Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

April 12, 2007
By: Kevin Drum

MISSING EMAILS UPDATE....Remember all those missing emails the White House told us about yesterday? Turns out the RNC does have copies on its servers. Whew. Apparently, back in 2004, as part of the Valerie Plame investigation, Patrick Fitzgerald told them to stop deleting emails.

So they did. Except, it turns out, for Karl Rove's emails, many of which are still missing. Now that's just plain peculiar, isn't it?

Luckily, I'm sure the RNC has backup tapes. Right? Everyone keeps backup tapes, don't they?

Kevin Drum 5:37 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (227)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Most systems allow users to delete their own emails. It's unlikely that there are backups.

And backup 'tapes', Kevin? Those are notoriously unreliable. It's something of a miracle that the RNC has recovered 99% or so of the emails.

Nancy Pelosi, et al, should lead by example and disclose all of their emails, personal and business, because that's what they're asking of the white house. I doubt they can, and I'm sure they won't.

Posted by: Al on April 12, 2007 at 5:49 PM | PERMALINK

If the 2006 mid-terms were Political Christmas, this scandal is shaping up to be quite the (seasonaly appropriate) Political Easter. I wonder what the RNC-Bunny will leave in my basket?

Posted by: Everblue Stater on April 12, 2007 at 5:50 PM | PERMALINK

Yes, they have the tapes. They're over in Rose Marie Woods' office.

Posted by: Rick Alber on April 12, 2007 at 5:52 PM | PERMALINK

Al,

If Speaker Pelosi is under investigation for obstruction of justice or as part of a corruption scandal, she would be expected to open up such correspondence provided a legitimate reason is offered. Were there an indication that she was using DNC e-mail accounts for official House business, in direct violation of the law (assuming the Speaker's office is under the same records obligations as the White House), I wouldn't hesitate in calling for her submission to the investigation - and I don't think anyone can argue against that in good faith.

Posted by: Everblue Stater on April 12, 2007 at 5:53 PM | PERMALINK

It's not about tapes, Kevin. It's backup software.
Of course, they've got it...but even if they don't, there are many other ways of retrieving the emails.

This "oh, all the emails have been deleted!" is the biggest bamboozlement of them all.

Posted by: Slothrop on April 12, 2007 at 5:54 PM | PERMALINK

Al:

Deleting e-mails on the client side has nothing to do with whether back-ups of those e-mails are available on the server side. Any good corporate IT shop backs up their mail servers nightly to tape, with a designated rotation and retention schedule to an off-site storage location. Retrieving Karl Rove's e-mails should be childs play, particularly in a post-Sarbanes-Oxley world. Of course, we can't always assume that our leaders play by the same rules as we do, can we???

TCD

Posted by: The Conservative Deflator on April 12, 2007 at 5:56 PM | PERMALINK

===Nancy Pelosi, et al, should lead by example and disclose all of their emails, personal and business, because that's what they're asking of the white house. I doubt they can, and I'm sure they won't.

No, they are asking for all e-mails related to the US Attorney's office--you know, correspondence that by the law was supposed to be done in White House e-mail accounts. It's not the Democrats fault that the White House broke the law and carried on government business on private e-mail accounts.

Posted by: ArchPundit on April 12, 2007 at 6:00 PM | PERMALINK

The scary part is Als dismissal and the jackaloptic attack on Pelosi works. Hannity will do it too. Its amazing that there are people who are waiting for that to come along so they can continue to see nothing here, which is what they want.

Posted by: jg on April 12, 2007 at 6:01 PM | PERMALINK

The backup tapes were checked out by a guy smoking "Morley."

Posted by: bleh on April 12, 2007 at 6:03 PM | PERMALINK

Everyone keeps backup tapes, don't they?

Not if you bite off the head of little animals for a living...

Posted by: ROTFLMLiberalAO on April 12, 2007 at 6:04 PM | PERMALINK

This is going to be good, real good.Karl walked the line one too many times.The RNC wasn't going to be tossed under the bus.Karl's days should be numbered.

Posted by: john john on April 12, 2007 at 6:11 PM | PERMALINK

Chuckle Chuckle -- Al thinks hitting the Delete key actually deletes an email. Bwa Ha ha ha.

Unless Rove was taking all the storage tapes home every night, some backup will turn up.

Posted by: Robert on April 12, 2007 at 6:11 PM | PERMALINK

Karl Rove's missing e-mails remind me of those critical time and attendance sheets that disappeared from George W. Bush's Texas Air National Guard files about the time that Karen Hughes was assigned to review them, before Dubya ran for president. These strange coincidences...

Posted by: The Conservative Deflator on April 12, 2007 at 6:12 PM | PERMALINK

I don't think Rove's missing emails should be described as "peculiar," perhaps a more accurate description would be "prima facie evidence of criminal acts."

Posted by: charlie don't surf on April 12, 2007 at 6:20 PM | PERMALINK

While I'm more than willing to believe the worst about these people, things like this happen legitimately all the time. (Think about the Hillary Clinton billing records showing up in a file where they should not have been, and no sane person would have looked.) Electronic discovery is a nightmare for lawyers, and it's going to get worse before it gets better.

Posted by: CJColucci on April 12, 2007 at 6:21 PM | PERMALINK

Wouldn't it be great if the FBI found that the RNC e-mail retention policy was not compliant with the Patriot Act? The loyal bushies would be hoisted by their own petards!

Posted by: Elliott on April 12, 2007 at 6:23 PM | PERMALINK

More about Karl & his email

"...Mr. Kelner's briefing raised particular concems about Karl Rove, who according to press reports used his RNC accountfor 95%o of his communications. According to Mr. Kelner, although the hold started in August 2004, the RNC does not have any e-mails prior to 2005 for Mr. Rove. Mr. Kelner did not give any explanation for the e-mails missing from Mr. Rove's account, but he did acknowledge that one possible explanation is that Mr. Rove personally deleted his e-mails from the RNC server.

Mr. Kelner also explained that starting in 2005, the RNC began to treat Mr. Rove's emails in a special fashion. At some point in 2005, the RNC commenced an automatic archive policy for Mr. Rove, but not for any other White House officials. According to Mr. Kelner, this archive policy removed Mr. Rove's ability to personally delete his e-mails from the RNC server. Mr. Kelner did not provide many details about why this special policy was adopted for Mr. Rove. But he did indicate that one factor was the presence of investigative or discovery requests or other legal concerns..." from TPM Muck division

This is getting to be more & more fun all the time.

"As long as people believe in absurdities they will continue to commit atrocities." - Voltaire

Posted by: daCascadian on April 12, 2007 at 6:24 PM | PERMALINK

I'm sure we can ask the Chinese or the Russian's for copies since they probably can easily hack Karl's Blackberry signals.

Posted by: Robert on April 12, 2007 at 6:25 PM | PERMALINK

It's quite a revelation that even the RNC doesn't trust Rove. Looks like they just might be preparing to jettison him.

Posted by: Disputo on April 12, 2007 at 6:28 PM | PERMALINK

Something seriously sounds wrong here. There's not a business in the world I'm aware of that allows people to permanently delete their emails. For various auditing and legal reasons, every single email ever sent is usually retained for a signifigant length of time, usually archived somehow if disk space is a premium, except for mass mailing and marketing appeals and the like, which may be routinely purged from the "Sent" archives.

I'm not an email administrator, but I work in information technology and have some familiarity with this. I've never worked for any company that would not be able to pull up one of my prior emails (received or sent) if they really needed it, whether or not I deleted it from my client "view", at least for a good several years back.

I suppose a smaller business might do that, or an incompetently run larger business, but an organization like the RNC should have no financial deprivation that would cause them to cut corners, and every legal reason to protect themselves if dealing with official communications from White House staff.

I could see them mass purging the bulk emailings and marketing appeals, but only incompetence would include all emails in this purge, including individual personnel emails, who may accidentally delete something they really need and not notice for awhile. Also, again, normally when you delete an email from your email client there is no association with the actual email on the server being deleted.

Again, I'm not an expert on this, but those are my impressions from being in the larger field for over a decade now.

Posted by: Jimm on April 12, 2007 at 6:30 PM | PERMALINK

The "Rose Mary Woods Defense" ain't gonna cut it as John Nichols writes at The Nation. He quotes Leahy from the Senate floor today:

They say they have not been preserved. I don't believe that! You can't erase e-mails, not today. They've gone through too many servers. Those e-mails are there, they just don't want to produce them. We'll subpoena them if necessary.... E-mails don't get lost. These are just e-mails they don't want to bring forward.
Leahy even said the "dog-ate-my-homework" excuse is... inexcusable.

A long, hot summer to come. Heh.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 12, 2007 at 6:31 PM | PERMALINK

I'm really having a great time with these Democratic investigations of the WH. I especially love the silly little futile tricks the Republicans play -- it makes it feel like a fair sport!

Really, it's cat and mouse. We're the cats, they're the mice.

Oh, we'll get around to eating them, but first a little chase! It's fun to hear them squeak when we bat them around!

Posted by: frankly0 on April 12, 2007 at 6:35 PM | PERMALINK

Deleting e-mails on the client side has nothing to do with whether back-ups of those e-mails are available on the server side. Any good corporate IT shop backs up their mail servers nightly to tape, with a designated rotation and retention schedule to an off-site storage location. Retrieving Karl Rove's e-mails should be childs play, particularly in a post-Sarbanes-Oxley world. Of course, we can't always assume that our leaders play by the same rules as we do, can we???

TCD concisely and articulately gets at a good portion of what I was trying to say.

I would add that people often accidentally delete emails, sometimes not noticing for some time, and also sometimes suddenly "need" emails they deleted off their client so as to recall a correspondence history with a particular associate, client, agency, etc.

Any decent email administrator knows this will occur, and has established the means to recover old emails for this very purpose, in addition to all the other reasons - legal and otherwise - that these would be kept long-term.

Posted by: Jimm on April 12, 2007 at 6:36 PM | PERMALINK

The only reasonable explanation, at first glance, for allowing this lax system to be in place, and for losing these emails, is to conceal them, to intentionally have them be unavailable - i.e. to protect a criminal enterprise.

Posted by: Jimm on April 12, 2007 at 6:38 PM | PERMALINK

...but he did acknowledge that one possible explanation is that Mr. Rove personally deleted his e-mails from the RNC server

I have never heard of such a thing. Why would a non-technical employee or client be given server access rights to delete his emails?

Posted by: Jimm on April 12, 2007 at 6:42 PM | PERMALINK

Where oh where is the reincarnation of Deepthroat spelled in proper Elite speak to get those emails when we need him...

Posted by: Dreggas on April 12, 2007 at 6:43 PM | PERMALINK

I have never heard of such a thing. Why would a non-technical employee or client be given server access rights to delete his emails?

Since they used a third party for hosting it would not necessarily be uncommon for specific users to be granted admin access in order to do something like this, however that just adds more evidence to the chain as far as emails being deleted because only X number of people would have that kind of access. If Rove's name is on that list it would not look good for him.

Posted by: Dreggas on April 12, 2007 at 6:45 PM | PERMALINK

Ooooh, another post on the email aspect of the US Attorney scandal! Does this mean Nathan -- who's as much of a failure at concealing his pro-Bush derangement as he is a lwayer -- is going to amuse us with more "expert" legal opinion?

Bonus points, of course, if he disparages the legal acumen of Stefan and cmdicely, both of whom kick his ass regularly in these forums.

Posted by: Gregory on April 12, 2007 at 6:46 PM | PERMALINK

Let me get this straight, the Bush administration can read our emails without a warrant, but we can't read theirs even with one? Especially when they were compelled by law to retain archives in the first place?

If impeachment and prosecutions do not follow, the Democratic party needs to be dissolved. Thus far the Democrats have proven themselves to be the spineless, worthless Stockholm Syndrome enablers in our nation's history.

When you consider the tremendously large number of major scandals from this administration that have gone without serious opposition, yet alone investigation or prosecution, you have to wonder if the Democrats are a legitimate opposition party or just willingly playing the Colmes to the GOP's Hannity.

