Missing email messages, and Karl Rove's personal computer, roil Washington

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/12/AR2007041=
202408.html?hpid=3Dtopnews
A lawyer for the Republican National Committee told congressional staff=20
members yesterday that the RNC is missing at least four years' worth of=20
e-mail from White House senior adviser Karl Rove that is being sought as =

part of investigations into the Bush administration, according to the=20
chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=3D1244
The briefing received by the Committee raises serious concerns about the =

White House compliance with the Presidential Records Act, which requires =

that the President =93take all such steps as may be necessary to assure=20
that the activities, deliberations, decisions, and policies that reflect =

the performance of his constitutional, statutory, or other official or=20
ceremonial duties are adequately documented and that such records are=20
maintained as Presidential records.=94

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/13/washington/13emails.html
The White House said Thursday that missing e-mail messages sent on=20
Republican Party accounts may include some relating to the firing of=20
eight United States attorneys.

--------------------------------


April 12, 2007

Fred Fielding, Esq.
Counsel to the President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20500


Dear Mr. Fielding:


We are troubled to learn through the press that the White House cannot=20
account for the e-mails of almost two dozen people at the White House,=20
including some the Senate Judiciary has asked to question in connection=20
with our ongoing investigation.  Apparently these officials utilized=20
e-mail accounts, addresses and equipment provided by the Republican=20
National Committee and political campaigns to communicate about the plan =

to replace a number of United States Attorneys.  As you know, by letter=20
dated  March 28, 2007, the Chairmen of both the House and Senate=20
Judiciary Committees wrote to you asking that you collect and produce=20
e-mails and documents sent from all e-mail accounts, addresses and=20
domains relevant to these investigations, and made specific reference to =

the use of such political e-mail addresses.

The comments of two White House officials, which were cited in today=92s =

edition of the Washington Post, raise questions about whether the White=20
House will be able to comply with the March 28 letter.  White House=20
spokesman Scott Stanzel reportedly stated, =93[t]he White House has not a=
t=20
this point done a good enough job at overseeing the practices of staff=20
with political e-mail accounts," and confirmed that "[s]ome officials'=20
e-mails have potentially been lost and that is a mistake that the White=20
House is aggressively working to fix."   The second official who was=20
cited, a White House lawyer who spoke on condition of anonymity, told=20
the press at a briefing that White House staff is now being advised that =

if they question whether an e-mail is political or official, the staff=20
should use their private accounts, but also preserve a copy to be sent=20
to White House lawyers for a determination of whether the e-mail needs=20
to be saved under the Presidential Records Act.

In light of these comments by White House officials, we would like to=20
know what is being done to investigate and remedy this situation.  For=20
example, we would like to know if the process described above by the=20
anonymous White House lawyer is intended to apply prospectively only or=20
if staff is also being advised that they should forward past e-mails=20
from their private accounts to White House lawyers for review.=20
Additionally, in reference to the statement that the White House =93has=20
not . . . done a good enough job at overseeing practices=94 regarding=20
e-mail accounts, we would like to know what was done in the past and=20
whether any private e-mail retention policies were in place.  We would=20
also like to know how and when the White House first learned of the=20
problem with private e-mail account usage and when it first came to=20
light that e-mails may have been lost.

We recognize that the White House must and should investigate this=20
matter in a timely fashion.  We also recognize that the congressional=20
committees of jurisdiction have a separate obligation to investigate.=20
To accommodate our separate obligations without slowing down or=20
otherwise complicating the others=92 efforts, we suggest that the White=20
House consult with us and the other congressional committees engaged in=20
affected investigations and that we jointly agree upon a fair and=20
objective process for investigating this matter, including the use of a=20
mutually trusted computer forensic expert.  Such a process would help to =

restore public confidence in the White House=92s desire to comply with th=
e=20
Presidential Records Act.  Moreover, it would ensure your office and the =

Congress that this matter is being taken seriously and that an objective =

process is employed to investigate, retrieve and reconstruct the=20
information that is reportedly missing due to deleted or otherwise=20
unretained e-mails.



Sincerely,





PATRICK LEAHY                                                      ARLEN =

SPECTER

Chairman=20
       Ranking Member
_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)