with you in goal of getting emails.

Waxman: I don’t know what characterizations you object to, I’m trying not to make any characterizations unlike what happened in the 1990s.

Sworn in.

Weinstein, Archivist: No authority over how incumbent manages records keeping. Describes learning from the Fitzgerald letter, later alert from WH reporting on McDevitt’s email. May 6, 2007 sent letter to Office of Administration requesting report on unauthorized destruction of records. To this day I have not received a written response to this letter. WH has responded regularly, but inconclusively, that its investigation is ongoing. We have insisted that WH must reconstruct those emails, presumably from backup tapes. Clinton Office of Administration took full responsibility for restoring their emails. NA advised Bush that it replace ARMS with new record keeping. Bush expressed interest. Proposed electronic communications system. NA staff reviewed the deliverables. In Fall 2006, NA learned Administration would not implement new system. Fall 2006, NA was not informed of missing emails at this time.

Swendiman, Director, Office of Administration: Started Nov 27, 2006. Presidential transition planning. Missing emails pre-dated my service as Director.

[Note they’ve replaced everyone in authority since McDevitt’s report.]

Theresa Payton, CIO, OA: Mid-May 2006 started. 3000 customers in 12 components of EOP. Late 2006 until today, explanation on leadership determination of people that I work for and those that work for me. 3 tracks, Late 2006 until today. 1) People, 2) technology, 3) longer view. Mircrosoft journals to PSTs, people reviewing them, give a weekly report if there are any "glitches." Transparency if there is a glitch. Gives us historical information if somebody’s looking back they have a place they can go look. Learning tool for team, 6 Sigma, reduce defects, reduce future defects. Technology improvements on existing technology. Email goes into MS journal, automatically moved into PST with program put into place in 2005, re-baselining entire inventory of records. Different "technology glitches" in tools that have been wonderful workhorses for EOP, we felt it in best interest to upgrade and update some of those tools. Early phase, we have 3 phases we’re implementing. Just started to get early results, have not had quality check on them. Have identified more emails for that time period, more emails than identified in 2005, have been able to locate emails within exchange. There are still some days that still show as red. In phase 2, our desire to eliminate all or most red and low volume days by reading information at more granular level. When we finish phase 3, that’s when we’ll have a conversation around restore, with disaster recovery tapes. Everyone on the team wants a successful NARA transition.

Waxman: Weinstein. This hearing’s about compliance with PRA. Requires President to ensure that his activities and policies are adequately documented. Records belong to American people, not Republican party. How important is PRA.

Weinstein: Incredibly important.

Waxman: Preserves records for history and for next adminsitration. Over the last year serious questions raised about compliance. Two violates of act. 1) Use of RNC emails. 2) failure to archive emails sent through official system. RNC email accounts. Used for official purposes, RNC preserved almost none of these from first term, and only some from second term. Archive was concerned about RNC missing emails as well.

Weinstein: I wish I had all the facts. The fact is, our understanding, WH has been working with RNC to restore the emails that have been reported.

Waxman: How concerned are you?

Weinstein: I’m concerned with any missing records.

Waxman: Rove, extensive user of RNC account. 95% through RNC. Ralston confirmed Rove used it extensively. Asked RNC what records they had, no emails before November 2003. None for 2001, 2002, 2003, defining years for Bush Administration. Are you concerned about missing Rove emails.

Weinstein: I’m concerned no matter what the system. I should add that in listening to Payton’s testimony, we’re still awaiting the completion of this process. My counsel;

Stern: As we’ve discussed with WH, President REcords, still responsibility of to WH to preserve them. WH creates non-WH records. It would be appropriate to use RNC email.

Waxman: Rove used primarily RNC. Status of restoration.

Weinstein: We haven’t gotten that information. Process nearly complete.

Stern: We heard today that RNC has not been doing that.

Waxman: You were relying on WH telling you they’d get all the records from RNC. We talked to RNC yesterday, they told us WH has taken NO steps to obtain backup tapes. Payton, Swindeman, when we checked, we learned WH never obtained backup tapes. Why isn’t WH following through?

Payton: Responsibility for EOP network. Not qualified to talk about RNC restore.

Waxman: maybe Swindeman is part of the process.

Swindeman: We’re responsible for official and sensitive record.

Waxman: aren’t you responsible to gather this information?

Swindeman: I’m advised that Counsel’s office has taken steps. Letters have gone out to former WH employees. I’ve been advised about that step.

Waxman: RNC are the core types that PRA supposed to preserve. WH may not want these emails disclosed. WH may not want these records of how WH led nation to war disclosed. Important that we get those RNC emails. I assume Weinstein that you agree. RNC has box of backup tapes. Are those being searched.

Swindeman: I don’t know. Among steps, I’ve mentioned letter. Second is contractual efforts wrt forensic and recovery.

Waxman: This is what this hearing is all about. We were told WH has not even asked for them. They’ve assured you, Weinstein, that they’re going to take care of it.

Weinstein: You’ll have my best information by end of week.

Waxman: Stern letter to Weinstein. Almost zero progress in moving ahead. Most significantly, our repeated request on PRA records that will be transferred has gone unheeded. We know nothing about status of missing emails. Weinstein: your reaction that WH had provided no information about large loss of records. Do you have info you need?

Weinstein: Not happy about that. Moving forward. We have sensitized group, but not answers.

Waxman: Congress doesn’t have info we need. We don’t know if they’re going to recover missing RNC emails. And we seem to get a different story about whether WH emails are complete. Without that this Administration not complying.

Davis: These people are not responsible for RNC emails. The other thing that troubles me, when you have a committee, we shouldn’t have this come out of their coffers. We might look at an appropriation. Ms Payton: we have backup tapes for all the emails.

Payton: Disaster recovery tapes. From a disaster recovery standpoint.

Davis: It covers everything that happened. Are there backups for all the missing emails?

Payton: we believe we should have backups.

Davis: It’s recoverable.

Payton: We believe we can use disaster recovery if we need to.

Davis: It is expensive, is it not.

Payton: Team put together algorithm, rough approximation, 1 component, 1 day, around $50,000.

Davis: Ballpark number?

Payton: There’s also servers that would have to be purchased. $500,000 for servers. If we restored every day, somewhere in ballpark of 15 million or more. It should be recoverable. Caveat, don’t know if there will be a flaw in a tape.

[Rosemary Woods might have something to say about flaws.]

Issa: Ask that back and forth comm with WH and McDevitt be included in record.

[All of a sudden Issa wants this in record]

Davis: Political operation in WH. To be able to use govt systems not consistent with Hatch Act.

Swindeman: Yes.

Davis: Going forward, outline guidelines for how you keep those records. The fact that you had different servers and computers is compliant.

Swindeman: You shouldn’t be doing your official work on that computer.

Weinstein: Restoring Clinton emails cost $12 million.

Issa: Call with McDevitt, question about McDevitt working with CREW, were the interrogatories result of working back and forth with employees. McDevitt, employee of FEMA, chose to use his gmail account to correspond as to whether he could give testimony.

Swindeman: Mere use of private account for govt business, is not a problem.

Issa; Are you keeping all the YouTube stuff from the President? That’s part of total internet.

Weinstein: What specifically are you referring to?

Issa: If Chariman things he should have Rove’s correspondance with a wife or an old girlfriend.

Weinstein: Congressman I think you know the answer to that question.

Issa; It’s very clear that it’s Rove’s non-official correspondence which I suspect Rove did that at the RNC. If Karl ROve chose to decide that talking about fundraising or talking about strategizing, how to maintain a majority in the Senate. Would that be appropriate for you to gather.

Weinstein: PRA pretty clearly defines what is an official act. The issue was there official business on that system.

Issa: is there any evidence that there was official business there? DO any of you know if any official business was done at the RNC? This committee doesn’t.

Weinstein: It’s hard to know anything.

Issa; I need to be as simplistic as possible. There might be some on YouTube. President might have had deliberative conversation at fundraiser. You have no mandate to go peeping tom. It’s important, Ms. Payton has important info for us. Reimaging servers. You captured images. If you’re lucky you get 30 days of emails. I appreciate that sometimes those images aren’t perfect, you may have to restore a server. Legitimate reason is not the RNC. If all we call about is Weinstein’s ability to get legitimate archives, you’re going to be able to provide that all or virtually all. Do any of you know of something that was wrongly used outside of official channels by Karl Rove. Chariman, a little like Dan Burton, who I disagreed with in the 90s. Do you know of misconduct by Karl Rove? Yes or no?