What is so worrisome is that increasingly there appears to be little if any effective difference between a corrupt dictatorship that investigates itself merely as a public relations pressure valve release and our government.

If the Democrats don't achieve real results in the form of impeachment and prosecution, there's a very real danger that these crimes not only will go unpunished but become established as a new, lower floor for corruption and lawlessness by our elected leaders. In fact, impeachment and prosecutions alone may not even be enough to undo the damage that has already been done to our constitutional form of government.

Posted by: Augustus on April 12, 2007 at 6:46 PM | PERMALINK

You're right, Jimm. That's just crazy that Karl would be able to delete e-mail from the server, unless he were, uh, helped (allowed) to do so by someone at RNC.

Posted by: nepeta on April 12, 2007 at 6:47 PM | PERMALINK

With intemperate imbeciles like Leahy lurching around with authority to subpoena, I dont mind that much of such a loss to history! Marble-mouth will froth on for a while and lawyers will do what lawyers do [the word is cognate with liar]

I think Dick Cheney summed him up well, though Cheney himself is no prize. Takes one to know one!

Posted by: daveinboca on April 12, 2007 at 6:49 PM | PERMALINK

I have never heard of such a thing. Why would a non-technical employee or client be given server access rights to delete his emails?

Gosh, that certainly boggles the mind, doesn't it? No one could have anticipated that an exception would have been made for Karl Rove....

Really, folks. This is getting ridiculous. Most folks here seem to be arguing that it is impossible to not be able to retrieve Rove's email, or at the very least that non-retrieval indicates gross incompetence on the part of the WH/RNC.

As I said before in another thread, if Rove's email can be retrieved, *that* would indicate gross incompetence by the WH/RNC. We're not dealing with a legit corporation that wishes to maintain documentation of its actions; we are dealing with a criminal enterprise that wishes to hide it actions.

Posted by: Disputo on April 12, 2007 at 6:50 PM | PERMALINK

Since they used a third party for hosting it would not necessarily be uncommon for specific users to be granted admin access in order to do something like this

Just saying that this almost never be a non-technical person. You don't want people who don't know what they're doing mucking around your servers with admin rights. They could end deleting all kinds of stuff by accident or corrupt the system even worse. Few administrators are willing to take those risks.

I know some bosses demand and get server access, but they're not actually supposed to use it and a good administrator would be well aware of everything they did on the server, and probably still have them in some kind of sandbox they're not aware of.

Posted by: Jimm on April 12, 2007 at 6:54 PM | PERMALINK

Really, it's cat and mouse. We're the cats, they're the mice.

And this is why I think the irrefutable -- except for the dead-ender, True Believer Bush Cultists, of course -- revelations of the Bush Administration's mendacity, incompetence and corruption spells a long, long time in the wilderness for the GOP, through 2008 and beyond. (The Democratic Party could certainly overreach, but they'd have to work hard to surpass the GOP in terms of malfeasance, incompetence and corruption.)

Oh, and Rove? Having one's "permanent Republican majority" shredded by failing to keep Congress in GOP hands for eight years running, not to mention ruining the GOP's decades-long branding effort as "strong on defense" by sheer incompetence, hardly burnishes one's credentials as a political genius -- just another dirty-playing huckster.

In other words, a typical Republican politician.

Posted by: Gregory on April 12, 2007 at 6:54 PM | PERMALINK

'Gosh, that certainly boggles the mind, doesn't it?'

You mean 'bottles' right? :)

Posted by: jg on April 12, 2007 at 6:54 PM | PERMALINK

You're right, Jimm. That's just crazy that Karl would be able to delete e-mail from the server, unless he were, uh, helped (allowed) to do so by someone at RNC.

Of course, in this particular case, I don't find it crazy. :) It makes perfect sense...concealing a criminal enterprise.

Posted by: Jimm on April 12, 2007 at 6:56 PM | PERMALINK

'(The Democratic Party could certainly overreach, but they'd have to work hard to surpass the GOP in terms of malfeasance, incompetence and corruption.)
'

Not really. They could stand perfectly still and yet still become more corrupt than any political party ever as long as FOX is still on the air and reaching ditto heads.

Posted by: jg on April 12, 2007 at 6:57 PM | PERMALINK

I love today's selection of troll'doeuvres.

My compliments to the Chef!

Posted by: anonymous on April 12, 2007 at 6:58 PM | PERMALINK

Apollo: A long, hot summer to come. Heh.

Just exactly the phrase I used about this topic earlier today. Ain't it grand?

Wait, wait, I feel the presence of my (admittedly dullwitted, thick-tongued and bedheaded) muse!

Tap delete button
All gone! Smooth sailing ahead!
Not quite, M.C. Rove

Posted by: shortstop on April 12, 2007 at 6:58 PM | PERMALINK

Disputo, I was speaking generally with my "surprise" in order to make the more specific point that this is obviously veering far from normal practice and that the best explanation is intentional concealment of a criminal enterprise.

I did actually say that in the first or second post.

Posted by: Jimm on April 12, 2007 at 6:59 PM | PERMALINK

If KK Karl's emails are gone, I smell obstruction of justice for whoever deleted them (canary singing), plus it's apropos to Fitz's investigation, which is not officially closed.

Posted by: bebimbob on April 12, 2007 at 6:59 PM | PERMALINK

If you follow the links, you find this passage:

Mr. Kelner also explained that starting in 2005, the RNC began to treat Mr. Rove's emails in a special fashion. At some point in 2005, the RNC commenced an automatic archive policy for Mr. Rove, but not for any other White House officials. According to Mr. Kelner, this archive policy removed Mr. Rove's ability to personally delete his e-mails from the RNC server. Mr. Kelner did not provide many details about why this special policy was adopted for Mr. Rove. But he did indicate that one factor was the presence of investigative or discovery requests or other legal concerns. It was unclear from Mr. Kelner's briefing whether the special archiving policy for Mr. Rove was consistently in effect after 2005.

Aren't the emails of interest with regard to the Attorney Purge in 2005 and 2006 in any case? So isn't Rove in deep shit even if he deleted emails before that point?

Posted by: frankly0 on April 12, 2007 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

the Democratic Party needs to be dissolved

Be careful, you may be attacked mercilessly for that apostasy, but I agree.

Posted by: Brojo on April 12, 2007 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

Um, third post, my bad.

Posted by: Jimm on April 12, 2007 at 7:01 PM | PERMALINK

Since they used a third party for hosting it would not necessarily be uncommon for specific users to be granted admin access in order to do something like this

This, I think, is the only hope we have of seeing the emails. If, eg, they are using an Exchange server hosted on a third party machine, then presumably the third party has daily backups going back some period of time. However, if the third party is ideologically aligned with the RNC (as seems probable -- when the GWB43.com scandal first broke, I did a search of all the other domains that resolved to the same IP addy, and many of them were wingnut type domains), then who knows what kind of deal they have worked out regarding data retention....

Posted by: Disputo on April 12, 2007 at 7:02 PM | PERMALINK

I would think the emails would have been hosted on one of the more enterprise mail servers, and I don't think we would be talking about some small-time web hosting arrangement where you are very careful about your disk space to keep costs down (other than routinely purging mass emails).

Posted by: Jimm on April 12, 2007 at 7:04 PM | PERMALINK

I did actually say that in the first or second post.

Fair enuff.

Posted by: Disputo on April 12, 2007 at 7:04 PM | PERMALINK

Didn't Nathan just accuse me of having BDS in another thread for asserting that Karl Rove's emails were missing?

I await my apology.

Posted by: trex on April 12, 2007 at 7:08 PM | PERMALINK

As I said before in another thread, if Rove's email can be retrieved, *that* would indicate gross incompetence by the WH/RNC. We're not dealing with a legit corporation that wishes to maintain documentation of its actions; we are dealing with a criminal enterprise that wishes to hide it actions.

Likely the essence of it, unless there was real "incompetence", as you mention.

Posted by: Jimm on April 12, 2007 at 7:08 PM | PERMALINK

Still, I would hazard to guess that some tapes are hidden somewhere, just waiting to be "discovered" after being "misorganized", if the shit really hits the fan over these missing emails, and the fall out over them being missing starts to loom as heavier than the actual content in them.

Posted by: Jimm on April 12, 2007 at 7:09 PM | PERMALINK

Didn't Nathan just accuse me of having BDS in another thread for asserting that Karl Rove's emails were missing?

I may have overstated your BDS...not that such an overstatement is illegal, mind you...but you have to concede that I was correct in stating that it is currently 43 and cloudy in Manhattan.

Posted by: Nathan (not really) on April 12, 2007 at 7:12 PM | PERMALINK

Somehow this reminded me -- I recently saw a rerun of an early episode of the original mid-1960s Star Trek TV series (with Shatner and Nimoy), and there was a line in which one character referred to data in the 23rd century starship Enterprise computer system being stored on "tapes". The future sure ain't what it used to be.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on April 12, 2007 at 7:13 PM | PERMALINK

Didn't Nathan just accuse me of having BDS in another thread for asserting that Karl Rove's emails were missing?

I await my apology.

Don't hold your breath -- Nathan never apologized, so far as I'm aware, for lying about the opinions that I, cmdicely and someone else -- I'm sorry for forgetting -- held regarding the Valerie Plame matter. This despite utterly failing to provide, you know, examples of us expressing the opinions he claimed.

Nathan's a liar and victim of true Bush Derangement Syndrome (the deranged notion that the Bush Administration is not spectacularly, disgustingly dishonest, incompetent and corrupt.

Funny how those two qualities go together, hm?

Posted by: Gregory on April 12, 2007 at 7:13 PM | PERMALINK

Somehow this reminded me -- I recently saw a rerun of an early episode of the original mid-1960s Star Trek TV series (with Shatner and Nimoy),

Just as I predicted would happen, SA mischaracterized ST-TOS as having first aired in the mid-1960s, when in fact it aired in the *late* 1960s.

Posted by: Nathan is always correct on April 12, 2007 at 7:18 PM | PERMALINK

shortstop on April 12, 2007 at 6:58 PM

Yow!

Missing WMDs?
Now missing emails!? Good grief.
Can we lose Bush next?

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 12, 2007 at 7:33 PM | PERMALINK

Maybe the RNC decided that they didn't want to end up on the "Gee, we found these emails on [political operatives x, y, & z's laptops] and we're wondering why you don't have the original..." chain-gang.

Or, it could have been someone at RNC trying to keep a sword hanging over Karl's head, just in case that became necessary to save the Constitution, etc.

Posted by: parrot on April 12, 2007 at 7:33 PM | PERMALINK

No one anticipated that the Democrats were determined to investigate the White House.

Posted by: gregor on April 12, 2007 at 7:34 PM | PERMALINK

Missing WMDs?
Now missing emails!? Good grief.

Did anyone look under aWol's desk?

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 12, 2007 at 7:35 PM | PERMALINK

Really, it's cat and mouse. We're the cats, they're the mice. Posted by: frankly0 on April 12, 2007 at 6:35 PM

Sure it is amusing until ya realize that what the cats are playing with are mice in the last stage of rabies.

Posted by: Zit on April 12, 2007 at 7:36 PM | PERMALINK

guess who was the reporter who broke the story on the missing emails a year ago? Jason Leopold.

http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/57/17972

Guess who was the reporter that revisited this issue last week?

Jason Leopold

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/040507J.shtml

Posted by: thomas on April 12, 2007 at 7:42 PM | PERMALINK

BGRS(aka G.C.) >"Did anyone look under aWol's desk?"

In the pretzel bowl

"...playin with matches in a pool of gasoline..." - Swamp Mama Johnson

Posted by: daCascadian on April 12, 2007 at 7:44 PM | PERMALINK

Nathan is always correct wrote: "Just as I predicted would happen, SA mischaracterized ST-TOS as having first aired in the mid-1960s, when in fact it aired in the *late* 1960s."

I assume this is a joke, but for the record the first episode of the original Star Trek series ("The Man Trap") was broadcast on September 8, 1966. That's the "mid-1960s".

