Computer Experts Point to White House Failures in E-Mail Controversy

In Congress and in federal court, a congressional committee and two private groups are pushing for information on how the White House has handled its e-mail for the past six years and whether officials there complied with records-retention laws.

The picture emerging from testimony and court filings is one of disregard for fundamental principles that well-run private companies adhere to routinely. By one estimate, over 1,000 days of e-mail are ... Full Story »

Posted by Julian Friedland
Tags Help
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Julian Friedland - Mar 3, 2008 - 12:18 PM PST
Edit Lock: This story can be edited

To:


Separate email addresses with commas.
25 recipients max.

Note:

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Member_photo_thumb
3.8
by Dwight Rousu - Mar. 6, 2008

This is a regathering of a long developing story that is worthy of attention. The story includes a quote suggesting the sad situation constitutes negligence. Interpreting Bush's statement, it sounds more like intentional spoliation of evidence by a person trying to cover up criminal evidence. What was the line after election -- run government like a business? Monkey business.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Member_photo_thumb
4.5
by Seabury Lyon - Mar. 3, 2008

This is a very important story. I won't pretend impartiality here, but as a life-long Republican, (until now) I have no reason whatsoever to doubt that the archiving problem and/or the negligence in addressing it, is intentional. This story is just one more example of the utter disdain the Bush administration has for American democracy and the lengths to which they will go to escape accountability. What a tragic state to which We The People have allowed America to descend.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Me_1_thumb
4.5
by Julian Friedland - Mar. 3, 2008
See Full Review » (1 answer)
Fabportrait_smallsquare_180x180_thumb
3.5
by Fabrice Florin - Mar. 3, 2008
See Full Review » (2 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

4.1

Good
from 4 reviews (confidence not calculated)
Quality
4.1
Facts
4.0
Fairness
4.5
Information
5.0
Sourcing
4.0
Style
3.0
Accuracy
4.0
Balance
1.0
Context
3.5
Popularity
4.0
Recommendation
4.0
Credibility
4.3
# Reviews
2.0
# Views
1.4
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!