Weinstein: I would say the question is above and below my pay grade.

Issa: I will take that as a No.

Waxman: WH has responsibility of getting emails that relate to govt work. If we know that of the 51 of 88 officials that have official RNC email accounts, only 14 had emails retained at all. Karl used 99% of his time on RNC emails, one would assume he was doing govt work.

Issa: Do you presume we have the right to look into private people’s lives?

Waxman: Absolutely not.

Issa: I agree, I would hope that we would ask the WH. Are there any records covered under official acts?

Swindeman: Much of what you’re talking about precede my time.

Davis: A report on possible PRA violations. I’m not sure we have to speculate. We have the information that has been written in a report.

[Oops missed some]

Davis: Archiving system "hardly qualifies as a system." Do you agree that this journaling system was not an archiving system.

Weinstein: Great distillation of system.

Stern: the journaling system was supposed to be a stopgap. It’s our view that the journaling function is not the ideal function.

Davis: And it’s been used for 6 years. Weinstein: do you have concerns this has been used for 6 years.

Weinstein: I’d like to hear what Swindeman and his colleagues have come up with.

Davis: Payton: Any concerns about that?

Payton: Is it an ideal solution?

Davis: WH has used it knowing it has not yielded what it needs.

Payton: It’s not that easy to say. Best efforts have been made to do a more comprehensive solution. Once the programs were run through their requirements. It appears that each time the products were run through the paces, they were left wanting.

Mica: The CLENIS did it too. Did McDevitt say such mean things about the WH because he didn’t agree with the technology?

Mica: Sandy Berger did it too.

Mica: Let’s put Sandy Berger’s emails in the record, too.

Waxman: No.

Watson: Ms. Payton. To comply with PRA an email has to ensure that it captures all pertinent email, but must prevent people from deleting emails. 2005 WH warned that system at risk of data loss, but also vulnerable to tampering. No way to guarantee that all emails retained in unmodified state. No mechanism or audit trail that tracks changes to data files. Not to say someone tampered with email, but no way to say that it didn’t happen.

Watson: Weinstein: Are you concerned about this?

Weinstein: I’d like to read about it.

Watson: Critical security issue not fixed until 2005, File servers and directories, accessible by everyone on EOP network. Anyone could delete or modify files.

Payton: Since that precedes me I’m going to go on conversations with staff. That has not been brought up.

Watson: This has not been brought up that these files could be deleted or tampered with.

Payton: That there was system-wide access for all 3000 employees. I have not been made aware that at some time these servers were open to anybody.

Duncan: You have no knowledge of this?

Payton: I have no knowledge. There is only one exception allowed, only if information from classified network is found on unclassified network. Swindeman or Payton. How many times have you briefed Oversight?

Duncan: Care to tell the committee how much time you have spent.

Swindeman: 1500 hours. Approx 15,000 pages of documents. Approx another 15,000 pages.

Payton: I’ve provided 4 briefings to committee staff.

Tierny: Some emails missing from VP office. Chronology: Your office produced chart showing 473 days with no emails. When inventory done in 2005, nobody could locate emails in PST files. WH still hasn’t located emails in PST servers. WH went to backup tapes, these were provided to special counsel. What happened to files that were supposed to be on WH servers.

Payton; Not one with analysis. Lots of emails not attributed to component.

Tierny: So far, long period of time you havent’ found them.

Payton: Backup file.

Tierny: we got doct showign that when WH restored, no journal files, not PST files, not only missing from servers, missing frmo backup tapes as well.

Payton: this predates me.

Tierny does this mean no journals for 50 files.

Payton: I don’t know the details.

Tierny:: Just having indiv emails, if someone deletes the day it was sent, it’s gone. A lot of unanswered questions.

Payton: We still have PST files we have not been able to associate with component. They contain 17 million emails.

Bilbray: CREW. Evil scary liberal organization. Can we get into the CLENIS files?

Weinstein/Stern: Special Access request for former President. We would respond to that.

Weinstein: Chair would have to request that.

Bilbray: Why Admin said they were going to pull mandate, now the concern is what kind of contacts the Republican Admin has made.

Mica: all the missing emails occurred before your tenure. This Steven McDevitt, did he leave on good terms or in a dispute.

Payton: initially reported directly to me, reported to D Director after that.

[Interrupts]

Payton: very passionate about ECRAMS pilot,

Mica: Disagreement about how records would be preserved.

Payton: We did not make decision until after he left.

[Changes tack]

Mica: WH had to live under all the laws the rest of us did. Do we need to change the laws?

Waxman: Time has expired.

Swindeman: Defer to someone with legal background.

Payton: The fact that more comm now happens on email, it’s also casual form of comm, as well as official. Do have some work to do on user side and tech side, to understand new protocols.

Weinstein: Too old to respond to that question.

Yarmuth: Based on conversation before I ever dreamed of getting into politics while I was a journalist. Reminded of it when the disappearing emails arose. Woman told me that she had a blood relative. Every six weeks his company took computers to remote location, and cleaned or scrubbed hard drives in computers. Swindeman and Payton: Any activity or procedure that resembles activity I’ve described.

Payton: Can’t comment on that time period. Currently take files store on drive, if we want to use equipment we wipe the drive. That’s a practice we’re using.

Yarmuth: Any contract with non-governmental entity involves using WH computers.

Payton: 60 Contractors on staff, messaging and tech support.

Yarmuth: Deleting information that might be classified. Tight process. How can we be confident of what that process is. Are we relying on WH?

Payton: Oops, can’t talk about classified in this setting.

Yarmuth: ECRAMS program. Made decision after McDEvitt a three-year process in which a lot of people made decision this was desirable to implement. You’ve given reasons in your testimony. In a meeting with Stern’s staff, you gave different reasons. Stern: Did you the the reasons were legitimate and compelling.

Stern: WH responsibility to make records management decision. Disappointed that they didn’t use ECRAM. Hope they still will get one in place.

Welch: Recovery. Stern, PRA requires that official business be available and stored in NA. Whether official action is done on WH email or RNC account or Gmail, if official, it belongs in archive.

Stern: Yes.

Welch: 88 WH officials used RNC to do some official business.

Stern: not familiar with details. Some belief even by WH that there could be official business on RNC.

Welch: You’ve made official inquiries, in May 07.

Stern: They said they were attempting to do that. We thought they were still continuing in that effort.

Welch: Since you’ve made the request, any concrete step WH has made? Do they have a legal duty?

Stern: No, have to provide at end of Admin.

Welch: Payton: Any official request?

Payton: Separate tech team.

Welch: Not your job, so you don’t know.

Payton: That is correct.

Welch: Nobody can explain to Mr. Stern why they haven’t done what they told Stern they would do.

Swindeman: Well, hold on.

Welch: Two backup boxes, any effort to make those tapes available to NA?

Stern: they’d make someone through WH.

Welch: Any steps with those two boxes? Payton, Swindeman?

Swindeman: I can’t speak to those two boxes.

Welch: No dispute, any emails in those boxes, no question that official business is under PRA.

Swindeman: Can you repeat the question? Any official business.

Welch: What, Mr Stern, can you do to make sure NA has the records it needs? You’ve asked and got no replay [to Stern], you don’t know, someone else does, but they’re not here [to Swindeman].

Clay: Any concern about abandoning archive system and proceeding with journaling. McDevitt expressed risk on numerous occasions. Process by which email would be lost. Potential impact that it might not include data.

Payton: Challenge about his statement, it does predate me, in talking with staff on go-forward, we have improved people process. Process process process. 6 sigman, MBA automaton.

Clay: What did WH do when it learned its system was inadequate.  In previous testimony, you’ve talked about how much this will cost. It’s a cavalier attitude, where does the care come in for taxpayer analysis.

Payton: we want a targeted list for restore.

Clay: Yet no one heeded their own warning. What was that about? Maybe we need to listen to archive, or to our own staff.

Payton: I wasn’t there.

Clay: Weinstein: WH process primitive and high risk of data loss.