Posted by: SecularAnimist on April 12, 2007 at 7:46 PM | PERMALINK

Wow--this is starting to stink like four day old fish.
Rove et al. might just have spastic colons by now. This really has a feel of the 18 minute gap... dishonest, fraudulent, illusionary. A legacy of unethical behavior that will forever define this presidency.
ALL emails are recoverable.

"Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law breaker, it breeds contempt for the law."
From former US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

GW Bush: " One year ago today, the time for excuse-making has come to an end." 1/8/03

Posted by: consider wisely on April 12, 2007 at 7:49 PM | PERMALINK

I assume this is a joke, but for the record the first episode of the original Star Trek series ("The Man Trap") was broadcast on September 8, 1966. That's the "mid-1960s".

Ah, I predicted that this would be your response.

If you divide the 10 years of the 60s into thirds, an "early", a "middle", and a "late", with each third consisting of 3 years and 4 months, the late 60s begins on Sept 1, 1966.

Posted by: Nathan is always correct on April 12, 2007 at 8:06 PM | PERMALINK

> There's not a business in the world I'm aware
> of that allows people to permanently delete their
> emails. For various auditing and legal reasons,
> every single email ever sent is usually retained
> for a signifigant length of time,

Where do people come up with things like this? I thought we were reality-based? Some financial institutions, particuarly those regulated by the SEC, and certain public corporations have such a requirement. That is problem 10% or less of the e-mail systems in the US alone. For everyone else, when you hit Delete it is gone. Now, there may be backups, but those may or may not allow you to get the deleted message back depending on dozens of factors.

Cranky

Posted by: Cranky Observer on April 12, 2007 at 8:13 PM | PERMALINK

CW always: Rove et al. might just have spastic colons by now.

That made me chuckle!

BGRS: Did anyone look under aWol's desk?

Now that you mention aWol, see No. 6 below.

Glenn Greenwald at Salon documented what's gone missing (besides decency and integrity) at the Bush Administration:

1) The current missing WH emails
2) The gap mid-November to early December in the DOJ doc dump
3) A video of Jose Padilla's interrogation in a military brig that mysteriously disappeared from the Pentagon
4) Missing memos about torture and interrogation to and from the FBI and CIA and any documents dated after April 2003
5) 2,000 pages missing from a congressional copy of a classified report detailing the alleged acts of abuse by soldiers against Iraqi inmates at Abu Ghraib
6) Gaps in aWol's TANG service, the missing docs that explain his absences plus his missed annual medical exam in 1972
7) The alleged non-existent transcript of Aug. 29, 2005, videoconference call produced by Bush administration officials about Katrina that Congress had requested... which magically appeared via Newsweek.

Of course, there are the obvious missing things about Bush-Cheney: Saddam's WMDs and links to AQ, any sort of post-invasion plan for Iraq, $12 billion of Iraq funds, etc. ...And honesty, good governance, fiscal responsibility, competence, national security credibility, you know, the characteristics the Repubs like to tout about themselves.

But partisan corruption, incompetence, lying, and plain ol' skullduggery, there's a-plenty.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 12, 2007 at 8:39 PM | PERMALINK

I feel a need to post this:
"Media largely ignored Fitzgerald revelation that White House may have destroyed emails
Summary: Few major news outlets have covered the fact -- first reported by the New York Daily News -- that in a letter to I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's defense attorneys, special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald said that numerous emails from 2003 are missing from the White House computer archives.
A February 1 New York Daily News article by staff writer James Gordon Meek reported that in a recent letter to defense attorneys for former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the lead prosecutor in the CIA leak case, wrote that numerous White House emails from 2003 are missing from White House computer archives. A Media Matters for America survey of coverage following the publication of Meek's article found that major news outlets have -- with only a few exceptions -- ignored this story.

On October 28, 2005, a grand jury indicted Libby on five counts of perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements to the FBI. Made public as part of a recent court filing, Fitzgerald's letter was sent in response to requests by Libby's legal team that the prosecutor turn over a large number of documents pertaining to the defendant. At the end of the letter, in which Fitzgerald refused the request, he wrote:

We are aware of no evidence pertinent to the charges against defendant Libby which has been destroyed. 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..."

Posted by: consider wisely on April 12, 2007 at 8:40 PM | PERMALINK

If you divide the 10 years of the 60s into thirds, an "early", a "middle", and a "late", with each third consisting of 3 years and 4 months, the late 60s begins on Sept 1, 1966.

Wow, that means we are already into the "late 00's." I feel old.

Posted by: jimBOB on April 12, 2007 at 8:47 PM | PERMALINK

You're not old until your kids start getting gray hair.

Posted by: Disputo on April 12, 2007 at 8:50 PM | PERMALINK

Apollo, at the risk of appearing an unrepentant blogwhore...I ripped on aWol from my hubbies perspective today.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 12, 2007 at 8:56 PM | PERMALINK

at the risk of appearing an unrepentant blogwhore

Just so long as your hair isn't nappy....

;)

Posted by: Disputo on April 12, 2007 at 9:00 PM | PERMALINK

Well, it isn't too humid today...

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 12, 2007 at 9:03 PM | PERMALINK

Neocon-led government sucks.

Posted by: Donald from Hawaii on April 12, 2007 at 9:16 PM | PERMALINK

Seemingly it is a largely imaginary idea that emails are lost.
This assuredly is a purposeful email blunder that will leave the GOP in crisis, coupled with their willful self delusion about the recovery of email.
Strategically beneficial??
How about total lawlessness!!
This administration is genuinely devoted to its anti-democratic behaviors.

Is not the White House--through Attorney Gonzales-- responsible for ensuring mandatory compliance with applicable laws>>including the Presidential Records Act>> which appear to have been violated by their wierd, self-serving system?

Posted by: consider wisely on April 12, 2007 at 9:17 PM | PERMALINK

The really pertinent question, the one no one has yet asked...How can they frame Inman for this???

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 12, 2007 at 9:21 PM | PERMALINK

Just a quicky.

You had a post about Lee Iaccoca who asked about outrage.

I've never understood why there isn't any outrage in the US when rights are abused. But there isn't.

None here, and, particularly, none here from the right of the line. Just guess it's all OK. It's all OK.

We've even been here before, but it's all OK.

Man! We are close to the edge.

Posted by: notthere on April 12, 2007 at 9:31 PM | PERMALINK

I kept backups for 5 years. Just to CYA if nothing else.

Posted by: Chief on April 12, 2007 at 9:34 PM | PERMALINK

I kept backups for 5 years. Just to CYA if nothing else.

Posted by: Chief on April 12, 2007 at 9:37 PM | PERMALINK

Globe,
Read your post. Major Tom sure knows how to call 'em. And I'd chip in on some beer for Larry Johnson. Have you read LJ's latest post about the possibility of Fitzgerald not knowing about the use of RNC email accounts in the WH? Interesting repercussions, I'd say.

CW always,

You may also find this curious with regard to the Libby case. RawStory first broke the story and then The Washington Note confirmed it. Via Shakespeare's Sister, Mar. 28, 2006:

According to several Pentagon sources close to Rove and others familiar with the inquiry, Bush's senior adviser tipped off Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald to information that led to the recent "discovery" of 250 pages of missing email from the office of Vice President Dick Cheney…
Rove is providing information on deleted emails, erased hard drives and other types of obstruction by staff and other officials in the Vice President's office. Pentagon sources close to Rove confirmed this account.
None would name the staffers and/or officials whom Rove is providing information about. They did, however, explain that the White House computer system has "real time backup" servers and that while emails were deleted from computers, they were still retrievable from the backup system. By providing the dates and recipient information of the deleted emails, sources say, Rove was able to chart a path for Fitzgerald directly into the office of the Vice President.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 12, 2007 at 9:40 PM | PERMALINK

Keep in mind, fellow citizen journalists, this is an ever narrowing crisis.
You get the impression of ridiculously clueless 'Mayberry Machiavellis'... Mayberry RFD.
Every information technology specialist worth his or her mustard says emails are retrievable through the hard drive. However, we will likely watch their bullshit machine going into overdrive.

Even the conservatives at the national review weigh in as follows:

"We need not need more evidence, however, to reach a conclusion about the suitability of Alberto Gonzales for the leadership of the Department of Justice. While we defended him from some of the outlandish charges made during his confirmation hearings, we have never seen evidence that he has a fine legal mind, good judgment, or managerial ability. Nor has his conduct at any stage of this controversy gained our confidence.

His claim not to have been involved in the firings suggests that he was either deceptive or inexcusably detached from the operations of his own department..."

Posted by: consider wisely on April 12, 2007 at 9:47 PM | PERMALINK

I love you, Apollo 13. You are truly an investigative reporter.

Posted by: consider wisely on April 12, 2007 at 9:49 PM | PERMALINK

Apollo, if I win the bet, I like my locally brewed Boulevard Pale Ale.

He is far better connected than I am, so he is probably right. My assertion that it's a lower-level officer or a civilian is pure hunch.

With a dash of life experience and just enough undergrad psychology to make me dangerous.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 12, 2007 at 9:57 PM | PERMALINK

ps - I read every word LJ writes.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 12, 2007 at 10:02 PM | PERMALINK

BGRS(akaGC): The really pertinent question, the one no one has yet asked...How can they frame Inman for this???

Please say more.

Posted by: Mr. G on April 12, 2007 at 10:03 PM | PERMALINK

That's an inside-the-community joke.

Inman is happily ensconced in academia. He is miles away from all this, and not missing it at all, I'm sure.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 12, 2007 at 10:09 PM | PERMALINK

Senator Leahy did not sound like he would be bullied or out-foxed by the irresponsible stewards of the white house email.

"It is not that I'm so smart, it's just that I stay with problems longer." --Albert Einstein

"If you don't know what your government is doing, you don't live in a democracy." --Jane Anne Morris

Posted by: consider wisely on April 12, 2007 at 10:18 PM | PERMALINK

Globe,

I actually referring to your hubby's call about Gates getting "caught with his pants down" over extensions. And with regard to chipping in for beer for Larry, I wouldn't bet against your hunch... but I would gladly buy a round of pints for Larry and you. No betting necessary. Simple gratitude.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 12, 2007 at 10:21 PM | PERMALINK

RE: Things that have gone missing...

You forgot to mention something that really pisses me off.

See #8:

1) The current missing WH emails
2) The gap mid-November to early December in the DOJ doc dump
3) A video of Jose Padilla's interrogation in a military brig that mysteriously disappeared from the Pentagon
4) Missing memos about torture and interrogation to and from the FBI and CIA and any documents dated after April 2003
5) 2,000 pages missing from a congressional copy of a classified report detailing the alleged acts of abuse by soldiers against Iraqi inmates at Abu Ghraib
6) Gaps in aWol's TANG service, the missing docs that explain his absences plus his missed annual medical exam in 1972
7) The alleged non-existent transcript of Aug. 29, 2005, videoconference call produced by Bush administration officials about Katrina that Congress had requested... which magically appeared via Newsweek.

8) Pat Tillman's journal:

"He started keeping a journal at 16 and continued the practice on the battlefield, writing in it regularly. (His journal was lost immediately after his death.)"

It wasn't lost.
Journals don't get lost...
True writers, like Pat, keep them close to their chest. BET ON IT.

Here's the quote that will prove that to you:

"Interviews also show a side of Pat Tillman not widely known — a fiercely independent thinker who enlisted, fought and died in service to his country yet was critical of President Bush and opposed the war in Iraq, where he served a tour of duty. He was an avid reader whose interests ranged from history books on World War II and Winston Churchill to works of leftist Noam Chomsky, a favorite author."

They stole it.
Probably burned it.
This perhaps is their greatest sin of all...


Posted by: ROTFLMLiberalAO on April 12, 2007 at 10:21 PM | PERMALINK

Another new low. It is like the jet stream of April is following the fortunes of the administration. Unbelievably corrupt.
What is more sickening, their intransigent refusal to leave Iraq is now to solely placate Big Oil--they fear a regional meltdown. Everyone with a clue would have left years ago. So obvious is it that oil is calling the shots for the war, I think it is fair to call this administration "The Oil Regency" for the purposes of history. It is clear that everything that has been plotted, stolen or exploded was done at the behest of a too rosy oil profit assessment. I expect we will find that Exxon-Mobile-BP-Texaco-Shell was behind Bush's original stolen election, the complicity of the MSM, and the quagmire of Iraq. Rove was free--those types tend to have already sold their soul repeatedly in the subprime marketplace.

