Originally Posted By Mr X Wow. <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/13/white.house.email/index.html" target="_blank">http://edition.cnn.com/2007/PO LITICS/04/13/white.house.email/index.html</a>
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Since the days of Rosemary Woods accidently erasing 18 minutes of audiotape, the talent level has certainly risen.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 Not to worry. Once Hillary is president, she will no doubt stumble across the elusive emails in an unassuming box in the east wing of the White House.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Wow. Only took two posts to get to the "oh yeah? What about your guys" defense.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 "Wow. Only took two posts to get to the "oh yeah? What about your guys" defense." Someone's gotta do it! (-:
Originally Posted By DlandDug Wow indeed. The very partisan CREW charges that the White House may have lost a couple of hundreds days' worth of emails, it's acknowledged that this might be the case, and, voila!, the whole thing morphs into "MILLIONS of White House Emails 'Vanish.'" Can we get some facts on this? Or shall we just let everyone respond in form, as usual?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Um, Dug, did you read the link? The very first sentence was an acknowledgement from the White House of millions... "Millions of White House e-mails may be missing, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino acknowledged Friday. "I wouldn't rule out that there were a potential 5 million e-mails lost," Perino told reporters." Perino didn't dispute that they were lost, but that they were "intentionally" lost. That's still in dispute, but the topic head by Mr. X is not inaccurate.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Can we get some facts on this? Or shall we just let everyone respond in form, as usual?<< You mean with more smarminess? Or, perhaps, as Dabob said, you should try reading the link before responding to the title, which you apparently take very seriously.
Originally Posted By Mr X My topic title is the same as the CNN title was. Which I did for a particular reason (that being, the media is always right ).
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Um, Dug, did you read the link?<< Oh brother. Yes. Obviously. >>My topic title is the same as the CNN title was.<< No, not really. The CNN story is entitled: >>White House: Millions of e-mails may be missing<< This topic thread is entitled: >>MILLIONS of white house e-mails "vanish"<< "May be missing" is not "vanished." But don't take my word for it. Obviously I don't read these things, I just make it all up...
Originally Posted By Dabob2 >>Um, Dug, did you read the link?<< <Oh brother. Yes. Obviously.> Well, I think you're reading it wrong, then. I think the question is not if they're missing or vanished, the question is how many. In other words, when they say "5 million emails may be missing," they're saying "it could be 3 million, it could be 4 million, it could be 5 million" - not "they may or may not be missing." They're definitely missing, which in the short term is effectively the same as vanished. The questions are how many, and can they be retrieved. The Daily Show had a great bit last night in which they pointed out the absurdity of pretending this could have been an "accidental" Rosemary Woods-like situation - it takes quite a few steps to delete emails to the point where they can't be easily retrieved from either the original computers or the server. When you "delete" an email, and even when you delete it from the recycle bin, it's still there and retrievable. This is hardly something that could have been done accidentally, and any messages relating to official white house business are supposed to be retained, by law.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 Sigh, I remember the old days when you could put something in the trash and be assured it was gone.
Originally Posted By Mr X >>My topic title is the same as the CNN title was.<< ***No, not really. The CNN story is entitled: >>White House: Millions of e-mails may be missing<< This topic thread is entitled: >>MILLIONS of white house e-mails "vanish"<< "May be missing" is not "vanished." But don't take my word for it. Obviously I don't read these things, I just make it all up...*** The title of the link ON THE CNN PAGE was, exactly, "millions of white house emails 'vanish'". The only change I made was to capitalize millions. And I'm not an idiot. I wouldn't have said I copied it directly unless that was the case.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>The title of the link ON THE CNN PAGE was, exactly, "millions of white house emails 'vanish'".<< I guess "was" is the operative word. This is not the current headline, nor was it when I first read it. (I don't think any of us are idiots here.)