Weinstein: If that is what my staff decided after looking at my process.  On this issue, who cares about taxpayer, crucially important for NA and LOC, to be very sensitive that we can lose support of taxpayers very quickly. Welch raised one question with Stern. One slight question: I signed that letter, if Congressman has interest in RNC. We have not asked that question lately. We have to be a bit stronger in our request to RNC.

Clay: It seems like everyone was warned about data loss. They continued with migration. They continued with ad hoc process from 2002 until today.

Norton: On January 2008, you filed declaration regarding loss of emails, criticized chart produced in 2005. Committee showed that your office created 15 person "message storage" team, documented in painstaking detail, reported to Director of OA and WH Counsel. Why didn’t you mention this team in your sworn declaration.

Payton: Prior to my arrival.

Norton: Were you unaware of this team?

Payton: Based on what the team has told me, a group of people …  All I knew is that they put data together, they did not work on the chart.

Norton: Later you sa OCIO has been able unable to replicate the chart.  We got a quite different account. This is what he said. Extensive testing was performed to ensure tools and tabulation was performed.

Payton: I am not aware of that testing. I am aware that Steve has made those statements. They said, as far as they could tell it has not gone through an extensive ID&D process.

Norton: Stated there was a lack of supporting documentation. McDeviit told us the chart was a summary, complete analysis was 250 pages. Why didn’t you mention 250 page supporting document.

Payton: Document had not been made aware to me. Must not have been on the radar of the team.

Norton: You seem to know nothing about it. You said you had serious reservations about reliability of chart. Easiest ways would be to talk to chart. The archives recommended to you on November 6, 2007, it would be useful to contact original author to ask questions about the nature and meaning. You never contacted him once. Even though he worked directly for you in 2006 while you were there.

[wow Norton’s snark-meter is off the charts] 

Payton: At that point in time, we had already found flaws with the tool, talking with Steve at that point, he was probably not aware that those flaws existed.

Norton: In 2006.

Payton: He reported to me directly and then he reported to DDir.

Norton: I think the credibility problems are patent here. The archives told you that someone talking to you could tell you.  Why didn’t you ask him any of the questions I just asked you.

Sarbanes: I gotta believe that people watching would find it completely implausible that this number of emails would disappear by accident. Are you familiar, I know you weren’t there, Have you become familiar with ARMs system.

Payton: Exists today, still houses Notes records. Had to be totally customized.

Sarbanes: did you ever find yourself saying I wish they hadn’t abandoned things. 

Payton: It would be nice, I try not to second-guess people I move in behind.

Sarbanes: If I were someone who wanted to delete records, the system the WH moved to would be an easier system to accomplish that.

Payton: A little more complicated. When an email comes in through Exchange. Automatically copied to a journal.

Sarbanes: If 10 is where you want to be, where would you say we are on transition.

Weinstein: We will be a ten, we will be a ten and a half. We’re somewhere in between.

Sarbanes: Disaster recovery tapes. Who has possession of those

[missed some] 

Davis:  Sandy Berger. Sandy Berger. Payton: did you respond to all requests.

Payton: From tech, 3 phases, in the midst of first phase now. Read through personal storage on archive. From inventory can reconstruct from PST. If you took mail servers out of operation on weekend, you don’t receive mail until Sunday. Old and new tool can only track receive date, network operations logs. When finish phase 1, share it with NARA to make sure comfortable with QA. We have identified 10 million emails that weren’t identified in 2005. Not sure team knew that those tools had those limitations. Work through entire inventory. We’re daying from Day 1 to transition.

Davis: If you can put it into writing, I want to get it in the record.

Waxman: After you’re finished you phases, you’ll be out of office. You decided to abort the archiving system in 2006. To date, WH still hasn’t installed a new system. 2002-2008 WH hasn’t had adequate functioning system. You’ve got 3 phases to correct the problem. Motion to include the interrogatories in the record. 

Davis: I want to note that your witness that you’re relying so much of your report. We did not have a chance to cross-examine.

Issa; You’re going to put this in the record, you’re going to put this in the record. We can’t even ask the witness whether those were his statements or not.  If gentleman were not a full-time govt employee, I really believe we’re doing an injustice to long-term health of this committee.

Waxman: When McDevitt refused, we had a bipartisan discussion, we could have subpoenaed him. He was sent interrogatories. WH reviewed them. When staff saw the answers, we didn’t get a chance, on and on and one. We operated in good faith. We ought to include them, the reason McDevitt didn’t want to come in is bc of WH.

Issa; we believe it was not bipartisan. We believe this was not with support of both.

Waxman I’ll talk to both staffs. We had Republicans asking him any question on Sunday night. You’re saying to me that your staff does not feel that’s accurate. I’m not going to apologize bc I don’t feel we have. I want these things not to be partisan.

Davis: We have some EPA witnesses we hope you’ll give same accounting to. 

Cummings:  

image_print
153 replies
  1. bmaz says:

    Your Goopers in action. Won’t even fucking let the basis of the hearing into evidence without a hissy fit fight. Jeebus.

    Hey MarieRoget, nice to see you.

  2. MarieRoget says:

    Nice to see you too, bmaz. Always reading here @ ew, don’t always comment.

    You know, if I was bulimic, I could listen to Davis all day instead of using syrup of ipecac.

  3. bmaz says:

    Okay, I am a little dense. Exactly what is the basis for WH/Fielding order to McDevitt to not appear and testify?? That is not a proper subject for EP. Unless there was discussion about criminal acts, in which case it’s NOT A PROPER SUBJECT FOR EP! If the shoe was on the other foot, the Repukes would have slapped an impeachment case on so long ago that we wouldn’t remember it any more; our jackasses still have it “off the table”.

  4. freepatriot says:

    so what’s george’s plan for January 21, 2009 ???

    the Whitehouse is gonna have a sudden reversal of opinion on hiding the bushbot crime spree

    if bush destroys the evidence, well … obstruction of justice is a pretty vicious law

    if bush pardons these clowns, they lose 5th amendment protection (and that would kinda give us a blueprint of what else to look for)

    in a day and age when 4000 soldiers have given THE LAST FULL MEASURE OF DEVOTION, does ANYBODY think America is going to just sit back and watch this criminal cabal refuse to answer some questions ???

    bush ain’t gonna be presnit anymore

    how is he going to try to keep this shit secret ???

    we better start planing to torpedo his bullshit now

  5. Hugh says:

    There is some weird woman on talking about what a nifty transparent system the White House has since 2005. But all those missing millions of emails before? Except for the massive problem, there doesn’t seem to be any problem.

  6. MarieRoget says:

    I know it’s the FedGov, but some/most/all of us who would have run businesses or offices the way this system was run & are still unable to get a handle on correcting its problems would be out of business real soon or out on our asses or both.

    Henry’s bulldogging them on this. Don’t let it go, Hank.

  7. MarieRoget says:

    Davis (aka Mr. Par-Boiled): Can’t we kick this into the future? Nothing really missing here, is there? You got tapes, so let’s get that info waaaay later since it’s hard to do & so expensive.

    Looks like it’s Dodge Day in HJC Repub Dodge City.

  8. MadDog says:

    I know it’s the FedGov, but some/most/all of us who would have run businesses or offices the way this system was run & are still unable to get a handle on correcting its problems would be out of business real soon or out on our asses or both.

    If one assumed that the intent was to conform to the PRA and to solve the missing email problems, I’d be with you 100%.

    But the reality is that this Administration has deliberately chosen to hide their criminal activities any way they can, and a central part in that is:

    1. Their deliberate decision to use non-WH accounts like the RNC email accounts for many of their underhanded and criminal activities.
    2. Their deliberate decision to NOT archive their email by shutting down their ARMS system.
    3. Their deliberate decision to drag their feet wrt to recovery of the missing emails hoping to run out the clock.
    4. And their deliberate decision to any refuse to testify about these topics under false cover of Executive Privilege or any other legal obstructionism they can cook up.

    Other than that, their IT shop is simply mahvelous!

    • MarieRoget says:

      Absolutely agree, it’s all a dodge.

      OK, I’ll just have to turn the sound down on Issa- he used to be my Rep. when I lived in Oceanside & I hate his guts. My daughter nicknamed him Darryl the Furious Hairball from his overheated appearances on the local news.

      She was 15, but it’s still apropos.

      • MarkC says:

        Issa should be the DORC poster boy — “Please, won’t you donate today before another Deliberately Obtuse Republican Congressman is elected and condemned to a lifetime of scorn and ridicule?”