Those e-mails would tell us a lot, but the gullible public will be assailed with non-stop media stories about how there really was a way a huge electro magnet ruined everything innocently in parts of the server. Perino is already preparing this part of the script. It is more clear with each passing day. "It is strange, and we really can't explain it. We are sorry. Here is an expert on magnets from Exxon to explain the weird coincidental placement of the illuminated magnetic globe and its quirky effects on Rove's server."


Posted by: Sparko on April 12, 2007 at 10:21 PM | PERMALINK

One more thing to add before I retire for the night:

White House Criminal Conspiracy

Posted by: consider wisely on April 12, 2007 at 10:24 PM | PERMALINK

*Blushing Here* Thanks Apollo. :)

Cheers!

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 12, 2007 at 10:24 PM | PERMALINK

Globe: read your blogging and agree fully with Apollo.
Put up a fund cite and many of us would gladly kick in for a beer for you and LJ irrespective of degree of certainty. You have done spectacular service for your country. Make it a microbrew, that Kansas City Busch beer is a wee bit too close to tainted by its name alone!

Posted by: Sparko on April 12, 2007 at 10:32 PM | PERMALINK

BGRS(akaGC):Inman is happily ensconced in academia.

We talkin' Bobby Ray? If so, last I heard of him (long ago) was he delivered a rant about why he wouldn't do CIA, something involving LaRouche. The CSPAN (re?)broadcast of said rant was cancelled. Lost track after that. I'd love to catch up (and I'd love to hear the rant.)

Please, fill me in.

Posted by: Mr. G on April 12, 2007 at 10:39 PM | PERMALINK

If Bush & Co. were a publicly-traded company, the revelations of their deception, duplicity, and sad attempts at cover-up would have brought the value of their stock down to about $0.16 - and they would have been de-listed from the Exchange over a month ago.

But instead our sleepy nation and press puts up with this buffoonery; we care less about our government than stockholders care about their company.

Sad.

Posted by: lampwick on April 12, 2007 at 10:40 PM | PERMALINK

notthere: "I've never understood why there isn't any outrage in the US when rights are abused. But there isn't. None here, and, particularly, none here from the right of the line."

Yours is not to reason nor understand why. You need to support our troops by going shopping, just like President Bush told you. After all, the adults are now in char--(POP!!)

You know, it's really uncomfortable, bending over and trying to climb head-first inside my own ass! I don't know how Al and egbert can perform that feat so effortlessly, and seemingly at will. Maybe if I did more right-wing political yoga ...

Posted by: Donald from Hawaii, Who's Only Experimenting with a Right-Wing Thought Process on April 12, 2007 at 10:40 PM | PERMALINK

" Mr. Kelner did not provide many details about why this special policy was adopted for Mr. Rove. But he did indicate that one factor was the presence of investigative or discovery requests or other legal concerns."

The Valerie Plame investigation?

Posted by: bobo the chimp on April 12, 2007 at 10:42 PM | PERMALINK
…the late 60s begins on Sept 1, 1966. Nathan is always correct at 8:06 PM

I thought it was remembered from the millennium celebration, there was no year 0. Therefore, the first year was 1, decades begin at x1, centuries at xx1, and millennia at xxx1.
Technically, the Sixties begin in 1961 since 1960 was the last year of the Fifties.
Dividing a decade into thirds of 3.334 year each, the early 60's ran to 1964.3; the mid 60's to 1967.6, and the late 60's to the end of 1970.
September 8, 1966? Mid 60's. Point to SecularAnimist.

Posted by: Mike on April 12, 2007 at 10:43 PM | PERMALINK

ROTFLMLiberalAO Probably burned it.

The investigation revealed that soldiers burned Tillman's uniform and body armor. So burning his journals isn't far-fetched.

CW always,
Thanks, with warm regards in return. Amazing what one can find with tenacity and having enough patience to dig around pages of Google queries.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 12, 2007 at 10:49 PM | PERMALINK

consider wisely >includes "If you don't know what your government is doing, you don't live in a democracy." --Jane Anne Morris"

Thanks. That`s a keeper.

"Patriotism is not a short and frenzied outburst of emotion but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime." - Adlai E. Stevenson, Jr.

Posted by: daCascadian on April 12, 2007 at 10:53 PM | PERMALINK

Mr. G - After a Republican witchhunt after Clinton nominated him for DoD, he withdrew his nomination and is at the LBJ school in Austin.

There for a while in the eighties every damned nefarious thing that happened they tried to blame him for - from Iran-Contra to Pollard's treason.

He remains to this day the only person ever to have the stones to deal harshly with Israel, when he cut the Mossad out of the intel loop.

I think he's a mensch, and I hope he is happy in his retirement from public service.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 12, 2007 at 10:53 PM | PERMALINK

BGRS (aka G.C.) >"...he cut the Mossad out of the intel loop..."

Didn`t know, thanks for the insight.

Maybe he suffered some "blowback" over that.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

Posted by: daCascadian on April 12, 2007 at 10:58 PM | PERMALINK

Thanks, Sparko. I appreciate that. If you are really moved to contribute something because I am blogging, make a donation to the Air Force Aid Society or the Kansas City Public Library.

Or the ACLU, of course.:)

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 12, 2007 at 11:00 PM | PERMALINK

'I've never understood why there isn't any outrage in the US when rights are abused. But there isn't.'

People would have to know their rights are being abused and there are barriers getting this info to them when the info reflects badly on the letter R.

Posted by: jg on April 12, 2007 at 11:01 PM | PERMALINK

[Posting deleted.]

Posted by: Pat on April 12, 2007 at 11:02 PM | PERMALINK

lampwick: "But instead our sleepy nation and press puts up with this buffoonery ..."

You want real buffoonery? Watch a replay of tonight's Paula Zahn Now! on CNN, in which right-wing Dennis Prager expresses his outrage at Don Imus' "nappy-headed ho" remark, while Paula turns the whole episode into an indictment of rap music.

To take Paula's blonde-impaired argument to its logicial conclusion, we only have to paraphrase Armstrong "For Sale - Cheap" Williams on MSNBC's Scarborough Country yesterday, and say that it's black people's own damn fault that white people feel compelled to label them in such deroguatory fashion.

Why, black people just need to stop being a convenient target for white people's wrath -- it's really as simple as that.

(Sigh!) And I wonder why I often find wanting to just get stoned, after hearing such mindless punditry ...

Posted by: Donald from Hawaii, doing bong hits "with" Jesus -- and not just for Him on April 12, 2007 at 11:03 PM | PERMALINK

C.E. is a modern invention that coincides (coincidentaly) with A.D. My guess would be that Jesus was born at 0 A.D., not 1 A.D. as this would make Jesus 1 year old the moment he was born. I think this is asking too much even of virgin birth.

Just to keep the math straight (not by Mike's math) 1/3 = .33333', 2/3 = .66666', 1/3 of 10 years = 10/3 = 3.33333', 2/3 of 10 years - 6.66666'.

365 days per year, 366 leap year: 366/3 = 122 days.

So, counting from 1st Jan 60 would be: 1960 + 1961 + 1962 + 1/3year.

So 1/3 = 1963 + 122 days = 1st May, 1963.

So 2/3 = 5.1.63 + 1964 + 1965 + (5.1.1966 + 122) days = 31st August 1966.

I'll give you a day either side.

Posted by: notthere on April 12, 2007 at 11:04 PM | PERMALINK

Apollo 13:

The investigation revealed that soldiers burned Tillman's uniform and body armor. So burning his journals isn't far-fetched.

Can't agree with that.

It presupposes that those examining his things for burning assumed the family had no right or interest in his most private thoughts. Even if these fellow soldiers hated him (doubtful) I suspect they would still preserve the journals for his family.

I suspect that the journals got sent up the stairs to superiors who didn't like what they read...

Why it pisses me off to no end:
You do not destroy a person's final thoughts.
To do so is a sin beyond belief.


Posted by: ROTFLMLiberalAO on April 12, 2007 at 11:13 PM | PERMALINK

Sorry to throw a pedantic monkey wrench into the glorious works y'all are furiously sweating over - but there is the little matter of the missing days when Pope Gregory rejiggered the calendar...

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 12, 2007 at 11:13 PM | PERMALINK

Deleting emails doesn't eliminate them, as any moderately computer savvy person knows. They are fully recoverable by software available online, some free, or via data recovery service. The only way this is not the case is a data wipe. To do a true data wipe, the RNC would have to be complicit in the criminal act of aiding Rove in violating the legally binding hold on deletions.

A mere email user can "delete" emails just fine, but what they cannot normally do is wipe them (delete the data and then overwrite the drive sectors that hold the data, hundreds of times, with nonsense data. THAT is something that Rove, as a mere user, could NOT do.

So, either the emails are fully recoverable or the RNC is guilty of conspiring with Rove to violate the law. That and the fact that Rove didn't receive and send emails only to himself. EVERYONE who received emails from Rove or sent emails to Rove would also have to take part in the data elimination. That would be a conspiracy.

Rove, by himself, cannot eliminate his emails and be free and clear.

Posted by: Praedor Atrebates on April 12, 2007 at 11:14 PM | PERMALINK

Just winding you up.

I don't suppose there was a year 0. They probably counted year 1 from the time he was supposedly born, completing at years end.

I'll take 1st May, '64, and 31st August '67.

Posted by: notthere on April 12, 2007 at 11:19 PM | PERMALINK

Something seriously sounds wrong here. There's not a business in the world I'm aware of that allows people to permanently delete their emails.

I can tell you of one that I am personally aware of: hushmail. Hushmail servers allow you to PERMANENTLY delete emails...or at least that is an option you get when you delete email messages. They are one of those email providers that specialize in encrypted/private email and privacy protection. Now, whether or not the option to permanently delete emails means that the email data is wiped (deleted and overwritten hundreds of times with other data) is another question.

Posted by: Praedor Atrebates on April 12, 2007 at 11:19 PM | PERMALINK

Globe: you are a treasure already--guess I'll keep giving to the aforementioned charities and drink your beer in absentia--kind of like Rove's emails!

Let's get some justice going on the Oil Regency.

Posted by: Sparko on April 12, 2007 at 11:26 PM | PERMALINK

I'll give you an "Amen!" and I'll bear witness.

Thanks for the kind words.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 12, 2007 at 11:28 PM | PERMALINK

Als' humor factor keeps me coming back. Hilaryarious!

Posted by: bobbywally on April 12, 2007 at 11:31 PM | PERMALINK

The latest incarnation of the Beltway Madam dropped a name in court today - now mind you, she still maintains she wasn't selling sex - but she dropped the name of Harlan Ullman...the guy who dreamed up the notion of *Shock and Awe.* He of course denied it...As every high-powered man since the dawn of journalism has denied he was boinking hookers. (Most always, he is lying.) He has a good lawyer, though. He is represented by Bracewell & Guiliani.

Nobody else is asking about the security clearances these mendacious fuck-ups enjoy...So I will. What about these guys security clearances? Hmmm? Are they at least being reviewed???

More here

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 12:02 AM | PERMALINK

ROTFLMLiberalAO: It presupposes that those examining his things for burning... Even if these fellow soldiers hated him (doubtful) I suspect they would still preserve the journals for his family.

Didn't intend to imply that the same soldiers involved in burning Tillman's uniform and body armor also burned his journals... but I can see how my comment could be misconstrued. My bad. I was simply agreeing with your statement that "burning" Pat's journals isn't a far-fetched notion.