  9. Hugh says:

    The Republicans are throwing up a whole army of strawmen. Question: If Karl Rove was doing something completely appropriate, would you consider that inappropriate? And since we don’t know what Karl Rove was doing, why should we go “peeping Tom” looking into what he was doing? There should be a ring in Hell for these guys where the devils repeat back to them the arguments they used all their lives to justify wrongdoing.

  10. freepatriot says:

    I’m gonna go Off Topic, in the prediction market

    I know things

    the debate about torture is gonna BLOW UP in mccain’s face

    does anybody here know that mccain was tortured while in captivity in North Vietnam

    john mccain signed a confession (don’t know what it said exactly, YET) while suffering under torture

    the confession was FALSE

    now, john mccain wants us to torture people, and make them sign false confessions

    I can’t wait to see john mccain explain how torturing people into signing false confessions helps keep Americans safe

    and when that discussion begins, abu zybada is waiting in the wings

    george bush tortured an alqueda suspect, and the FBI chased their asses around the country following his FALSE LEADS

    how does sending the FBI on wild goose chases help secure America

    johnny boy, you got some SPLAININ to do

    anyway, when it happens, remember, you heard it here first …

  11. bmaz says:

    Weinstein: I wish I had all the facts. The fact is, our understanding, WH has been working with RNC to restore the emails that have been reported.

    Heh, Isn’t this the problem in a nutshell?

    Mad Dog – Are you a Mac user? If so what do you think about the new laptops that just came out today? I just bought a MacBook Air last week, but if I had known about these, I might have bought the MacBook Pro. Am thinking about going back and switching (I have this dickhead lawyer persona that is very effective when necessary). Any thoughts??

    • MadDog says:

      Mad Dog – Are you a Mac user? If so what do you think about the new laptops that just came out today? I just bought a MacBook Air last week, but if I had known about these, I might have bought the MacBook Pro. Am thinking about going back and switching (I have this dickhead lawyer persona that is very effective when necessary). Any thoughts??

      Heck no, I ain’t no heretic!

      Steve Jobs is Satan and Bill Gates can do no wrong…LOL!

      The company line where I be slaving away is adamantly or even vehemently Microsoft (with a bunch of Sun stuff for the Engineers just to make us MS serfs really, really paranoid *g*).

      That said, I think TRex drooled over the MacBook Air until he found out a bunch of tradeoffs that Apple made in order to achieve the ultimate thin-ness.

      Based on the specs at Apple’s site, my druthers would have been the MacBook Pro too, but since Apple does not exist in my perfect MS world (ha ha ha), I am unable to formulate an opinion.

    • merkwurdiglieber says:

      Go for it. The Pro I have has a 120 gig hard drive, the new one has a
      200 gig… leaves more headroom to load windows, if you want it for the
      many legal softwares that are not available in mac. That alone makes a
      smooth operating machine even better.

  12. Ann in AZ says:

    I’m way beyond the point of accepting any excuses from anyone in government anymore. The Constitution provides a way to insure checks and balances and nobody has the guts to use the proper resources. When the government lawyers tell people to ignore congressional subpoenas, you use the power of the purse! You cut off the WH funding; no money to pay lawyers, no money to pay the VP or anyone in his office, no money for Prez or his aides, no money for DOJ, NO MONEY AT ALL! NO EXCUSES! I don’t know how much clearer our forefathers could have made it? This involves the balance of power within our own government! Nothing is more important, unless of course they want to become a dictatorship with a tyrant in charge instead of a President. If this does not get done, we set precedents that will be once again exercised whenever a Rethug is next elected, because they already know Dems are stymied by it. They must do what they must do. Period.

    • QuakerGirl says:

      I’ll sign on with you. My sentiments, exactly. I am sooo tired of hearings that evaporate into thin air as the next outrage comes along. Use the damn checks and balances. I’m really tired of Waxman’s righteous outrage that is like the bridge that goes from nowhere to nowhere.

      • MadDog says:

        Nancy, Steny and Rahm don’t want to rock the boat ’cause…’cause…’cause…Why?

        When doG was givin’ out Brains, these nimwits thought he said Trains, and replied: “No thanks! We’ll walk.”

  13. MadDog says:

    Payton: Team put together algorithm, rough approximation, 1 component, 1 day, around $50,000.

    Davis: Ballpark number?

    Payton: There’s also servers that would have to be purchased. $500,000 for servers. If we restored every day, somewhere in ballpark of 15 million or more. It should be recoverable. Caveat, don’t know if there will be a flaw in a tape.

    Payton is obviously a loyal Bushy flunky hired for her “presentation skills” (i.e. can bullshit ad nauseum) and not for her technology leadership (of which she is totally out of her depth).

    As a Chief Idiot Officer (CIO), I bet she gives great shmooze.

  14. PJEvans says:

    Fifteen million is too expensive for them?
    That’s what, about a day in Iraq?
    The department I work in has an annual budget that’s probably not much under that (eighty people, lots of hardware, lots of specialized software).
    Darth could probably pay for it from his Halliburton accoounts. Or Mrs Straight Talk Express could donate the funds.

    Go, Henry!

    • freepatriot says:

      Fifteen million is too expensive for them?
      That’s what, about a day in Iraq?

      let’s see

      250 billion a year is about 10 billion per month

      that works out to about 1/3 of a billion per day

      that works out to about 1.5 billion per hour

      $15 million, about one one-hundredth of an hour

      $15 million = less than a munite in Iraq

      unless you wanna get REAL PRECISE about it ???

      (mental masturbation, don’t ya love it)

      • freepatriot says:

        bmaz can get you a better deal:

        Try 2 hours in Iraq (and that is conservative). Iraq is 180-200 million per day

        must be cuz they got lower overhead costs in Arizona …

  15. Rayne says:

    Oh jeebus, nice change of topic there, Sandy Berger’s socks.

    Maybe there are millions of missing emails in Sandy’s socks along with the few papers he stuffed in there.

  16. wavpeac says:

    If only 15 mill came close to paying for a day in Iraq!!!!

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/p…..lock_x.htm

    Organizers calculated the war’s cost as of Wednesday at $134.5 billion and are adding $177 million per day, which comes to $7.4 million per hour or $122,820 per minute

  17. Rayne says:

    “system-wide access by 3000 users” — WHAT THE F*CK?????

    “I had not been aware that these servers had been open to just anyone”

    She would be FIRED by most organizations for such a gross failure of this nature.

      • Rayne says:

        Sure sounded like she didn’t know what was going on during her own watch, too, though.

        Convenient.

        And security should have been the very first concern she had when she came on board, particularly post-9/11.

        Still hasn’t finished their analysis, she says, as to where the files are. That is such complete f*cking bullshit. No corporation would put up with this crap.

  18. Rayne says:

    “I have not had an employee come to me saying that this needs to be researched” she says.

    Why did she not ASK them herself, instead of waiting for them to volunteer?
    Why is it not a standard policy to know this across the entire OA operation?

  19. JohnJ says:

    Why doesn’t everyone in the room bust out laughing when someone from this crime family administration talks about fiscal responsibility?

  20. pseudonymousinnc says:

    Rep Watson is entirely on the mark here: an archiving method that’s based upon PSTs seems, just on a gut level, vulnerable to after-the-fact tweaking. It’s not archiving. It’s just shared storage.

    There are obvious issues here. On the one hand, the EOP wants a degree of technological flexibility to run its comms. On the other hand, it’s entirely possible to create having an archiving method that satisfies the requirements of the PRA, but which works invisibly, beneath the day-to-day comms.

    • MadDog says:

      Somebody needs to pull the damned LOG files. They’re probably on the backup files.

      Yeah! Where are the Audit trails? You know, the ones which show which WH slime critters were deleting emails.

      As far as I can tell, the White House Office of Administration seems to be State-of-the-art Stone-age wrt to IT policies and procedures.

    • bmaz says:

      Okay, but isn’t it time to dust off the mothballs on that DC office and get to work? There is a GJ born every minute; or at least there could be….

  21. pseudonymousinnc says:

    Just to reiterate: PST files are messy, proprietary agglomerations of email and calendar data. As a basic rule, small discrete files are easier to archive than large agglomerated ones. With PSTs, there’s not only a risk of corruption but also file format obsolescence and other forms of bitrot. Thus:

    Many people tend to use PST files as a large scale data storage solution. However, PST files were never actually intended for this purpose. It’s been my experience over the years that PST files are often used as a primary storage mechanism because of the unreliability of earlier versions of Exchange Server. For example several years ago, Fort Knox had an incident in which one of their Exchange 5.0 servers failed. It was soon determined that both the public and private information stores were corrupt. The obvious natural step was to restore the information stores from backup. Unfortunately, none of the backups were valid. The harsh reality was that for at least a month, Fort Knox had been backing up corrupt data. Because the corruption wasn’t initially severe enough to cause a fatal crash, there had been no way of knowing that the information stores were corrupt. In the end, all of the data on the server was permanently lost.

  22. Hugh says:

    Why did she not ASK them herself, instead of waiting for them to volunteer?
    Why is it not a standard policy to know this across the entire OA operation?

    I think you are being unfair here. It is pretty clear she was hired not to know these things.

    • Rayne says:

      Then she was hired for a role that doesn’t match her title.

      If she’s the Chief Propaganda Officer for the OA IT organization, great — but her pay should be commensurate. Propaganda supply outpaces demand, shouldn’t be paid much.

      • Hugh says:

        If she’s the Chief Propaganda Officer for the OA IT organization, great — but her pay should be commensurate. Propaganda supply outpaces demand, shouldn’t be paid much.

        Bushies aren’t paid for doing their jobs. They are paid for not doing their jobs.

  23. QuakerGirl says:

    Issa has serious brain damage from drinking the navy contaminated drinking water in his neck of the desert woods.

    • freepatriot says:

      I assume Regent U. sells IT degrees too?

      it comes with the “Small Engines repair” degree for just $2500

      *you might actually be required to repair a small engine some day …

      • Rayne says:

        actually, I think they bundle this stuff under their “Interdisciplinary Studies” program.

        Or maybe their “Cinema-Television” degree program. Gotta’ look good before Congress on video, you know?

  24. Rayne says:

    Oh, I think this one’s paid for doing her job. Just a mismatch on titles.

    Who is this mush-mouthed POS that can’t speak up or pull the mic closer to him? The video freezes, can’t catch his name.

    I want to bitch-slap his sorry ass into next week for his insolence.

    • bmaz says:

      Please, bitch slap away. If there are any problems I’ll defend you.

      pinc – “The Archivist is a bit of a sad sack, isn’t he?” What? You thought an archivist was going to be Clooney or Pitt or something?

      • pseudonymousinnc says:

        pinc – “The Archivist is a bit of a sad sack, isn’t he?” What? You thought an archivist was going to be Clooney or Pitt or something?

        Archivists don’t have to be sexy, but they can make the job of being an archivist look sexy. I’ve been to conferences where people discuss the issues of archiving in a digital context, and the people who care about these things are smart and insightful and understand the needs of the next century.

        (Brewster Kahle needs to be on the next prez’s archiving panel in an advisory role.)

        Weinstein looks like he expected his job would be to give talks on the type of paper used by Jefferson to write memos.

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      Might I simply note, once again, how much I enjoy the commentary on this thread?

      Aren’t banks, insurance companies, health care corporations, and universities all just completely okayyyyy with the idea that ANY user on their networks can overwrite ANY email sent at ANY time?

      Why would that be a problem?

      – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
      But one question — re: @ 63, 64 — doesn’t this now obligate Fitz to subpeona WH OA if he suspects they might be able to recover even a single one of these emails…? Isn’t he obligated to do that if he suspects they can deliver info?

  25. pseudonymousinnc says:

    The Archivist is a bit of a sad sack, isn’t he?

    Didn’t he come in without consultation to replace the previous guy, who was fired by BushCo? Ah, yes.

    He’s out of his depth, which is somewhat forgivable. Payton is just ridiculous, embarrassing, a shill. And the archiving methods are shoddy.

    Waxman really does need to get people up who are at a lower pay grade, but actually know their stuff. If there are any of them left.

  26. Rayne says:

    “Why didn’t you [Miss Payton] ask him any of the questions I have just run down?”

    Hello.

    In other words, why didn’t you actually do some f*cking work under the job title you were bestowed.

  27. Rayne says:

    OH SNAP. She just screwed up.

    She just gave away that she actually knows where all the copies are, that there would be copies in OMB and OA — BOTH.

    If both of these copies and their backups are gone, it’s deliberate as f*cking hell.

  28. Citizen92 says:

    Whenever ‘Office of Administration’ (OA) or ‘White House Office’ (WHO) show up for hearings, they seem to know nothing.

    Remember the pathetic testimony of White House Director of Security Jim Knodell back when they were talking about the Plame issue? That his office in the White House NEVER investigated the Plame leak, desipite being charged to do so?

    ThinkProgress has that moment on tape: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/…..lame-leak/

    Payton said something about working with the White House Office of Security on the present issue as well.

  29. freepatriot says:

    why didn’t you actually do some f*cking work under the job title you were bestowed.

    that would have interfered with his duty to get george and the repuglitards re-elected

    and I got an off-topic question that’s drivin me crazy. I found this quote in Froomkin’s column:

    “This is the second publicly disclosed Justice Department investigation related to the CIA’s use of waterboarding, a type of simulated drowning that is considered torture by most human rights groups and legal scholars.

    a type of simulated drowning that is considered torture by most human rights groups ???

    what human rights group DOESN’T consider this torture ???

    Pol Pot’s human rights group ???

    was there a “Human Rights” group at the Wansea Conference ???

    Is this some “Human Rights” group from China ??? The North Pole ???

    where is there a “HUMAN RIGHTS” group that endorses waterboarding ???

    I already know I’m crazy, but WTF ???

  30. merkwurdiglieber says:

    The key word in references to OA is contractor… the real work and access to the documents were, I wager, sold off to an off campus special
    operation group, another example of the parallel government we face.

  31. Citizen92 says:

    Darryl Issa was asking for evidence, evidence earlier in the hearing.

    You want evidence, Mr. Issa? How about this story?

    When Mr. Bush hosted the Ohio State University football team after it won the national championship for the 2002 season, Ms. Carroll made sure that there was a seat for Mr. Noe, a big campaign contributor to the governor and the President.

    Once Mr. Noe was in the White House on Feb. 24, 2003, his itinerary included an “Ohio political strategy session’’ with Ken Mehlman, who was later named Mr. Bush’s campaign manager and Collister “Coddy’’ Johnson, later named the campaign’s field director.

    …….

    A listing of the day’s events said Karl Rove, who is credited as the “architect” of Mr. Bush’s political career, was “likely’’ to attend the political strategy session at the White House, according to a Feb. 21, 2003, e-mail from David Rachelson, then the White House’s associate political director from Ohio.

    The one-hour strategy session was scheduled to include several people, including Mr. Noe. A White House spokesman yesterday could not confirm Mr. Noe’s attendance at the meeting or other events that day.

    In a Feb. 6, 2003, e-mail, Ms. Carroll asked the White House’s associate director of political affairs to make room for Mr. Noe. The celebration was scheduled for Feb. 24, 2003.

    “The chairman of the Ohio Board of Regents will be in DC on the 24th and asked if he could attend the OSU event at the White House?’’ Ms. Carroll wrote in an e-mail to Mr. Johnson, the associate director of political affairs. “His name is Tom Noe and is a strong supporter of President Bush and Governor Taft. Please advise.’’

    http://www.toledoblade.com/app…..RARECOINS2

    Wonder which e-mail account was used to send that email, that is PICTURED in the article.

      • Citizen92 says:

        Thanks. I’d like Chairman Waxman to ask the CIA to produce that e-mail. That one e-mail.

        It’s a meeting that happened inside the White House (a government building) that was partially an official event (a photo op with the OSU team).

        That OSU photo op appointment for Mr. Noe should have been handled on an official White House e-mail account.

        For those who don’t remember, Mr. Noe is in jail. He was huge GOP force in Ohio. He made straw contributions to the Bush-Cheney re-elect ($57,000) stolen from the State of Ohio pension fund. His wife was the elections chair for Lucas County in 2004 – a county with huge irregularities in that election.

  32. MadDog says:

    EW, in case you hadn’t seen it yet, CREW has this:

    House Committee on Oversight and Government reform released a report which includes supplemental information about the missing White House email, in advance of today’s hearing where the Committee would hear testimony from White House officials.