Who burned or disappeared Tillman's journals? I would agree with you that probably "the journals got sent up the stairs to superiors who didn't like what they read." BGRS has been tracking the story about the investigation into Tillman's death that now involves "nine officers, including up to four generals." Regardless, Pat's death was a tragedy. The exploitation of his death, the lies and deception are despicable. The loss of Tillman's journals, especially for his family's sake, makes it even more terrible.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 13, 2007 at 12:15 AM | PERMALINK

BGRS(akaGS): Your response above, regarding Inman, led me to the following from Libertarian Murray Rothbard:

This incident must be understood against its structural background: the CIA had long consisted of two clashing factions: the hard-line hawks, fanatical Cold Warriors, pro-Zionists and close to Israel's spy agency Mossad; and the moderates, close to the Establishment and the Rockefeller World Empire. The hard-liners and Mossadniks were big in the operations department, and included Ops chief James Jesus Angleton, and Bill Buckley's CIA mentor and buddy E. Howard Hunt; they were headed by William J. Casey. The moderates were strong in the Intelligence department, and included William Colby and Admiral Inman.

Carl Olglesby referred to the larger embodiments of these factions as "Cowboys" and "Yankees".

In the same vein, Carroll Quigley spoke of the struggle between industrial and financial capital, and placed it in a truly sobering context: the survival of Western Civilization.

Samuel Huntington gave a hat tip to Quigley, and proceeded to ignore his central point. Instead, he proposed a "clash of civilizations" based on something more durable than political ideology: religious belief. This, of course, presupposed the demise of financial capital, but that wasn't an issue for Huntington.

The current plan (near as I can tell) is for Industrial (now Christian) capital to form an alliance with Islam against whatever Huntington is currently calling the Yellow Peril (was "Confucianism", later on "Sinic Civilization"). We just have to get rid of those Shiites, who are sitting on the oil.

Surely we can do better. Google, Apple, and, yes, even Microsoft give me hope.

As Bertrand Russell said: In the welter of conflicting fanaticisms, one of the few unifying forces is scientific truthfulness...

Posted by: Mr. G on April 13, 2007 at 12:16 AM | PERMALINK

Very well done, Grasshopper!

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 12:22 AM | PERMALINK

One thing not to be lost in all of this is that they had to know just how lame this explanation would be not only to politico types but damn near everyone these days and yet they chose to go this route anyway. Why? Whatever it is it in those e-mails must be so dangerous to them that this kind of clear credibility shredding/destroying (and it is not like they have much left to start with and even they must recognize that these days) exercise is preferable which given just how much worse this is making an already incompetent looking Administration look is saying something. What are they so afraid of? That is what we cannot allow ourselves to forget while we are down in the weeds of the details of the matter IMHO.

Posted by: Scotian on April 13, 2007 at 12:37 AM | PERMALINK

So 2/3 = 5.1.63 + 1964 + 1965 + (5.1.1966 + 122) days = 31st August 1966.

Have you considered using the harmonic mean of these dates instead, or possibly the median? I believe 31 would be an outlier because it only happens in a few months, as would September cause it uniquely starts with S.

Then again, it mostly depends on how close to the speed of light you are traveling.

Posted by: absent observer on April 13, 2007 at 12:48 AM | PERMALINK

Bom - Bom - Bom -
Another one bites the dust!
And another one! And another one!
Another one bites the dust!.

OooooOooOoOoo OooOoOoo OooOoOoo

Another one bites the dust!

Posted by: notthere on April 13, 2007 at 12:51 AM | PERMALINK

Mr.G --

"As Bertrand Russell said: In the welter of conflicting fanaticisms, one of the few unifying forces is scientific truthfulness..."

I think what Russell was referring to was the similar Karl Popper "Logic of Scientific Discovery" type philosophy, not the rather speculative if not necesserily inaccurate but totally unscientific analysis you write of.

In short, don't comfort yourself with a misapplied aphorism.

Posted by: notthere on April 13, 2007 at 1:01 AM | PERMALINK

notthere:

In what way was what I wrote "analysis" let alone "not necessarily inaccurate but totally unscientific analysis"?

In short, what's your beef?

Posted by: Mr. G on April 13, 2007 at 1:05 AM | PERMALINK

Where do deleted comment posts go?

I know there have been many times I have not posted what I have written. Where do those comments go?

If I backspace and wipe out whole paragraphs, where do the words go?

I have written long posts and then hit the link to call up comments, losing the file that was my post. Where did it go? One time I lost a comment twice this way. I must have been unconsciously censoring myself. (Making very many people happy.)

Text in html, or whatever this is called, is a little bit different than ink on paper, which goes in the trash, crumpled, if it is rejected.

Posted by: Brojo on April 13, 2007 at 1:20 AM | PERMALINK

'I think what Russell was referring to was the similar Karl Popper "Logic of Scientific Discovery" type philosophy, not the rather speculative if not necesserily inaccurate but totally unscientific analysis you write of.'

Dude, you totally ended your sentence with a prepostion.

Posted by: jg on April 13, 2007 at 1:32 AM | PERMALINK

I am of the opinion that Bertrand Russell should be quoted at every conceivable opportunity. In fact, I think I will quote him right now:

Many people would sooner die than think; In fact, they do so.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 1:45 AM | PERMALINK

Josh Marshall is reporting that there will be another huge WH document dump tonight.

Posted by: nepeta on April 13, 2007 at 1:47 AM | PERMALINK

I am of the opinion that Bertrand Russell should be quoted at every conceivable opportunity.

Taking this as an opportunity:

"It is traditional to regard opinion as due to mental causes, but this is only true of the immediate causes: in the background, there is usually force in the service of some creed."

"Broadly speaking, all the elements in Marx's philosophy which are derived from Hegel are unscientific, in the sense that there is no reason whatever to suppose them true."

"The governors of the world believe, and have always believed, that virtue can only be taught by teaching falsehood, and that any man who knew the truth would be wicked. I disbelieve this, absolutely and entirely. I believe that love of truth is the basis of all real virtue, and that virtues based upon lies can only do harm."

"I found one day in school a boy of medium size ill-treating a smaller boy. I expostulated, but he replied: 'The bigs hit me, so I hit the babies; that's fair.' In these words he epitomized the history of the human race."

"The first step in a fascist movement is the combination under an energetic leader of a number of men who possess more than the average share of leisure, brutality, and stupidity. The next step is to fascinate fools and muzzle the intelligent, by emotional excitement on the one hand and terrorism on the other."

Posted by: Mr. G on April 13, 2007 at 1:52 AM | PERMALINK

From TPM. WH claims executive privilege over RNC e-mails.

From the Times ...

The clash also seemed to push the White House and Democrats closer to a serious confrontation over executive privilege, with the White House counsel, Fred F. Fielding, asserting that the administration has control over countless other e-mail messages that the Republican National Committee has archived. Democrats are insisting that they are entitled to get the e-mail messages directly from the national committee.

Posted by: nepeta on April 13, 2007 at 1:52 AM | PERMALINK

In the words of Josh Marshall, "...even Richard Nixon was not half this audacious." He refers to a NYTimes article by Sheryl Gay Stolberg, Apr. 13, 2007:

The clash also seemed to push the White House and Democrats closer to a serious confrontation over executive privilege, with the White House counsel, Fred F. Fielding, asserting that the administration has control over countless other e-mail messages that the Republican National Committee has archived. Democrats are insisting that they are entitled to get the e-mail messages directly from the national committee....
...In a letter to Mr. Leahy and Representative John Conyers Jr., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Mr. Fielding, the White House counsel, said the administration was prepared to produce e-mail from the national committee, but only as part of a “carefully and thoughtfully considered package of accommodations” — in other words, only as part of the offer for Mr. Rove and the others to appear in private.
Mr. Conyers, a Michigan Democrat, issued a tart reply: “The White House position seems to be that executive privilege not only applies in the Oval Office, but to the R.N.C. as well. There is absolutely no basis in law or fact for such a claim.”
Senator Charles E. Schumer, the New York Democrat who is spearheading the Senate inquiry into the prosecutors’ dismissals, said the Fielding letter “can be summed up in three words: ‘We are stonewalling.’ ”
Mr. Waxman, meanwhile, spent Thursday pushing the committee to release the e-mail. According to the congressman’s account of Thursday’s meeting with Mr. Kelner, the R.N.C. lawyer, as well as an interview with a Republican official familiar with the committee’s e-mail practices, the committee has a large cache of communications from White House officials. But there are none before 2005, when the committee “began to treat Mr. Rove’s e-mails in a special fashion,” Mr. Waxman wrote.
The committee appears to have changed its e-mail retention policies twice, possibly in response to the investigation by a special prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, into the leak of the name of a C.I.A. officer. When that inquiry began, in early 2004, the committee’s practice was to purge all e-mail from its servers after 30 days.
But in August of that year, according to the Republican official, the committee decided that e-mail sent by White House officials would be kept on the server. Still, the change did not prevent White House officials from manually deleting their e-mail, and some, including Mr. Rove, apparently did. So in 2005, the committee took steps to prevent Mr. Rove from doing so....
...Now the question is whether the missing e-mail can be recovered. Mr. Smith, the Internet security consultant, said e-mail ordinarily is initially stored in at least four places: in the “sent” file of the computer used to send the message; on the computer server of the sender’s Internet service provider; on the computer server of the recipient’s provider; and on the recipient’s computer.
Even if the message is deleted, it may be recoverable from a computer’s hard drive. Eventually, however, the deleted file may be overwritten and lost, Mr. Smith said.
It's time for special prosecutor to investigate, investigate, and investigate. To go to this extent, to evoke executive privilege over the RNC email archive makes the WH look more and more guilty as well as absurd with every stonewalling moment that passes. I would guess they are stalling for time... time to erase and shred damning evidence and concoct a cover-up story in the interim since they have been awful at lying on the fly. But... can they purge all of anything that could reveal high crimes and misdemeanors? Therein hangs the noose... for whatever the dirt is as well as the cover-up.

TPMmuckraker says that "informal" discussions underway hint at immunity for Monica Goodling.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 13, 2007 at 1:56 AM | PERMALINK

CORRECTION: Document dump coming from DOJ, not the WH.

Posted by: nepeta on April 13, 2007 at 1:59 AM | PERMALINK

nepeta,

Hey, we were on the same track. You have good taste in bloggers. : )

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 13, 2007 at 2:00 AM | PERMALINK

Aside from the obvious ethical and legal implications let's not forget the absolutely HUGE national security issue here.

If 95% of Karl Rove's emails are done on non-secure email servers, not to mention all the other government officials using unsecure RNC accounts, then highly classified and sensitive government material has been compromised. Period. In this post 9-11 world, as the administration likes to say, security is all important.

Democrats need to point out that either one of two things are happening here. The administration, Karl Rove and the RNC have been deliberately lying about this to cover their tracks. Or they have committed a borderline treasonous lapse of security protocols. It's either one of the other. Hammer them on this.

Posted by: Han Solomente on April 13, 2007 at 2:04 AM | PERMALINK

Apollo, I was thinking the same thing! Glad you copied the whole Times article. Josh is the best place to go for up to the minute news on the USA scandal.

Posted by: nepeta on April 13, 2007 at 2:05 AM | PERMALINK

I'm off to TPM for a bit - but I have to make this announcement: McCain has fired a bunch of his campaign staff. I read it in the Independent. There is desperation aboard the straight-talk express.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 2:07 AM | PERMALINK

Sorry - Straight Jacket Express.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 2:09 AM | PERMALINK

"There is desperation aboard the straight-talk express"

McCain is not a worry. Who are we going to run against Fred Thompson?

Posted by: Mr. G on April 13, 2007 at 2:15 AM | PERMALINK

Well, I put a poll up on my site and Edwards and Richardson are favored among the really, really smart people who read my rantings.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 2:25 AM | PERMALINK

"Edwards and Richardson are favored"

Glad to hear it, BGRS!

Posted by: nepeta on April 13, 2007 at 2:30 AM | PERMALINK

I like Richardson a lot. Too bad the electorate isn't really, really smart, like your readers. If I search for Richardson in TVGuide, I get nothing.

Posted by: Mr. G on April 13, 2007 at 2:31 AM | PERMALINK

Here's the best I can do:

Fred Thompson == Larry "Lonesome" Rhodes

Run with it.

Posted by: Mr. G on April 13, 2007 at 3:21 AM | PERMALINK

I'm curious as to why the prosecutor in Abramoff (and Abramoff's associate, Neil Volz, convicted of public corruption) didn't uncover this backdoor communications system through the RNC after email between Abramoff and the White House (and Volz and the White House) surfaced on some of these extra-legal accounts. Why weren't all the records on all of the laptops subpoenaed then?