    And the document is here.

    • MadDog says:

      From that document:

      The difficulties the White House encountered in recovering e-mails for Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald also undermine its claim that the journaling system was adequate. According to documents provided and shown to the Committee, the journaling archive system contained no e-mails from the Office of the Vice President for important dates: September 30, 2003, to October 6,2003. In an effort to recover the e-mails, the White House restored backup tapes for these days. These backup tapes also contained no journaled e-mails or .pst files for those dates for the Office of the Vice President. The only e-mails that could be recovered and provided to the Special Counsel were e-mails that the White House was able to restore from the personal email accounts of officials in the Vice President’s office.

        • MadDog says:

          LOL,

          I just emailed you to ask precisely what the lack of journaling means.

          LOL! I’ll answer you here. From MSExchange.org:

          Exchange 2003 provides a native Journaling feature which allows you to archive all incoming and outgoing e-mails for a specific mailbox store.

          Why Journaling?
          Message Journaling can become necessary because of political reasons or new regulations. Many organizations in the healthcare and insurance industry or financial services must record the communication between their customers and their employees.

          Which Journaling?
          There are three different types of journaling that you can enable in Exchange Server 2003.

          Message-only journaling
          Message-only journaling captures all messages from users on a specific mailbox database and sends the message copy to a specified journaling mailbox.

          BCC journaling
          BCC journaling is message-only journaling with a capture of BCC recipients. When BCC journaling is enabled, Exchange Server captures all recipients (TO / CC / BCC).

          Note:
          BCC journaling doesn’t work if the recipient list contains hidden distribution lists, query-based distribution lists, or distribution lists that have another expansion server.

          Envelope journaling
          Envelope journaling is different from message-only journaling and BCC journaling in that it allows you to archive P1 message headers (envelope headers).

      • emptywheel says:

        Also, another question. What would happen if these people were no longer in OVP at the time, as the three key players (Libby, Mayfield, and Martin) were not?

        • MadDog says:

          Also, another question. What would happen if these people were no longer in OVP at the time, as the three key players (Libby, Mayfield, and Martin) were not?

          If Journaling was used at the inception of the Administration, AND the Archive tapes were managed properly (not overwritten like these dummies did) by storing offsite via a 3rd-party storage provider, then and only then, we’d still have all the email for all the players.

        • Rayne says:

          You know, MadDog, these people are so f*cking sloppy that I really think the emails are still there somewhere. Payton kept making a reference to associations — that’s the issue for them. As long as the association is broken, the emails are theoretically lost.

          Which of course is bullsh*t in reality.

          This entire hearing was nothing but a pack of lies.

          $500,000 for a bunch of servers to fix this? what a crock of fermented dogshit.

        • MadDog says:

          $500,000 for a bunch of servers to fix this? what a crock of fermented dogshit.

          Gold-plated, blessed with Holy Water and supplied by the Regent University Computer Store.

        • Hmmm says:

          Interior design industry standard joke-explanation for why a given element (fabric usually) is so astronomically spendy.

        • Rayne says:

          Jeebus. It’s like they never heard of leasing equipment.

          I cannot imagine any Fortune 100 company putting up with this bullsh*t for a second. It’s completely bogus.

        • MadDog says:

          Jeebus. It’s like they never heard of leasing equipment.

          I cannot imagine any Fortune 100 company putting up with this bullsh*t for a second. It’s completely bogus.

          They are probably, no, definitely getting ripped off.

          And/Or

          They are deliberately quoting a gold-plated price to then turn around and say that it’s just not cost-effective to search for this evidence of our criminal deeds. Just too dang expensive, doncha know? Wink, Wink!

      • MadDog says:

        The only e-mails that could be recovered and provided to the Special Counsel were e-mails that the White House was able to restore from the personal email accounts of officials in the Vice President’s office.

        Does this imply RNC email account usage in the OVP?

        Did Luskin “find” Rove’s Get Out Of Jail email from an RNC email account?

        Was Rove emailing via the RNC to folks in Deadeye’s OVP who were also using RNC email accounts?

  33. pseudonymousinnc says:

    Catching up: Sarbanes did a very good job of gently showing that he knows at least the broad sweep of how this shit works. My guess is that he knows about it from private law practice.

    The previous Notes setup may have been a pain to administer — anecdotally, Notes environments make friends squirm — but it did its job. The switch to Exchange — not just Exchange, but Exchange with PST archiving — seemed, from an archiving standpoint, as far away from best practices as you can get. That is, there are ways to do it properly in an enterprise setting where retention is a legal responsibility, and the WH didn’t even follow those guidelines.

  34. bmaz says:

    Did somebody use “Issa” and “reasonable” in the same sentence? WTF is wrong with you Neil? I thought you got schooled up better than that in those high fallutin east coast schools!

  35. Hugh says:

    I point this out a lot, but what we have seen from Republicans today is their SOP. They create a narrative: Sandy Berger, the Clinton Administration, the RNC is a fishing expedition, McDevitt is somehow being withheld, nothing to see here, the WH has behaved admirably, move along. And once they have the narrative established they stick to it like glue regardless of the facts.

    • yellowdog jim says:

      I point this out a lot, but what we have seen from Republicans today is their SOP. They create a narrative: Sandy Berger, the Clinton Administration, the RNC is a fishing expedition, McDevitt is somehow being withheld, nothing to see here, the WH has behaved admirably, move along. And once they have the narrative established they stick to it like glue regardless of the facts.

      well worth repeatedly pointing out, too.
      and well stated, with our present example.
      well, said.

      it is as if they are the automatons they appear to be as they recite the their programming like slave robots chanting a mantra:


      CLIN

      TON

      CLIN

      TON

      CLIN

      TON

      they are robot tools of the cheneyBu$hCo propaganda industry.
      they hope to keep their drones hypnotized.

  36. pseudonymousinnc says:

    Shorter Issa: I have no problem with this dragging on until after Bush has fucked off back to the pig farm.

  37. MarieRoget says:

    Thanx for the liveblogging, ew, & for informative comments one & all.

    Boarding passes in hand for business trip & I’m out of here. No big loss to miss Darryl the Furious Hairball doing his “bipartisan” bullshit humpathump closing for Davis.

    Read you all this evening.

  38. Neil says:

    Issa drives my blood pressure up.

    How about this bmaz? Is there any basis in fact or at least an infinitesimal chance that the conclusion to which Issa is driving this witness has a scintilla of reason or truth?

  39. pseudonymousinnc says:

    EW: the ‘journal’ is just an separate record of what gets sent where, stripped of any content. It’s implemented with an eye to regulatory compliance.

    Tech gubbins here. There’s even a ‘disaster recovery guide’.

    • emptywheel says:

      So if OVP has no journal, it’s possible they deleted stuff that was sent out?

      And if the people in question had left their position (Martin, Mayfield, and Libby) then the person’s computer was sent out to be wiped before it was given to another person?

      Am I reading this right? Libby’s emails to Judy were wiped at some point and therefore were among those not turned over to Fitz?

      • MadDog says:

        So if OVP has no journal, it’s possible they deleted stuff that was sent out?

        Yup, see my item 2 in # 106.

        And if the people in question had left their position (Martin, Mayfield, and Libby) then the person’s computer was sent out to be wiped before it was given to another person?

        Am I reading this right? Libby’s emails to Judy were wiped at some point and therefore were among those not turned over to Fitz?

        Nah, the Client computer did not have the emails resident on it (unless some nosy, smart-ass user created their own PST file and placed it on their own hard drive).

        The PST files that were used to store email were on files servers.

        And my item 2 in # 106 talks about a very real concern that those file servers and their PST files were wide, fookin’ open to deletion, manipulation and even fookin’ substitution of email messages.

      • pseudonymousinnc says:

        if OVP has no journal, it’s possible they deleted stuff that was sent out?

        We really need to know more details, which is why Waxman might be better off subpoenaing people below Payton’s pay grade. Take a cross-section of the people who know the technical shit from before, during and after the transition — but, natch, that’ll all be Super Dick Secret.

        You could see in this hearing, in the attempt from the GOP side to make it look as if Waxman’s asking the WH to prove a negative. But if there’s no contemporaneous, independent record of email, then you’re left doing forensics, either using headers and message IDs, or more oldschool (TPM Muckraker style) by examining what’s in the record and seeing what’s missing.

        In short, if there’s no journal, there may be forensic ways to identify gaps, but it’ll be hard to do so conclusively.

        Think in terms of accounting, with the journal as the books in which transactions are recorded. What we have right now are 17 million receipts and invoices contained in unlabelled boxes, and those boxes may or may not be locked, buried and subject to water damage.

        • MadDog says:

          Think in terms of accounting, with the journal as the books in which transactions are recorded. What we have right now are 17 million receipts and invoices contained in unlabelled boxes, and those boxes may or may not be locked, buried and subject to water damage.

          Excellent analogy!

          Or another accounting analogy, they say they spent/received the money, but there is no record of it.

    • emptywheel says:

      Are you on CSPAN (is it on CSPAN??) or the House feed, bc I don’t see his bald spot, and I like to think after watching his damn baldspot for 2 months straight, I oughta recognize it by now.

      • rosalind says:

        OT: ew, any chance for some liveblogging of the foggo trial now that it’s been moved to VA? i’ll chip in for the travel fund or beamish kitty.

  40. Hmmm says:

    So… Federal Income Tax law is to Al Capone as the Presidential Records Act is to… well, to whom, exactly? How far uphill do penalties under the Act reach?

  41. Sara says:

    A little background on the National Archivist, Allen Weinstein.

    When Bush shorted the term of the former Archivist, who had been appointed by Clinton, but was a pro, and also a Republican, the Historians in the professional organizations had a big campaign against Weinstein. There had been a major controversy about his use of sources in his last book, The Haunted Wood, in which he literally bought his way into the Soviet Archives shortly after the collapse in 1991, and in his interests of proving himself right on the Hiss-Chambers affair, he used formerly secret sources to add another layer of proof to his argument. Problem was, shortly after he published, the Russian officials closed off all the materials he used, meaning no one could go back and review his sources. Since then bits and pieces have become available, largely through the work of Russian Historians who have limited access to these materials, and their materials cast much doubt on Weinstein’s interpretations. He has very limited respect among serious historians, particularly those interested in his fields of interest, namely Soviet Espionage in the US during the New Deal and WWII period. As far as I know he has never held an Academic appointment — instead he has always worked for think tanks on the Right which have sponsored his research.

    Come salvation through a new President, we will need a new Professional National Archivist. There has been considerable scuttlebut in historical circles about really competent pro’s with many years experience quitting during Weinstein’s tenure. It is a ten year appointment, and it should be non-political, but I would imagine his inability to satisfy the requirements of the Presidential Records Act could lead to a shorter tenure in his case.

  42. Citizen92 says:

    I suspect that OVP was operating on another, yet undisclosed e-mail system. Addington and Cheney are control freaks and even to relinquish possible control to the RNC would be iffy for them.

    Waxman’s earlier report on the White House holders of GWB43.com accounts only listed 2 or 3 Cheney people. Which means they were using something else.

    Issa was trying HARD to establish that RNC accounts are “personal.” I would have expected some sort of political parties discussion, but he kept saying “personal.” Is the RNC chartered to run an e-mail system like AOL or Gmail, for personal use? Very strange methinks.

      • Citizen92 says:

        Rove also held onto the corporate business registration for “Karl Rove & Co” (a Texas corporation) throughout his tenure at the White House.

        He noted it every year on his White House ethics disclosure form and took pains to make clear it was an “inactive corporation.” You can find them at http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds

        Trivia – Harry Whittington (of Cheney gunshot fame) is listed as Vice Director and Secretary of Rove’s company in public records.

        http://ecpa.cpa.state.tx.us/co…..7421986492

        • MadDog says:

          Trivia – Harry Whittington (of Cheney gunshot fame) is listed as Vice Director and Secretary of Rove’s company in public records.

          Deadeye never was a fan of Turdblossom, so perhaps targeting Harry was no accident.

  43. MadDog says:

    EW, to answer your other emailed question:

    Between you and me, I know Fitz’ team is none too sure that they got everything. Is that because of the journaling?

    Yes, due to a couple of things:

    1. No journaling.
    2. Wide open access to the file servers and files where the PST files were stored. See this part of the document:

    Until mid-2005, the system that the White House used for preserving e-mails had serious security flaws. According to Mr. McDevitt, “ln mid-2005 … a critical security issue was identified and corrected. During this period it was discovered that the file servers and the file directories used to store the retained email … were accessible by everyone on the EOP network.” Mr. McDevitt informed the Committee that the “potential impact” of this security flaw was that there was “[n]o verification that data retained has not been modified.”

    Also, I wonder if Fitz’ team is also suspicious that they did not get all personal email account info from the suspects. For example, did you know that Rove had/has his own email server?

    I’ve got a dozen different email accounts, and I suspect that this Administration came to power with similar tendencies to avoid detection.

  44. Neil says:

    HJC via RealPlayer
    The discussion is about a subpeona for J Keneth Blackwell, former Ohio secretary of state, about voter suppression. The RNC hack made a motion to postpone until after FISA Amendment Reathorization is passed.

    I don’t see it on any of the 3 C-SPANs.

    • Rayne says:

      You need to watch this one carefully.

      If Blackwell comes up before HJC, he will not be asked about the voter suppression alone. My money says there will be overlap with today’s meeting.

  45. emptywheel says:

    Oh, cool. Fitz will have his own panel. I forgot that govt employees aren’t on panels with non-govt employees.

    That raises the chance of interesting questions up significantly.

  46. Hmmm says:

    Thanks for the video help, all.

    OT – kspena, I still don’t see any relevant links on the Committee page even after scrolling down; maybe because I’m on Safari/Mac OS X?

    • kspena says:

      So sorry. Does this help?

      http://judiciary.house.gov/

      Tuesday 02/26/2008 – 1:15 PM
      2141 Rayburn House Office Building
      Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law
      Oversight Hearing on the Implementation of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Special Counsel Regulations

      By Direction of the Chairman

      On the site, it’s on the upper left of the page.

  47. Mary says:

    So, does this mean that Issa is against warrantless wiretaps with no oversight and against immunity for govt snooping into the private lives of American citizens on American soil?

    Issa: Do you presume we have the right to look into private people’s lives?

    Waxman: Absolutely not.

    Issa: I agree,

  48. earlofhuntingdon says:

    The White House inherited a limited but workable system and immediately dismantled it, substituting a Rube Golberg contraption with even more flaws.

    Yet, this is the GOP of Ken Mehlman, a Harvard-trained lawyer, computer guru and former RNC head who devised one of the most sophisticated computer systems in the country. A system capable of tracking the party affiliation of every registered voter in the country and retrieving it as quickly as a credit carp swipe so that gate attendants at “privatized” presidential events could exclude Democrats, regardless of whether they were legitimate ticket holders.

    With computer smarts like that at its beck and call, the White House could readily have designed and maintained a fully functional archival e-mail system. (RNC has one.) Which means that the deeply flawed WH e-mail system operates as Rove intended and about as effectively as the Iraqi political system. One reason Rove “left” the administration early – under the guise of setting up Bush’s library, the definitive record of the Bush years – would have been to prepare the digital transition from Bush to a Democratic president.

    The stakes involved in this normally backstage process could not be higher. Success for the GOP will keep top Bush players out of jail and secure Rove a lifelong place at the center of the GOP, just as J. Edgard Hoover’s steamy secret files kept him head of the FBI for life. Success for the public would revive the rule of law and public accountability for government officials.

    At a minimum, Mr. Waxman should attempt to assess the damage, document reasons for it, and spearhead needed changes to a revised PRA. Most importantly, he should take all possible steps to prevent massive loss of data between now and next January 20th. That includes implementing measures to obtain possession of all data banks, notebooks, and PDA’s promptly when the new president takes office. Taking any of those steps in February 2009 will be too late. So, Uncle Henry had better breed up his huntin’ dogs and keep ‘em hungry. They gonna be busy.

  49. MadDog says:

    EW, I’m just guessing here, but that document has got a whole lot of goodies in it, and I’d bet you’d make a very tasty post out of it.