Let's hope that this puts to rest one line from the Republicans' list of talking points, "There's not one shred of evidence of any wrongdoing, that any laws were broken, of any crimes committed."

I think Orrin Hatch broke his own personal best record, of not answering the questions put to him, but instead filibustering with these RNC talking points.

Posted by: Maeven on April 13, 2007 at 4:37 AM | PERMALINK

Wouldn't it be great if the FBI found that the RNC e-mail retention policy was not compliant with the Patriot Act? The loyal bushies would be hoisted by their own petards!
Posted by: Elliott on April 12, 2007 at 6:23 PM

Wouldn't it be great if we could trust the FBI, under this Justice Department, to investigate Republicans? But that's the whole crux of this scandal right there, isn't it- using the power of federal law enforcement at the very highest level for partisan ends.

Posted by: RobW on April 13, 2007 at 5:16 AM | PERMALINK

I'm curious as to why the prosecutor in Abramoff (and Abramoff's associate, Neil Volz, convicted of public corruption) didn't uncover this backdoor communications system through the RNC after email between Abramoff and the White House (and Volz and the White House) surfaced on some of these extra-legal accounts. Posted by: Maeven on April 13, 2007 at 4:37 AM

That is a DAMNED good question. Let's see...

R. Robert Acosta was Bush's appointee to AAG Civil Rights Division, the first and most heavily politicized branch of Justice; he helped put them over in 2004. His first act there? Approval of Texas redistricting in 2003. He then resigned there and was appointed interim US Attorney for Southern Florida in June 2005.

http://january6th.org/acosta.html

His first big case there? SunCruz, and the Abramoff scandal.

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/fls/PressReleases/060329-01.html

(dammit, can't remember how to embed url)

And wouldn't you know it? His time in S. FL as USA when he was investigating Abramoff (mid-'05 til Mar. '06) coincides with the period in which Rove's mail was being specially archived by the RNC (as noted by daCascadian at 6:24 PM) AND Abramoff himself was in regular contact with the White House through Rove's executive assistant, Susan Ralston, who was herself in constant contact with... Ken Mehlman at the RNC.

(Remember: the Abramoff investigation was NOT initiated by the Justice department or the White House -duh-, but by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, which put pressure on Justice... right around the time Acosta was given his interim appointment.)

This is all WAY too cozy. I knew from the beginning that the USAs who were fired were nowhere near as big a deal as the ones who kept their jobs or got promoted.

Posted by: RobW on April 13, 2007 at 6:05 AM | PERMALINK

> Deleting emails doesn't eliminate them,
> as any moderately computer savvy person
> knows. They are fully recoverable by software
> available online, some free, or via data
> recovery service.

Things I have learned in the last three days that I hadn't previously known after 19 years of managing e-mail systems:

* E-mail can never be deleted
* Every single e-mail ever sent can always be recovered
* Every e-mail system automatically keeps a copy of all sent messages
* No e-mail users are allowed to use a Delete function, even assuming that there is one
* No e-mail system has an automatic purge function
* No entity has a data retention policy that specifies timed purging, and if they do it is utterly illegal
* Data can never be erased from storage systems
* Every e-mail server, router, and firewall that every touches an e-mail packet keeps a copy of it [1]
* All that Congress needs to do is "grab the hard drive"

Damn - 19 years of hard work that I didn't actually have to do to learn how e-mail systems really work.

Cranky

[1] Admittedly this _was_ somewhat true under the original conception of 'net e-mail circa 1975-1985.

Posted by: Cranky Observer on April 13, 2007 at 7:53 AM | PERMALINK

Cranky,

I think you're being a little too tough on the commenter.

If by "data recovery service" they are referring to a CIA team, an inclined board, and a few buckets of water, and if by "fully recoverable" they mean we can get some unreliable version of the original emails -- they have themselves a hollywood plot.

Don't forget that, if need be, we can enhance archived oblique satellite imagery of the whitehouse and read the emails as they were typed. We just need a sexy computer nerd with her hair back and some thick rimmed glasses.

Posted by: B on April 13, 2007 at 8:57 AM | PERMALINK

Representative Rove email after the initiation of special archiving:

Mehlman,

Whaaaaaaass Uuuuuup!!!

What did you think of the boxing match? With more and more fighters hailing from Europe, important bouts are missing on U.S. airwaves. But, there may be a solution thanks to Don King and James Dolan.

The weather here is interesting. A slight chance of rain after 2pm. Mostly cloudy, with a high near 55. North wind 5 to 8 mph becoming south. Chance of precipitation is 20%.

It's only 343 days til my Birthday. I can't wait to see everyone at my party.

Salutations,

Karl

Posted by: B on April 13, 2007 at 9:11 AM | PERMALINK

Money talks, anything can be erased permanently..... That is until it's time to write one's memoirs -- its amazing what proof people kept when they're trying to prove their version of the facts.

Posted by: Ray Waldren on April 13, 2007 at 9:21 AM | PERMALINK

Cranky, why don't you write a technical post about erasing emails. I bet Blue Girl could give you some space on one of her blogs.

Posted by: Ron Byers on April 13, 2007 at 9:26 AM | PERMALINK

B, you crack me up as usual.

Josh is the best place to go for up to the minute news on the USA scandal.

They have really been doing yeoman's work over there. Outstanding.

Posted by: shortstop on April 13, 2007 at 9:30 AM | PERMALINK

Let's assume the Republicans can erase the emails. They have to erase them on at least 4 different computers. We aren't talking about keeping your wife from finding out about your girlfriend, we are talking about keeping trained and focused IT professionals from finding the emails. To truly eliminate them they have to jump through a set of hoops that would imply intention to obstruct a conserted investigation down the line. If the boys in the White House were truly doing America's business and had nothing to hide why would they go to all that trouble? And if they did, why do they claim the destruction was inadvertant?

As somebody said above. Do you doubt they won't show up when it is time for Karl and the gang to write their retirement "tell all" books.

Posted by: Ron Byers on April 13, 2007 at 9:34 AM | PERMALINK

Things I have learned in the last three days that I hadn't previously known after 19 years of managing e-mail systems:
* E-mail can never be deleted
* Every single e-mail ever sent can always be recovered
* Every e-mail system automatically keeps a copy of all sent messages
* No e-mail users are allowed to use a Delete function, even assuming that there is one
* No e-mail system has an automatic purge function
* No entity has a data retention policy that specifies timed purging, and if they do it is utterly illegal
* Data can never be erased from storage systems
* Every e-mail server, router, and firewall that every touches an e-mail packet keeps a copy of it [1]
* All that Congress needs to do is "grab the hard drive"

Nineteen years of managing E-mail systems? Mr. Cranky, I was taken to the woodshed yesterday by those who disputed that I was using E-mail regularly from late 1989 through 1994

Thank you for publishing your views and thank you for supporting my contention that, at least during 1993 and 1994, E-mail was a regular part of my daily life (until the Federal authorities seized the servers and computers of the investment bank where I worked and used them as evidence against me.)

Suck eggs, liberals. And pay attention when smart people like Mr. Cranky and myself tell you what for.

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 13, 2007 at 9:45 AM | PERMALINK

Norman Rogers,
I disagree with just about everything you post, so please don't take this as any indication of support. However, your critics yesterday were incorrect about the history of e-mail and e-mail system intereconnections pre-Internet, which have existed on a meaningful scale since at least 1970. It is not unreasonable that a person in a sophisticated corporate environment could have been using e-mail on a daily basis in 1989.

Cranky

Posted by: Cranky Observer on April 13, 2007 at 10:03 AM | PERMALINK

There is no guarantee that the RNC kept backups of user e-mails. Many industries, law firms in particular, want e-mails deleted after a certain time period, and adjust their backup schedule accordingly. However, as Patrick Leahy noted, it is possible to collect deleted e-mails from other servers they may have been routed through. That would take an enormous amount of effort and resources, though.

Posted by: MeLoseBrain? on April 13, 2007 at 10:15 AM | PERMALINK

However, your critics yesterday were incorrect about the history of e-mail and e-mail system intereconnections pre-Internet, which have existed on a meaningful scale since at least 1970. It is not unreasonable that a person in a sophisticated corporate environment could have been using e-mail on a daily basis in 1989.

Sir, my critics are confused babies who can't quite get over the fact that I have taken their candy and flushed it down the toilet.

Today, you are my ally. Together, we form an unlikely alliance that destroys ignorance and gives uninformed fools the middle finger salute and the high hat. If you ever need someone to destroy your adversary or deliver a knock-out punch to someone who is teetering on the brink of obscurity, just raise your hand and I shall appear on these threads to assist you.

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 13, 2007 at 10:21 AM | PERMALINK

There is aa lot of misconception here about data backup. We have no idea what the RNC does regarding data backup, and many, if not most, organizations use different rotation schedules and backup methods for e-mail as opposed to other data. Large companies are getting away from using tape, most use disc storage, either in SAN (Storage Area Network), or NAS (Network-Attached Storage) environments, so tracking older deleted e-mails can be a tricky business.

Financial records must be kept for a minimum of 7 years, but most firms segment those records out to be stored under a seperate rotation schedule. It is highly unlikely that the RNC keeps its e-mails stored using the same paradigm. If they are not required to do so by law, why would they?

Posted by: MeLoseBrain? on April 13, 2007 at 10:23 AM | PERMALINK

> Norman Rogers
> Today, you are my ally.

No, I am not: not today or any day. I was just correcting a misstatment of fact, since I personally try to stay reality-based.

Cranky

Posted by: Cranky Observer on April 13, 2007 at 10:26 AM | PERMALINK

Neocon-led government sucks.
Posted by: Donald from Hawaii

'The phrase "conservative misrule" is a redundancy. The two words mean exactly the same thing.' - Robert L. Borosage

p.s. to wisely: "Our government... teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. --Louis D. Brandeis

But this one remains my favorite: "We can have democracy in this country or we can have great concentrated wealth in the hands of a few. We cannot have both." - Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis.

Posted by: MsNThrope on April 13, 2007 at 10:35 AM | PERMALINK

Norman,

Don't fret any late discovery of your early 90s e-mails - Heidi Fleisch claims they have been erased. As well as Jeff Gannon on your 2000s.

Glad to see that you are still bi-partisan.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on April 13, 2007 at 10:37 AM | PERMALINK

Here's my favorite bizarre GOP claim so far today, as reported in the NY Times:

The clash also seemed to push the White House and Democrats closer to a serious confrontation over executive privilege, with the White House counsel, Fred F. Fielding, asserting that the administration has control over countless other e-mail messages that the Republican National Committee has archived.

Executive privilege, remember, is (generally speaking) intended to protect sensitive diplomatic, military, and national security executive branch communications inside the White House. Fielding, however, is now asserting that executive privilege applies to political communications by a political party -- a claim which, as Rep. Waxman said earlier, has no "basis in fact or in law."

Posted by: Stefan on April 13, 2007 at 10:42 AM | PERMALINK

If KK Karl's emails are gone, I smell obstruction of justice for whoever deleted them (canary singing), plus it's apropos to Fitz's investigation, which is not officially closed.

Unfortunately, that may not be so easy to prove without the e-mails in question. We don't know what, if any, retention policies the RNC is required to implement regarding e-mail. Rove could say the e-mails he deleted were all political in nature and had nothing to do with WH policy. It would be up to the committee to prove him wrong.

On the flip side, those e-mails had to go to somebody. The committee should subpeona not only all RNC e-mails, but e-mails from the offices of all 93 USA's. They would definitely have stringent e-mail retention requirements, and if Rove were e-mailing any of them, copies would reside in their storage device.

Posted by: MeLoseBrain? on April 13, 2007 at 10:44 AM | PERMALINK

We know where the missing emails are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Posted by: Donald "Duck" Rumsfeld on April 13, 2007 at 10:47 AM | PERMALINK

Has anyone looked into the possibility that the missing emails may have been smuggled by Saddam into Syria? I say let's give Curt Weldon a shovel and let him dig! He'll find them!