    More goodies:

    According to Ms. Payton, when the White House migrated to its new e-mail system, it abandoned the ARMS archiving system. Instead, the White House began an ad hoc process called’Joumaling.” Under this process, a White House staffer or contractor would collect from a “journal” e-mail folder in the Microsoft Exchange system copies of e-mails sent and received by White House employees. After retrieving copies of these e-mails, the White House staffer or contractor would then manually name and save them as “.pst” files on various White House servers.

    Jeebus! Talk about the fox guarding the fookin’ henhouse!

    White House staffers were responsible for saving (or as the case was more likely to be, deleting) emails?

    How much does anyone one want to bet me that these “White House staffers” had a job description that was originally Rose Mary Wood’s:

    “Here’s all ya gotta do. Press this button and it will delete everything. It’s simple and we’ll pay you big bucks!”

    This ain’t “journaling” by anyone’s reasonable definition. Lest, apparently, you are a Repug from Texas.

    • pseudonymousinnc says:

      This ain’t “journaling” by anyone’s reasonable definition. Lest, apparently, you are a Repug from Texas.

      Holy frigging crap.

      Can you imagine how that would be treated by the SEC?

      And yes, the PRA needs drastic revision: actual penalties for violation would be nice. I’m even sympathetic to Payton’s remarks about how stuff that would have bypassed PRA archiving in the 80s, by being done face-to-face or over the phone, is now done by email. But that’s by the bye: a determination of what should be archived can’t be made programmatically. If you don’t want something archived, walk down the corridor.

      The broad terms of the archiving system need to be stipulated: automated, invisible in daily use, and write-once. That’s to say, any after-the-fact changes need to be made like this.

  50. bobschacht says:

    EW–
    Thanks for doing this!
    Biggest red flag for me: old system not tamper-proof.

    Sorry this is a driveby, but can’t take time to read all of the comments now (I plan to do so later).

    Question: On normal files, the OS keeps track of date the file was saved, and also often date last modified. Just on that basis alone, might it be possible to detect tampering with those emails? Or is it easy to tamper with those files without leaving footprints?

    Bob in HI

    Bob in HI

    • MadDog says:

      Question: On normal files, the OS keeps track of date the file was saved, and also often date last modified. Just on that basis alone, might it be possible to detect tampering with those emails? Or is it easy to tamper with those files without leaving footprints?

      One thing that I’ve learned is that all things are possible with computers.

      And the more specific answers to your questions are:

      1. Yes, one can tamper without leaving tracks. Tis not something an average user could easily undertake, but TechWizards can make the Sun rise in the West.

      2. Tampering can generally be detected. Since most folks ain’t got a clue, their attempts to delete, add, substitute or modify files will leave tracks that Techies can root out (root is my Techie pun of the day *g*).

      Additionally, Windows has “Auditing” capabilities that can be turned on to track and log many, many different actions on computers.

      I’m guessing that this Administration ensured that Auditing was not enabled on their Windows Servers.

  51. freepatriot says:

    I guess the guys at re(tar)d(ed)state were right when they said goppes suck at IT stuff

    it doesn’t really matter though

    we don’t let you off for robbing a bank just cuz you suck at robbing banks …

  52. MadDog says:

    And not OT at all, but I gotta get me a copy of this book:

    Where Have All The Emails Gone? By David Gewirtz

    Is IT management at the White House as incomprehensibly unprofessional as it seems — or is a pretense of cluelessness being used to divert questions of disclosure?

    David is an expert on both Microsoft Exchange as well as Lotus Notes. Some more of his curriculum vitae:

    David Gewirtz has written more than 600 articles about email, collaboration, and mobile technology. He is the Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of ZATZ Publishing, an independent digital magazine and book publisher.

    David is a former professor of computer science, has lectured at Princeton, Berkeley, UCLA, and Stanford, and has been awarded the prestigious Sigma Xi Research Award in Engineering. He is the author of four books including Where Have All The Emails Gone? and The Flexible Enterprise.

    Earlier in his career, he held the unusual title of “Godfather” at Apple…

  53. Hmmm says:

    OK, so again I wonder, since there seems to be ample evidence of massive violations the Presidential Records Act, what are the penalties under that Act, and to whom do they apply? Or is this exercise more in the impeachment-fodder vein?

  54. Neil says:

    Is the witness Deputy AG from Civil Rights Voting Division a loyalty-sworn BushCo hack or just a newbie sent to spike the hearing?

    • emptywheel says:

      Are you on the HJC feed or CSPAN (I think you’re on CPSAN). I think he’ll definitely be on HJC, don’t know about CSPAN. But this panel got interrupted by a vote, and he goes, by himself, after that.

  55. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Penalties? We don’t need no stinkin’ penalties. The PRA is virtually toothless; something Waxman’s Democrats, if worthy of the name, will push through early next year, along with litigating the hell out of what we can expect Karl Rove to have done to the people’s records temporarily in the hands of the Bush Library.

    That utter lack of teeth is one reason, I assume, the Bushies would rather be found to have violated it rather than to have committed war crimes, perjury, obstruction, corrupt prosecutions, computer crimes, ad nauseum. It is a virtual Get Out of Jail Free Card.

    • Hmmm says:

      Thanks, I figured. Actually I rather think Dem spine is in significantly increased evidence today. Anyone know what gives?

  56. earlofhuntingdon says:

    I should have added that the Constitution prohibits Congress from making past acts criminal; it can only make future conduct criminal, that is, only after it puts citizens on notice that such acts are prohibited and subject to criminal sanctions. (The ex post facto clause.)

    Since the GOP continues to vote in lockstep, and resolutely supports its Leader (as well as George Bush), the Presidential Records Act won’t lead to much punishment – or deter much behavior – during this administration.

    Even unamended, however, it can be one of the bases for various criminal and congressional investigations, as it now supports Waxman’s inquiry into how well it is being complied with and how Congress ought to change it in future.

    Such investigations document behavior that may violate other laws that have more teeth, including catchalls like perjury and obstruction of justice, which is what caught Libby and almost caught Rove.

  57. jdmckay says:

    Davis: These people are not responsible for RNC emails. The other thing that troubles me, when you have a committee, we shouldn’t have this come out of their coffers. We might look at an appropriation.

    (NOTE: Davis also said it’s cost RNC lots of $$/RNC should not have to pay these costs responding to congressional inquiries.)

    Sheesh…

    Davis: It covers everything that happened. Are there backups for all the missing emails?

    Payton: we believe we should have backups.

    Davis: It’s recoverable.

    Payton: We believe we can use disaster recovery if we need to.

    Davis: It is expensive, is it not.

    Payton: Team put together algorithm, rough approximation, 1 component, 1 day, around $50,000.

    “put together algorighm?”

    Pure bullshit… disk images are an ISO standard. You can by this stuff all over the place, for $39 – $200. The restore functions come with all of ‘em. THERE IS NO ALGORITHM TO WRITE!!!

    You just point the restore function to available disk, click, go get some coffee, and sit back and read EMPTYWHEEL for a few hours.

    Davis: Ballpark number?

    Payton: There’s also servers that would have to be purchased. $500,000 for servers.

    no way Jose… not even 25% of that. And you don’t need all that to restore images, only disk space.

    If we restored every day, somewhere in ballpark of 15 million or more. It should be recoverable. Caveat, don’t know if there will be a flaw in a tape.

    She’s just making it up.

    If all this time’s gone by, and images have been known to exist, there’s nothing to do but run a restore. She’s just making canned statements irrelevant to issue at hand (watching rerun of this on CSPAN2 now).

    I don’t believe a word she says.

  58. jdmckay says:

    Clay: What did WH do when it learned its system was inadequate. In previous testimony, you’ve talked about how much this will cost. It’s a cavalier attitude, where does the care come in for taxpayer analysis.

    Payton: we want a targeted list for restore.

    Clay: Yet no one heeded their own warning. What was that about? Maybe we need to listen to archive, or to our own staff.

    Payton: I wasn’t there.

    Payton does this dance repeatedly, eg. eliciting details suggesting care/analysis/etc. for a safe/reliable (etc.) restore… she expresses such “careful” considerations repeatedly.

    I would point out restore doesn’t need a special system, rather only an installed Exchange server in order to search those records. Rebuilding a more reliable email server is entirely different exploit.

    Using this “care” excuse as reason records have not been examined is specious… in the extreme.

    I’ve done this exact same stuff a gazillion times. I find her entirely unbelievable.

    I also find Rep Mica to be a rather nauseating individual.

Comments are closed.