Posted by: Stefan on April 13, 2007 at 10:49 AM | PERMALINK

I think they're in Gitmo, all alone in a tiny cell, without benefit of counsel or the light of day.

Posted by: shortstop on April 13, 2007 at 10:50 AM | PERMALINK

Look they have the power through subpoena duces tecum to take possession of the servers themselves.

What's the hold up?

"The America I loved is gone." - Kurt Vonnegut

Posted by: MsNThrope on April 13, 2007 at 10:53 AM | PERMALINK

Ah, the beginning of new folk music.

In the 60s, it was "Where, oh where, have the flowers gone" - Now, we need a new Joan Baez singing, "Where, oh where, have the e-mails gone".

Probably where our Republic has gone - Down the toilet.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on April 13, 2007 at 10:57 AM | PERMALINK

Look they have the power through subpoena duces tecum to take possession of the servers themselves.

You know who actually does? The Federal Trade Commission could call up the Federal Bureau of Investigation and get some agents and then they could both get some assistance from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms and they could assemble a might phalanx of forces--say, two or three hundred fellows in black body armour with battering rams, shotguns and TASERs--and just go tearing into the Republican National Committee without bothering to get a warrant and without really ever considering whether or not a crime has taken place. And they could do this because, as we all know, liberals are here to destroy civil liberties in this country. Whoo-hoooo! Shouts the drug-addled liberals who worship at the alter of Clinton, Bill not Clinton, Hillary--you finally have a reason to destroy America and destroy good people and invent crimes out situations where no crimes have been committed.

I hope you bask in the wonder of it all.

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 13, 2007 at 10:59 AM | PERMALINK

C.E. is a modern invention that coincides (coincidentaly) with A.D. My guess would be that Jesus was born at 0 A.D., not 1 A.D. as this would make Jesus 1 year old the moment he was born. I think this is asking too much even of virgin birth.

Actually, Jesus, if he existed, would have born between 6 to 4 B.C. (the end of Herod's reign) or around 7 to 6 B.C, when the Roman governor of Palestine, Quirinus, was conducting a census.

There was no year 0. The calendar goes from 1 B.C. directly to 1 A.D. and skips over what should be 0.

Posted by: Stefan on April 13, 2007 at 10:59 AM | PERMALINK

Time for a Special Prosecutor, time for criminal charges. Washing away official emails is more serious than trying to wash away unofficial se-mails.

tyrannogenius

Posted by: Neil B. on April 13, 2007 at 11:05 AM | PERMALINK

Hey, BTW, how come "Al" is so ready to pop up right-wing away, to throw out negative talking points on almost every one of Kevin's posts? *No one would just care enough on his own* to go to all that trouble - someone is paying this troll/s to do this, as part of a disinformation/diseditorialization campaign.

Posted by: Neil B. on April 13, 2007 at 11:08 AM | PERMALINK

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 13, 2007 at 10:59 AM

somebody's drug-addled alright. Who wants to suspend habeus corpus again?

Posted by: haha on April 13, 2007 at 11:08 AM | PERMALINK

...just go tearing into the Republican National Committee without bothering to get a warrant and without really ever considering whether or not a crime has taken place. And they could do this because, as we all know, liberals are here to destroy civil liberties in this country.

Oh, the irony! Bush, Rove and their cohorts in crime getting nailed by virtue of the very crime they helped make legal. Well done Normie!

Posted by: MeLoseBrain? on April 13, 2007 at 11:08 AM | PERMALINK

What a leap from subpoena duces tecum (I mean forget any frackin' tapes - go for the servers for crying out loud.) to armed invasion of the RNC...Uncle Normie outdoes Evel Knievel.

Posted by: MsNThrope on April 13, 2007 at 11:24 AM | PERMALINK

Oh, sure. The people who are sending the US Army overseas to kill terrorists and keep you all safe and sound in your little cloud of pot smoke are doing all of this so they can destroy the US Constitution.

Meanwhile, liberals work overtime to denigrate America and embolden our allies. Conservatives KILL our enemies, liberals give them a hanky and pat on the head.

Blah, blah, blah.

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 13, 2007 at 11:29 AM | PERMALINK

I imagine Karl's on the phone right now,

"What the hell do you mean you've been archiving my email since 2005? You can't do this to me, I'm Karl fucking Rove!"

RNC, "Karl who?"

-click-

Posted by: Dr. Morpheus on April 13, 2007 at 11:35 AM | PERMALINK

I like Richardson a lot

Richardson was the first Governor to send National Guard troops to 'protect' the border from immigrants. The AZ gov., another Democrat, followed his lead and praised Bush for his Wall.

Posted by: Brojo on April 13, 2007 at 11:37 AM | PERMALINK

Cranky, if you are still reading, Ron Byers had a grand notion and if you would be interested I will give you access to post on WTWC.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 11:38 AM | PERMALINK

Check out this link about some extra powers the Congress has to enforce investigation, that we don't hear much about:
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/03/dusting_off_inh.html

Posted by: Neil B. on April 13, 2007 at 11:38 AM | PERMALINK

Time for a Special Prosecutor, time for criminal charges. Washing away official emails is more serious than trying to wash away unofficial se-mails.

Time also for an immediate Congressional subpoena for the RNC's servers and any emails stored on them.

(And for Nathan and others similarly ignorant of the law: yes, Congress has plenary power for such a request, and refusal to comply will result in a contempt of Congress order).

Posted by: Stefan on April 13, 2007 at 11:38 AM | PERMALINK

(And for Nathan and others similarly ignorant of the law: yes, Congress has plenary power for such a request, and refusal to comply will result in a contempt of Congress order).

Two words, sir: "signing statement."

The Executive Branch doesn't have to do anything the Congress tells it to do. It's called the "unitary Executive" and the little Congressmen and Congresswomen can huff and puff and jump up and down, but there's nothing they will end up doing about it.

You see, the Democrats desperately want that power for themselves in the next election cycle so that they can unleash Hillary Clinton on her enemies. They want that power so badly they will lie, cheat, steal, and bury the bodies where they won't be found. And they're using those of you who are "informed" to accomplish this by completely co-opting the progressive/liberal blogosphere.

Only problem is, the "move on.organization" crowd can't stomach Hillary any more than the Republican Party.

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 13, 2007 at 11:42 AM | PERMALINK

Brojo, we aren't counting on your vote, no matter who we nominate. That person is going to be a human being and have the baggage of having taken some action at some time that pissed off fully half of the population. No one is ever going to meet your unrealistic expectations. The rest of us have to weigh the pros and cons and actually pick a president.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 11:42 AM | PERMALINK

Time also for an immediate Congressional subpoena for the RNC's servers and any emails stored on them. - Stefan

subpoena duces tecum and like yesterday already.


'In time, almost all men and women will become worthless as producers of goods, food, services, and more machines, as sources of practical ideas in the areas of economics, engineering and probably medicine too. So, if we can't find reasons and methods for treasuring human beings because they are human beings, then we might as well, as so often has been suggested, rub them out."
- Kilgore Trout, in Kurt Vonnegut's God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater

Posted by: MsNThrope on April 13, 2007 at 11:44 AM | PERMALINK

someone is paying this troll/s to do this, as part of a disinformation/diseditorialization campaign.

... nnd reporting back to duty, sir...

Posted by: pol on April 13, 2007 at 11:46 AM | PERMALINK

There's a good post and discussion going on right now about the deleted emails and re Rove, linked from Druge of all places:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0407/White_House_Emails_from_200103_Deleted_but_Rove_Messages_Kept_from_05_On.html

Posted by: Neil B. on April 13, 2007 at 11:50 AM | PERMALINK

Another one bites the dust!

Yes, let's hope that Wolfie goes the way of Imus.

In order to keep any more of the GWB admin cancer from metastasizing to other organizations, I suggest we dump radiation and chemo on the whole lot of
them.

Posted by: Disputo on April 13, 2007 at 11:52 AM | PERMALINK

cranky, I feel your pain. The amount of magical thinking wrt data recovery is astounding.

Posted by: Disputo on April 13, 2007 at 11:55 AM | PERMALINK
...Conservatives KILL our enemies… Norman Rogers at 11:29 AM
The way Bush let bin Laden go free in Tora Bora? Unless killing means dying in bed of old age in newspeak, I don't think so.
….Only problem is…Norman Rogers at 11:42 AM
The only problem is the continued support for anti-Constitutional authoritarianism from the minions of the right. Posted by: Mike on April 13, 2007 at 11:55 AM | PERMALINK

The docs have been dumped.

Posted by: Disputo on April 13, 2007 at 12:06 PM | PERMALINK

no matter who we nominate. That person is going to be a human being

I would hope that whomever that person is, they treat all people as human beings. I would argue Richardsaon is suspect in that regard, which is probably why he appeals to so many Republicans and moderates.

Posted by: Brojo on April 13, 2007 at 12:09 PM | PERMALINK

Hey--didn't Clinton lose millions of e-mails first!?!!?

Posted by: ricardo on April 13, 2007 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

Cite?

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 12:42 PM | PERMALINK

The amount of magical thinking wrt data recovery is astounding.

Probably less magical than wishful (though I loved B's enhanced archived oblique satellite imagery of the WH). Anyway, the efforts of the knowledgeable to set us straight are appreciated.

Posted by: shortstop on April 13, 2007 at 1:02 PM | PERMALINK

Poor Mike. He follows me around like the remora follows the shark, hoping to cling to the shark and live as a parasite would, feasting off the food I take for myself.

Too bad he is neither mature nor capable enough as a commenter to amount to anything more than a small fish with big suckers on its body.

Bwah hah hah hah hah hah hah!

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 13, 2007 at 1:03 PM | PERMALINK

Richardson exploiting a nonexistent immmigrant 'crisis' by sending the National Guard to 'protect' the border requires no footnote. The governor of my state, also a Democrat, did the very same thing. She also stood with Bush and cheered for the border wall he wants to erect. At least Richardson has not done that, but he is running for president, not seeking to become the next Secretary of Homeland Security, which is my guess about what Napolitano is up to.

Now I think Gov. Napolitano has done a good job as governor, except for sending the Nat. Guard to the border, and Richardson has probably done a similar good job in New Mexico, but both of them have used the immigration issue for political gain, rather than for extending kindness and compassion to human beings many Americans call aliens. You would be correct to think they could not politically extend the human being franchise to the immmigrants because of popular opinion, but that opens them up to my criticism and skepticism for what they might do in future, especially as president. If that opens me up to DLC stalkers' insults, that is the price I have to pay.

I think my input has just as much legitimacy as any other citizen. You may regard it any way you choose. I would hope, though, that it leads to a discussion and better understanding of the issues rather than just an issue of party loyalty.

One reason W. Bush was able to invade Iraq is because both parties have similar national security policies. I do not know how much the defense budget grew under Clinton, but it did not diminish the ability of our armed forces from invading a nation that posed no threat to our security. This allowed a Republican president to wage war. I think no matter which Democratic contender wins the presidency in 2008, they will keep the military strong for the next Republican president to use. I have difficulty with that.


Posted by: Brojo on April 13, 2007 at 1:30 PM | PERMALINK

There are some interesting and shocking quotes from officials and etc., to google for, in a post over at http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0407/White_House_Emails_from_200103_Deleted_but_Rove_Messages_Kept_from_05_On.html

"
Little wonder the wingnuts never ask themselves why we know about these email accounts. The source of course is the same as the source for all other factual information we have about this supernova of corruption better known as the GOP. Jack Abramoff. Chew on this nut jobs: "Susan Ralston, until recently presidential adviser Karl Rove's assistant at the White House, appears to have used at least four outside email accounts: a 'gwb' domain account, a 'georgewbush.com' account, and an 'rnchq.org' account -- all run by the RNC -- plus an AOL account. She once emailed two associates of lobbyist Jack Abramoff, 'I now have an RNC blackberry which you can use to e-mail me at any time. No security issues like my WH email.' . . . No security issues. Hmmm... Now what could she mean by that? Secure from the... laws of the United States? Dead on as usual wing nut jobs, nothing to see here. ...an Abramoff associate warned that "it is better not to put this stuff in writing in their e-mail system because it might actually limit what they can do to help us, especially since there could be lawsuits, etc." Abramoff replied: "Dammit. It was sent to Susan on her rnc pager and was not supposed to go into the WH system." . . . 'Limit what they can do'- what do you imagine they were afraid of? So beyond the Presidential Records Act which the White House admits requires the retention of much of the correspondence gone 'missing', i.e. was violated, there is clearly more to this than a political agenda- more like the whirlwind the administration has been accruing for all these years. Speaking of, all of this is without even considering The Bush administration's terrible luck with finding documents. The best comparison for this lot isn't Nixon, but Mugabe...
"

[Posted at outside site by: Majorajam, April 13, 2007 at 11:14 AM]

Posted by: Neil B. on April 13, 2007 at 1:34 PM | PERMALINK

Brojo, don't pretend that not wanting people to walk across our borders is wrong, or even not consistent with an honest progressive agenda. Above all, don't defame honest immigrants who apply legally for citizenship (and yes, *they* shouldn't have so much trouble doing that) by lumping legals and illegals together in the fudge usage "immigrants."

tgrex23

Posted by: Neil B. on April 13, 2007 at 1:38 PM | PERMALINK

Norman - I would be fascinated to hear the story of how Feds seized your bank's servers back in the day. So, you were innocent?

Posted by: Neil B. on April 13, 2007 at 1:40 PM | PERMALINK

I think a super majority of the immigrants are honest. They want to come to the US and work. Probably just like your and my ancestors did. I do not think I am defaming anyone.

Posted by: Brojo on April 13, 2007 at 1:50 PM | PERMALINK
At least four years of emails sent by White House adviser Karl Rove have gone missing, a lawyer for the Republican National Committee informed congressional staff members Thursday, a front page article in today's Washington Post reports.

Nathan, helloooo, Mr. "No one has claimed Rove's emails weren't preserved therefore you have BDS" waiting for your apology.

Just so you know, I like 'em good and grovelly. And while you're at it, I think you should be Gregory's butler for a week. You've driven him pretty crazy over the years.

Posted by: trex on April 13, 2007 at 1:58 PM | PERMALINK

I will give a hat-tip to the Archdiocese of Kansas City Kansas. They saw the immigrant issue building and they started helping people who immigrated. In the eastern part of Wyandotte county, in the part of town where immigrants have traditionally settled, there are something like eight Catholic churches in one square mile. Most of them have grammar schools. The churches in that area started responding about 15 years ago with community centers, English lessons and help with securing legal immigration status.

If you are ever in KCK, check out 18th and Central. That area used to be all white-trash bikers, seedy bars, and beating deaths. Now it is clean and the storefronts are brightly painted bodegas, boutiques and taquerias. Families are everywhere. It has benefited everyone. the elderly white homeowners venture outside their homes now, without fear of becoming a crime victim, and the entire area has benefited.

A dose of sanity and reality on both sides is sorely needed. Unfortunately, I don't know that the success of KCK would translate to other areas, let alone nationally. A lot of factors came together there and meshed just right.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 2:02 PM | PERMALINK

I should have pointed out that the Archdiocese of KCK started dealing with the issue about 15 years ago.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 2:04 PM | PERMALINK

In Tucson, over twenty years ago, I used a contract typist for a paper because my typewriter broke. After doing the work the typist informed me she was involved through her church with the underground housing of immigrants from El Salvador, Nicaragua and Guatemala seeking political asylum. These were people denied asylum by the Reagan Admin. Even though I do not like organized religion much, I respect and applaud their work to help people escape violence and make better lives.

Posted by: Brojo on April 13, 2007 at 2:17 PM | PERMALINK

We were stationed at Davis-Monthan then. I too assisted the Sanctuary movement for Central American refugees.

But that was an entirely different set of circumstances than those faced today. Those people were true refugees, and they were suffering horribly as a result of Reagan's Central American policies.

I sent flowers to Reverend Fife's funeral, by the way.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 2:23 PM | PERMALINK

Norman - I would be fascinated to hear the story of how Feds seized your bank's servers back in the day. So, you were innocent?

Goodness, no. I was guilty as sin. I fought the charges, but we ultimately settled on a plea agreement. Instead of 10 years I got 18 months minimum security, and only had to serve 11 months. I got out on good behavior, thank the Creator.

But to answer your question, no, I was guilty of monstrous things, things they never even figured out.

It's called being one step ahead of everyone else, and in my lifetime, that's where I've always been. Hence, I'm rich.

As Johnny Cougar would say, "...ain't that America!"

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 13, 2007 at 2:27 PM | PERMALINK

That Sanctuary Movement was good work.

The immigrants today are much more like my ancestors, who were seeking to make a better life for their families when they came to America.

Posted by: Brojo on April 13, 2007 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

I was also involved with the Sanctuary movement back in the day, which is one of the many reasons I get so ticked off when so-called progressives (especially those bloggers who for the most part haven't ever actually done anything IRL) make blanket denouncements of religion.

Posted by: Disputo on April 13, 2007 at 2:32 PM | PERMALINK

I got out on good behavior, thank the Creator.

Bending over for the warden, Normie?

Posted by: MeLoseBrain? on April 13, 2007 at 2:42 PM | PERMALINK

I am a Jewish Atheist, but when I was in Tucson, I tithed Reverend Fife's Presbyterian congregation because of the good works of that congregation.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 13, 2007 at 2:52 PM | PERMALINK

trex: And while you're at it, I think you should be Gregory's butler for a week. You've driven him pretty crazy over the years.

What have you against poor Gregory?! Thinkst thou that Nathan would be a silent butler? Shudder!

Posted by: shortstop on April 13, 2007 at 3:38 PM | PERMALINK

Time to subpoena Unka Karl just to find out how and why he deleted his emails from the RNC Server. And to ask why he used it for official WH business in the first place.

Not about the SUBSTANCE of his "privileged communications" but about the methods and reasons he did not preserve his "privileged communications."

Let him claim Executive Privilege for failing comply with WH document retention policies.

Posted by: Cal Gal on April 13, 2007 at 3:40 PM | PERMALINK

What have you against poor Gregory?! Thinkst thou that Nathan would be a silent butler? Shudder!

Besides, I wouldn't trust Nathan to wax my car competently.

Posted by: Gregory on April 13, 2007 at 3:53 PM | PERMALINK

I wouldn't trust Nathan to competently shred my files.

Posted by: Disputo on April 13, 2007 at 4:37 PM | PERMALINK

People do good works. I bash all religions equally. Sorry about that.

Posted by: Brojo on April 13, 2007 at 4:50 PM | PERMALINK

I try explaining to people that I am a Christian Atheist, but all I get are confused stares.

Posted by: Disputo on April 13, 2007 at 4:52 PM | PERMALINK

I call myself an apathetic agnostic. I do not know if God exists and I do not care. I could do better at making good works though.

Posted by: Brojo on April 13, 2007 at 5:12 PM | PERMALINK

Well, if you want to get technical, I generally consider myself a soft atheist (aka hard agnostic).

Well, whaddaya know, wikipee has an entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_atheism

Posted by: Disputo on April 13, 2007 at 5:18 PM | PERMALINK

Far be it for me to geek in, but regardless of Karl Rove's emails (sent/received/inbox) being deleted, what about the archive of whomever he sent them to?

Posted by: royalblue_tom on April 13, 2007 at 5:30 PM | PERMALINK
Bwah hah hah hah hah hah hah! Norman Rogers at 1:03 PM
Still imitating the hoot of the loon

Posted by: Mike on April 13, 2007 at 5:34 PM | PERMALINK

I used to be a hard atheist but realized I did not really know. I had an excellent short story prof who made the observation that regardless of a deity's existence, we would be the same persons with the same qualities and troubles here, in heaven or in hell. I thought that made a lot of sense.

Posted by: Brojo on April 13, 2007 at 6:39 PM | PERMALINK

Brojo,

No one knows for sure whether a 'god' exists, do they? I'm just pretty sure that if there was originally some sort of 'god' that caused the universe to come into being that he/she/it has paid no attention to the little planet called Earth since long before the origin of the human species.

And I do think that religion can have a bearing on how people behave. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad. Historically I would say that in general it's had a bad influence in providing yet another 'wall' that separates people from each other.

Posted by: nepeta on April 13, 2007 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

No one knows for sure whether a 'god' exists, do they? I'm just pretty sure that if there was originally some sort of 'god' that caused the universe to come into being that he/she/it has paid no attention to the little planet called Earth since long before the origin of the human species.

Hardly a theory of any merit.

Let me make a prediction--for the next hundred-odd comments, you mental midgets will debate religion/God/atheism/philosophy and repeat, ad infinitum, every single plausible argument whether relevant or otherwise in a terrifying attempt to arrive at this thing called "truth" and, before too long, someone will be cursing and screaming and oh, haven't we been down this road before?

And then it'll start all over again. There is no God, religion is the opiate of the masses, God is dead, music is proof there is a God, atheism is based on the scientific method...

Blah, blah, blah.

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 13, 2007 at 7:21 PM | PERMALINK

No one knows for sure whether a 'god' exists, do they? I'm just pretty sure that if there was originally some sort of 'god' that caused the universe to come into being that he/she/it has paid no attention to the little planet called Earth since long before the origin of the human species.

I'm pretty sure that *if* their is a God, and that god hasn't left us, as you speculate, that it is a kind of trickster god that can be found in many pantheons (see esp the Coyote in Native American religions), the kind of god that gets off on screwing with people.

That's really the only other possibility.

Posted by: Disputo on April 13, 2007 at 7:51 PM | PERMALINK
I'll give you a day either side. notthere at 11:04 PM
Hillarious! Despite appeals to existence or non-existence of a mythical or non-mythical religious figure, there is no year zero in the Gregorian calendar.

Try to understand, without a year Zero, our calendar begins with the year 1. A decade is defined as 10 years. 1 + 10 is 11. Therefore the second decade begins is the year 11. If it began in the year 10, the first decade would have 9 years, but that is not a decade by definition. The third decade begins in the year 11 + 10 or 21. The second century begins in the year 101. If it began in the year 100, the first century would be 100 – 1 or 99 years, but a century is defined as 100 years. The first millennium begins in the year 1001. if it began in the year 1000, it would have 1000 – 1 or 999 years, which is not a millennium.
If you divide a decade into thirds, early, middle and late, divide 10 by 3 and arrive at 31/3 years for each.
1961 + 31/3 + 31/3 = 1961 + 6 2/3 or 1967 2/3
If you like, I will work out the details of every decade, every century and every millennium for your since you are such a stickler for precision, but learning is doing, so do da math, game boy.

Posted by: Mike on April 13, 2007 at 8:07 PM | PERMALINK

The Official God FAQ.


The Sanctuary movement was one of the best examples I could think of why organized religion should be obliterated by any means necessary.

The Catholic Church, unaccountable to no one, or, rather, an unaccountable fad within it, acts with utter impunity to violate the law.

Because they are accountable to no one they can assume any level of responsibility at whim and, in doing so, achieve priceless social cachet among the desperate, who can always thereafter be counted on to look the other way when they're needed to.

Posted by: cld on April 13, 2007 at 8:37 PM | PERMALINK

Religious institutions' leaders use the desperate to achieve their authoritarian agenda, which is why I denigrate the priestly class. We have to make a distinction though, between the institutional crimes of religion and the good works individuals do.

Posted by: Brojo on April 14, 2007 at 11:37 AM | PERMALINK

The good works some individual might do are meaningless in the context and can only provide camouflage for villainy.

Posted by: cld on April 14, 2007 at 1:31 PM | PERMALINK

Sometimes it depends on the policies (and competence) of the IT department. A few months ago, all of my old emails disappeared from my work account. My entire inbox simply vanished, including about 6000 emails I had received in the previous four years. I argued with IT for about a month, but they insisted that there was no way for them to restore them. Self-fulfilling prophecy, perhaps, but I never did get any of them back.

Posted by: russ on April 15, 2007 at 8:54 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly