CREW v. EOP: Regarding Missing WH Emails: 2/26/08 - Committee Report on WH Email

8/7/2019 CREW v. EOP: Regarding Missing WH Emails: 2/26/08 - Committee Report on WH Email

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/crew-v-eop-regarding-missing-wh-emails-22608-committee-report-on-wh 1/21

HENRY A. WAXMAN.CALIFORNIA,CHAIRMAN

TOM LANTOS,CALIFORNIAEDOLPHUS TOWNS, NEW YORKPAUL E. KANJORSKI, PENNSYLVANIACAROLYN B. MALONEY, NEW YORKELIJAHE. CUMMINGS, MARYLANDDENNISJ. KUCINICH, OHIODANNY K. DAVIS,ITIINOISJOHN F. TIERNEY,MASSACHUSETISWI\4. LACY CLAY, MISSOURIDIANE E. WATSON, CALIFORNIASTEPHEN F. LYNCH, MASSACHUSETTSBRIAN HIGGINS, NEW YORKJOHN A YARMUTH, KENTUCKYBRUCE L, BRALEY. IOWAETEANOR HOLMES NORTON,

DISTRICT OFCOLUMBIABETrYMCCOLLUM, MINNESOTAJIMCOOPER, TENNESSEE

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, MA-BYLANDPAULW. HODES, NEW HAMPSHIRECHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY. CONNECTICUTJOHN P. SARBANES, MARYLANDPETEBWELCH, VERMONT

@onpwø of thSe@rnitùþtutesTb oust o f ßepreøentstib eø

COMMITTEE ONOVERSIGHTANDGOVERNMENTREFORM2157 RnveunruHouse Opprce BurLDrNc

Wnsnrrueror.¡,DC 2051 5-61 43

MtuoRñ(202)22H051FrcsNtÉ(202122H784MrNoFñ(202)22H074

www.oversight.house. gov

MEMORANDUM

February26,2008

Members of theCommitteeon Oversightand GovernmentReform

I)emocratic CommitteeStaff

Supplemental Information for FullCommitteeHearing on \ilhiteHouse E-mails

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

TOMDAVIS. VIRGINIA.RANKINGMINORtrYMEI\¡BER

DAN BURTON,INDIANACHRISTOPHEB SHAYS, CONNECTICUJOHNM, McHUGH.NEWYOFKJOHNL. MICA,FLORIDAI\¡ABK E. SOUDER.INDIANATODD RUSSELL PLATTS, PENNSYLVANCHRIS CANNON.UTAHJOHN J. DUNCAN.JR.. TENNESSEEMICHAEL R.TUFNER, OHIODARRELLÊ. ISSA,CALIFORNIAKENNYMARCHANI.TÛASLYNN A. WÊSTMORELAND, GEORGIPATHICKT.MGHENRY, NORTH CAROVIFGINIA FO)C(NORTH CAROLINABBIANP. BILBRAY, CALIFORNIABILLSALI,IDAHOJIMJORDAN. OHIO

To:

Fr:

Re:

On Tuesday, February 26,2008, at 10:00 a.m., in rcom2l54of the Rayburn HouseOff,rceBuilding,the fullCommitteewillhold a hearing entitled "ElectronicRecords Preservationat the WhiteHouse."Thismemo provides supplemental information formembers regarding thestatus of the Committee'sinvestisationinto the loss of officiale-mail.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Committeehas been investigatingWhiteHouse compliancewiththe PresidentialRecords Act.In preparation for this hearing, the Committee received more than 20,000pages ofintemale-mails and other documentsfrom the WhiteHouse and the National ArchivesandRecords Administration.The Committeealso interviewedor received writtenanswers toquestions from sixcurrent or formerofficialsin the WhiteHouse responsiblefor preservingV/hiteHouse records.

The documents and interviewsraise serious questions about the WhiteHouse'scompliance withthe Presidential Records Act, whichrequires the WhiteHouse to preserve e-mails documenting the"activities,deliberations,decisions, and policies"of the President. Theinformationthe Committeehas received shows:

The \ilhiteHouse has not had a reliablesystem forpreserving \ilhiteHouse e-mailssince 2002, when the WhiteHouse made the decision to stop using theAutomaticRecords Management System (ARMS)used by the ClintonWhiteHouse. StevenMcDevitt,an offrcialin the WhiteHouse Office ofthe Chief Information Officer fromSeptember 2002throughOctober 2006, informedthe Committee that duringhis time atthe WhiteHouse, "the process by whichemail was being collectedand retained wasprimitiveand the risk that data wouldbe lost was high."As early as January 2004,the



NationalArchiveswarned the WhiteHouse that it was'ooperating at risk by not capturingand storing messages outside of the email system." An internal WhiteHouse "discussiondocument" fromOctober 2005states: "There is operationalrisk in current email storagemanagement processes. Lost or misplaced archivesmay result in an inabilityto meetstatutory deadlines."

Untilmid-2005, thesystem that the WhiteHouse used forpreservinge-mails hadserious securityflaws.Accordingto Mr. McDevitt,"lnmid-2005... a criticalsecurityissue was identifiedand corrected. Duringthis period it was discovered thatthe fileservers and the filedirectories used to store the retained email ... were accessible byeveryone on the EOP network."Mr. McDevittinformedthe Committee thatthe"potentialimpact" of thissecurity flawwas that there was "[n]overificationthat dataretained has not been modified."

The WhiteHouse has refused to cooperate witheffortsby the NationalArchives toensure the preservationof \ilhiteHouse e-mails. On May1,2007, the Archivistof theUnited States, AllenWeinstein, wrote WhiteHouse CounselFred Fieldingthat"itisessential that the WhiteHouse movewiththe utmost dispatchboth in assessing anyproblems that may existwithpreserving emails ... and in takingwhatever action maybenecessary to restore any missing emails." On May6,2007, a senior off,rcialin theNationalArchives wrotethe Director of the'WhiteHouse Off,rceof Administrationto"request that you . .. determine whether instances of alienation of Federal records actuallyoccurred and then notifyus of your findings."These requests and multiplesimilarrequests were ignored.According toa September 5,2007, memorandum to Dr.Weinsteinfromthe General Counsel of the Archives:

we stillhave made almost zero progress in actually movingahead withtheimportantand necessary work that is requiredfora successful transition. ...

[O]urrepeated requests ... have gone unheeded. ... Ofmost importance, westillknowvirnrallynothingabout the status of the alleged missingWhiteHouse e-mails.

o The process of recoveringmissing e-mails fromRNCservers and \ilhiteHouseback-up tapes has not begun. Beginning inApril2007, the Archivesurged the WhiteHouse to start recovering missingWhiteHouse e-mails stored on back-up tapesmaintained by the RepublicanNationalCommittee (RNC)and the WhiteHouse. InhisMay1, 2007,letter, the Archivistadvised Mr.Fieldingthat such 'oa 'restoration' projectcan easily take more thanone year to complete."Despite repeated requests from theArchives,these effortshave not yet begun. Moreover, theRNChas informedtheCommittee that it has no intention of trying torestore missing WhiteHouse e-mails.

At this point, the fullextent of the missing WhiteHouse e-mailscannot be determined.There appear to be two mainsources of missing e-mails.First,over 80WhiteHouse offtcials,includingmany of the most seniorofficialsin the WhiteHouse, regularlyused RNC e-mailaccounts. The RNC,however, has preserved no e-mails for over 50 of these officialsand hassaved few e-mails for the other offrcials frombefore fall2006.



I. REQUIREMENTSOF THEPRESIDENTIALRECORDSACT

The PresidentialRecords Actwas passed in 1978 in the aftermathof Watergate. The Actmakes clear that thePresident's records belong to the Americanpublic,not to thePresident orhis advisors. The Actrequires the President to:

take all such steps as may be necessary to assure that the activities,deliberations,decisions, and policiesthat reflect the performance of his constitutional,statutory, orother officialor ceremonial dutiesare adequately documentedand that such records aremaintained as Presidential records.'

The Actalso gives importantpowers and responsibilitiesto the NationalArchivesandRecords Administration, whichis headed by the Archivistof the United States, Allen'Weinstein.The Archivist'sprimaryresponsibilityarises at the end of a president's term ofoffice,when he isto "assume responsibility forthe custody, control,and preservation of, and access to, thePresidential records of that President."'

In addition, theArchivisthas limitedauthorityover the preservation of presidentialrecords duringa President's term. Althoughthe Actgives the President fullauthorityover themanagement of records duringhis term, the Presidentis required to obtain theviews oftheArchivistpriorto disposing of any "Presidentialrecords that no longerhave administrative,historical,or evidentiaryvalue."The Archivistdoes not have the authorityunder the Acttoprevent the disposal of these records. He may, however, consult withCongress and require thePresident to submit a disposal schedule to the appropriate congressional committees 60daysprior to the proposed disposal.'

II. THE INADEQUATEWHITEHOUSEE.MAILARCHIVINGSYSTEM

Interviewsand documents reviewed by the Committee show that theWhiteHouseabandoned its e-mail archivingsystem in2002and relied instead on a temponry,ad hoc, manualsystem. These interviewsand documents also show thattop WhiteHouse officialswere warnedrepeatedly bytheir own technicalstaff and by the National Archivesthat operatingwithoutanarchivingsystem posed serious dangers, such as the risk ofdata loss, the risk of tampering, andthe inabilityto verifythat systems were workingproperly. Despite these warnings, the'WhiteHouse aborted efforts to put in place a new e-mail archivingsystem.

Accordingto Theresa Payton, the WhiteHouse's current ChiefInformation Officer,mostWhiteHouse employeesused the Lotus Notes e-mail system when the BushAdministration tookofficein January 2001. E-mails from thissystem were archivedthrough theAutomaticRecords

Management System (ARMS),whichhad been in place since the previous administration. In2002, however, theWhiteHouse decided to switch(or "migrate")from the Lotus Notese-mail

44 U.S.C. 92203.44 U.S.C. ç2203.44 U.S.C. ç2203.

I

2

3



system to the MicrosoftExchange e-mail system.This migrationstarted in2002 and wascompleted in2004.4

According to Ms.Payton, when theWhiteHouse migrated to its new e-mail system, itabandoned the ARMSarchivingsystem. Instead, the WhiteHouse began an ad hoc processcalled'Joumaling."Under this process, a WhiteHouse staffer or contractorwould collectfroma "journal"e-mailfolder inthe MicrosoftExchange system copies of e-mails sent and receivedby WhiteHouse employees. Afterretrievingcopies of these e-mails, theWhiteHouse staffer orcontractor wouldthen manuallyname and save them as ".pst"fileson various WhiteHouseseryers.5

The new system for preserving WhiteHouse e-mailshad serious flaws.In one e-mail,anArchivesoff,rcialwrote:"I refer to it as a 'message collectionsystem' even though weallunderstand that it hardlyqualifiesas a 'system' by the usualITdefinition."oCarlos Solari,whowas the ChiefInformationOfficerfor the WhiteHouse at the time,described the journalingprocess as a "temporary"solution,and as a "short-term situation"that was not considered by therWhiteHouse as a'oagood long-termsituation."T

Steven McDevitt,a senior officialin the WhiteHouse Office ofthe Chief InformationOfflrcerfromSeptember 2002 through October 2006,provided the Committee an extensivedescription of the problems withthe rWhiteHouse system:

There was a great deal of concern about proceeding withthe migrationtoOutlook/Exchangewithouthaving an adequate email records management solutioninplace. . . . There were four types of risk that were discussed on a number of occasionswithinmanagement ranks ... :

Incomplete Data

-The process by whichemail was being collectedand retained was

primitiveand the risk that data wouldbe lost was high. ...

Data ReconciliationThere is no way to guarantee that all records are retained intheir complete and unmodifiedstate. ...

PublicPerception- Given theissues that occurred during theprioradministration,itshould warrant extra cautionon the part of the EOP beforemakingany changes to theemail retention process. Additionalsystem problems wouldcreate a publicperception

o BriefingfromTheresa Payton to Staff, House Committee on OversightandGovemment Reform(Oct. 10, 2007).

5 Id.6 E-mail fromSam V/atkins toTheresa Payton (Nov. 6,2007)(NARABates No. 001634

to 001635).7 Interviewof Carlos Solariby Staft Committee on Oversightand Government Reform

(Feb. 7,2008).



that the EOP was unwillingor unable [to]retain records that were requiredunder currentlaw. ...

User Accountability- The approach of simplystoring emailmessage in .pst filesprovides no mechanism or audittrailthat tracks changes Io data files or the activitiesperformed by users or system administrators.s

Accordingto Mr. McDevitt,he brought his concerns to the attentionof senior officialsatthe WhiteHouse, including"WhiteHouse Counsel Harriet Miersand members of her staff."e

A. Risk of Data Loss

The documentsreceived by the Committee show that theWhiteHouse was repeatedlywarned that its system for preserving e-mails wasinadequate. Anearly waming occurred inJanuary 2004 from the staff of the NationalArchives.Accordingto a summary of a January 6,2004, meeting betweenWhiteHouse and Archivesstaff:

EOP has been convertingfromLotus Notesto MicrosoftXchange over thepast tv/oyears. ... Messages in Xchange areNOTbeing captured in ARMSor any othersystem external to Xchange. ... The NARAteam emphasized that EOP wasoperatingat risk by not cãpturingand storingmessages outside the email system."l0

These risks were reiteratedin an internal WhiteHouse "discussion document" fromOctober 2005. Accordingto this document:

There is operational risk in current email storage management processes. Lost ormisplaced emailarchives may result in an inabilityto meet statutory requirements. ...Standard operating procedures foremail management do not exist. Automated tools thatsupport theemailarchive process are not robust. The current version ... is prone tofailure.... Searches of email in response to statutory requirementsmay not be complete,creating legal and politicalrisk.lr

A November14,2005, memorandum fromMr. McDevittto John Straub, the ActingChief InformationOfficerand the Director ofthe Officeof Administration.similarlvwarned of

8 Letter fromSteven McDevittto Rep. HenryA. Waxman (Feb. 21,2003)(Attachmentl, at7).

e Id. çÃttachment2, af 7).

r0 NationalArchivesand Records Administration,Summaryof Jan. 6, 2004, meetingwìthEOP re ECRMSat Archives11(undated) (NARABates No. 000643 to 000644) (emphasisin original).

rr Email Archive ProcessRisk Mitigations;Discussion Document(Oct.25,2005).Inhis responses to the Committee, Mr. McDevittstated that he believed he "was involvedin thecreation of this document butdo not recall the specificpurpose of the presentation." LetterfromSteven McDevittto Rep. Henry A. Waxman (Feb. 21, 2008) (Attachment2, at l2).

6



the "potentialloss of emails"and an "inabilityto meet statutory requirements."l2Accordingtothe memorandum:

The currentemailarchive process depends on manual operationsand monitoring,standard operating procedures do not exist, automated tools thatsupport the email archiveprocess are not robust,and there is no dedicated archivestorage location.l3

B. Risk of Tamperinq

WhiteHouse offrcialswere also wamed that the ad hoc system they reliedon in place ofan archivingsystem subjected WhiteHouse records to tampering. According toMr. McDevitt,one of the risks he discussed withsenior management withinthe Office ofthe ChiefInformationOfficeand the Offrce ofAdministrationwas "user accountability." Mr.McDevittwrote theCommittee:

The integrity ofthe data could be called into question because it was not possible toensure that inappropriate action,either intentionalor unintentional,could notoccur. ...The potentialimpact:No verificationthat data retained has not been modifiedor whatactivltieshave been performed by system users or administrators.ta

In his answers to questions from the Committee, Mr. McDevittalso revealed that in 2005,"a criticalsecurity issue was identifiedand corrected."ls According toMr.McDevitt:"the fileservers and the filedirectories used to store the retained email .pst f,rles were accessible byeveryone on the EOP network."l6He explained that this security breach wouldhave allowedanyWhiteHouse officialto reviewthe e-mails of any other V/hiteHouse officialwithoutbeingdetected.lT

C. Inabilitvto VerifuSvstem Functionality

WhiteHouse officialswere also warned of a host of problems associated withtheinabilityto verifythat the e-mailsystem was workingproperly. For example, Mr. McDevittexplained that"fileswere scattered across variousservers on the EOP network"and that "[t]here

12 Memorandum for John Straub fromSteven McDevitt,MS Exchange ElectronicMailArchivalProcess Standard Operating Procedures (Nov.14,2005) (HOGR6OA-010532to0l 0s33).

13 Id.

ra LetterfromSteven McDevittto Rep. Henry A.Waxman (Feb. 21, 2008) (AttachmentI, at7).

ts Id. çAttachmentl,at9).t6 Id. çAttachmentl,at9).17 Telephone conversationbetween Steven McDevittand Staff, House Committee on

Oversight and Government Reform(F eb. 24, 2008).



was no consistently appliednaming convention for the component .pst files."l8Mr. McDevittalso warned that withouta "mechanism to reconcile against what wasoriginallyretained by thesystem," it was impossible to be sure "that all records are retained in their complete andunmodifiedstate."le

D. AbortedEffortsat NewArchivineSvstem

According to interviewsand documents reviewed by the Committee,the'WhiteHousehas aborted efforts toput in place a new e-mail archivingsystem over the past six years.

In2002and2003, WhiteHouse offrcials tried tomodiffthe previous e-mail archivingsystem, ARMS, toworkwiththe new e-mailsystem, MicrosoftExchange. WhiteHouseofficialstoldCommittee staffthat they attempted to develop a program to "interface"betweenthe two, but they ultimatelydetermined it was not technicallyfeasible.'u

In 2003, the WhiteHouse began workingon a new e-mailarchivingsystem called theElectronicCommunicationsRecords Management System (ECRMS).The WhiteHouseawarded Booz AllenHamiltona contract to begin designinga system in 2003 and awardedUnisys a task order underan existingcontract to test and implement thesystem. DuringhisinterviewwithCommittee staff, Carlos Solari,the Chief InformationOfficerduringthis time,stated that the ECRMSwas of "highimportance."Zl

Mr. McDevitt,the program manager responsible for developing the system,described theextensive planningand testing thatwent into the project. He stated that the project started withan "initialdraft ofthe Concept of Operations" in 2002, whichwas "reviewedand approved byOACounsel, WhiteHouse Office ofRecords Management and WhiteHouse Counsel" early thenext year.22 Followingthat review, the WhiteHouse developeda statement of workto"completea detailed systems requirements specification,evaluate commercialoff the shelfproduìts and propose solutions that meet thJgovernment requirements."23Booz AllenHamiltonwas awarded this contract and began its work in late 2003. According toMr. McDevitt,in thespring of 2004, the contractor completedits workand recommended a combination of twocommercial off-the-shelfproducts to serve as the ECRMSsystem.

r8 LetterfromSteven McDevittto Rep. Henry A. Waxman (Feb. 21, 2003) (Attachment2, at l).

tn Id. çAttuchmentl,at7).

'oBrieftngfromTheresa Payton to Staft House Committeeon Oversightand

Govemment Reform(Oct. 10, 2007).2l Interview ofCarlos Solari by Staff,Committee on Oversightand Government Reform

(Feb. 7,2008).22 LeIîerfromSteven McDevittto Rep. Henry A. V/axman (Feb. 21, 200S) (Attachment

2, at l0).23 Id.



According toMr. McDevitt,this design was presented to the WhiteHouse Counsel,theWhiteHouse Officeof Records Management, and counsel in the Office ofAdministration"fortheir concurrence" in the spring of 2004. WithUnisysserving as the contractor for theimplementationphase, the WhiteHouse undertook "[s]ystemconfiguration,testing and tuning"through2005. In early2006, standard operating procedures were developed. In March 2006, the

WhiteHouse

Counsel,the WhiteHouse Officeof Records Management, and OAcounsel were

briefedon the system, and in July of 2006, they werebriefed"on the search and retrievalcapabilities of the ECRMSsolution."Mr. McDevittstated that the projectwas "ready to go live"onAugust21,2006.24

Despite thisextensive testingand preparation, the WhiteHouse never implementedECRMS.According todocuments obtained by the Committee, the currentChief InformationOfficer,Theresa Payton, aborted the project in the fallof 2006. The Committeehas obtainednotes froman October11,2007, meeting betweenMs. Payton and officialsfrom the NationalArchivesstating thatMs. Payton rejected thesystem because "[t]hesystem wouldrequire l8months to ingest the existingbacklog of messages in the MicrosoftXchange system"and "[t]hesystem offered users no option to distinguishbetween Presidential records and politicalorpersonal materials."2s

Officialsfromthe NationalArchivesexpressed concern withMs. Payton's decisiontoabort the ECRMSarchivingsystem. According tonotes from the meeting withMs. Payton, theArchivesstaff "had participated in the development of requirements forECRMS."''TheArchivesstaff observed that "the decision to drop the requirement to distinguish betweenPresidential and personal/politicalmessages was made by OAcounsel early in the developmentof ECRMS."27Withrespect to Ms.Payton's argument regarding the time required to ingest theexistingbacklog of messages, the NationalArchivesstaff responded that the process "wouldstillhave left time tocompleteleforetransition."28

When told that ECRMShad never been implemented, CarlosSolari, Mr.Payton'spredecessor as ChiefInformation Officer,expressed surprise. Mr.Solaristated that he"absolutely"believed that the system wouldbe implemented. He said-he thought the "systemgot finished"and was "puzzled"as to why ECRMShad been rejected."

2a Id. (Attachment2,atl04l).25 NationalArchivesand Records Administration,Record ofMeeting:l0/11/2007, 2:00-

3:30 p.m., OAConferenceRoom,G Street NE Offices(Undated) (NARABates No. 001628 to

00163 l).26 Id.27 Id.28 Id.2e Interview ofCarlos Solari by Staff,Committee on Oversightand Government Reform

(Feb. 7,2008).



Mr. McDevittleft the WhiteHouse in October 2006.30 He explained thatone reason forhis decisionto leave the WhiteHouse was the decision byMs. Payton to abort the ECRMSsystem.3l

Althoughthis decision to abort the ECRMS e-mail archivingsystem was made in 2006,to date the WhiteHouse has failedto put in place any other archiving system. According toTheresa Payton, the WhiteHouse has under development a new system using a commercial offthe shelf product." As ofthe date of thismemo, the Committeehas not been informedthat thesystem has been implemented.

ilI. LACKOF COOPERATION \ryITHTHE ARCHIVES

Documents obtained by the Committeeshow that despite multiple effortsby the NationalArchives togather informationabout the loss of WhiteHouse e-mails, WhiteHouse officialsdenied that any problems existed, delayed providingrequested information,and failedto respondto inquiries.One Archivesofficialwrote in an October 2007 e-mail:

The Officeof Administration,the component of EOP through whomwe are attempting togain detailed technical information,has been extremely guarded in theirresponses, andall communicationhas been conducted under apatina of legal caution.Whenever wesolicitspecific technicalinformation,they reply forthe most part that they are stillin theprocess of conducting inventories."

Over the course of the last two years, twodistinctbut related problems regarding WhiteHouse e-mailbecame public.First, in February 2006, press accounts reported that the WhiteHouse failedto properlyarchive e-mails to or from certain componentsin the WhiteHouse.Second, in March 2007, the Oversight Committeerevealed that WhiteHouse officialsused e-mail accounts controlledby the RepublicanNationalCommittee,whichhad a policyof deletinge-mails after 30days. In bothcases, the National Archivessought informationfrom the WhiteHouse withoutsuccess.

The followingis a chronologyof attempts by the Archives tounderstand the extent of themissing WhiteHouse e-mailsand related developments:

February 2120062 News accounts reported that the Special Counselinvestigatingtheoutingof CIAagent Valerie Plame V/ilsondiscovered gaps in the process by whichthe

30 LetterfromSteven McDevittto Rep. Henry A. Waxman (Feb. 21, 2008) (Attachmentl, at l).

3l Telephone conversationbetween Steven McDeviuand Staff, House CommitteeonOversight and Government Reform(F eb. 24, 2008).

32 BriefingfromTheresa Payton to Staff, House Committeeon OversightandGovernmentReform(Oct. 10, 2007).

33 E-mailfrom Robert Spangler to DavidKepley(Oct. l, 2007) (NARABates No.00178s).

l0



WhiteHouse archivedits e-mails.3a In response to these reports, two officialsfrom theNationalArchivesspoke to Jenny Brosnahan in WhiteHouse Counsel's offrce.TheArchives offrcialstold Ms.Brosnahan that ifpresidential records were destroyed, "theyshould let the archivistknowbecause un49r the PRA theyare supposed to informtheArchivistbefore any disposal of record.""

February6,20062 Counsel for the WhiteHouse Office ofAdministrationspoke to theGeneral Counsel of the NationalArchives.The OACounsel told the ArchivesCounselthat the WhiteHouse "believedthat the emails existedand could be accounted for."36This does not appear to have been an accurate assertion. As discussed in part III,anintemal WhiteHouse analysis in 2005 had shown that there were hundreds of days inwhiche-mails appeared to be missing fromcomponents of the Executive Office ofthePresident.

February 6120072 Officialsfromthe National Archivesmet withoffrcialsfrom theWhiteHouse's officeof the ChiefInformation Officerto "discu5s lrf{fu{'5need forknowledgeof OAelectronic email and other electronicsystems managed by 04."37Accordingto the chronologyof WhiteHouse meetings developedby Archivesstaff, atthis meeting, theWhiteHouse officialsgave "no indicationthat there is a problem withany missing emails."38

March 26,20072 The OversightCommittee sent letters to the RNC and the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign requesting informationabout the use of politicale-mailaccountsby WhiteHouse officialsand directingthese organizations to halt any deletions of thesee-mails.3e The next day, the General Counsel for the Archivesinformed Archivesstaffthat the Archives"willcontact the WhiteHouse Counsel's Office todiscuss further."40

April12,2007:The General Counselof the NationalArchives wrote to ChrisOprison, aWhiteHouse Associate Counsel:

34 See, e.g., ll'hiteHouse Fails To ArchiveE-Mail;Issue in CIALeak Case, New YorkSun (Feb. 2,2006).

' 35 E-mailfrom NancySmith to Sharon Fawcett (Feb. 2, 2006) (NARABates No.001s07).

36 NationalArchivesand Records Administration,Chronologtof WhiteHouse Meetings(NARABates No.01637 to 01641).

37Id.38 Id.

3e LetterfromRep. Henry A. Waxman to MikeDuncan, Chairman,RepublicanNationalCommittee (Mar. 26,2007); LetterfromRep. HenryA. Waxman to MarcRacicot, FormerChairman, Bush Cheney'04 (Mar. 26,2007).

a0 E-mail fromGary Stern to Jason Baron et al. (Mar. 27,2007)(NARABates No.001531 to 001532).

11



Chris, followingup on our conversation several weeks ago about WhiteHouseemails, we appreciate, as noted in the press, that youroffice is taking steps toinvestigatewhether PRA records were created or received on non-WhiteHouseemail systems, and if so, to take all measures to recover and preserve them. Asyou know, under Section 2203 of the PRA, the President may not dispose ofPresidential records withoutfirstobtaining the writtenviews ofthe Archivist.Ithas also been normalpractice for the WhiteHouse to informNARAof anyunauthorized destruction of Presidential records. 4 I

April13,2007:A nonprofitgroup called Citizens for Responsibilityand Ethics inWashington (CREW)released a report allegingthat after conductingan inventoryin2005,the WhiteHouse found hundredsof days withno e-mailsent fromor receivedbyvarious WhiteHouse components.a2 Asked about these allegations that day, WhiteHouse Press Secretary Dana Perino stated that she "wouldn'trule out that there were apotential5 millionemails lost."43Itwas only after the release of the CREV/report thatthe WhiteHouse acknowledgedto the Archivesthat e-mails couldbe missing from itsservers.

April25120072 The'WhiteHouse Counselmet with"key members ofNARA'sseniorståff'to update them on "cuffentissues relating to V/hiteHouse emails."44At themeeting, the NationalArchivesrequested_ a copy of the spreadsheet associated withthe2005 analysis of potentiale-mail losses.a5 The Archivesstaff also advised the WhiteHouse that "itis essential that you begin an email restoration project from the backuptapes as soon as possible."a6

May1, 2007¿ The Archivist,AllenWeinstein, wrotea letter tothe WhiteHouseCounsel, Fred Fielding,about the missing WhiteHouse e-mails.In the letter, Dr.Weinstein wrote:

ar E-mailfromGary Stern to ChrisOprison (Apr.12,2007)(NARABates No. 001540).az Citizensfor Responsibilityand Ethics in V/ashington,Withouta Trace (Apr. 2007);

see also WhiteHouse; Millionsof E-MailsMayBe Missing, CNN(Apr.13,2007).o3 The WhiteHouse, Press Gaggle by Dana Perino and Dr. AliAl-Dabbagh,Spokesman

for the Governmentof lraq (Apr.13,2007).oo Lett"tfromAllenWeinstein to Fred Fielding(Mayl, 2007) (NARABates No.

001428 to 001429).os Memorandum from GaryStern to Allen'Weinstein,Bush 43 Transition,et al. (Sept. 5,2007) (NARABates No. 001626 to 001627). See also LetterfromAllenWeinstein to FredFielding(Mayl, 2007) (NARABates No. 001428 to 001429)(indicatingthat the Fred Fieldingattended an April25,2007, meeting withArchivesstaff).

a6 E-mailfromGary Stem to Emmet Floodand Christopher Oprison (June 20,2007)(NARABates No. 001624).

t2



V/ithinthe next month theyare going to complete an audit of the PST files todetermine thefullextent of the problem.But they also stated that they expect tohave an action plan ready by theend of the surnmer. We asked that they brief uswhen the auditis complete, and not wait for the action plan.

We asked if they couldgive us any more specificson what theyknow so far: e.g.,volume ofmissing email;whether it is particularto specifico'buckets"representingparticularEOP offices;does it involveboth federaland presidentialemails? Theysaid they could notat this point answer any of these questions.5r

The meetingalso discussed the problem of the missingRNCe-mails.The WhiteHouseofficialsassured the Archivesstaff that thisproblem was being addressed and the e-mailswouldbe captured in a "separate restoration effort":

V/e thenasked about the RNCemail issue. Theyare workingwiththe RNCandlookingat this issue. They stated that the RNC server is now fixedso that thiswillnot happen again, and that the RNChas the old servers.They are exploringhow they willcapture the Presidential recordemails. ... Thiswillbe a separaterestoration effort from the EOP email restoration.s2

June 20, 20072 The General Counselfor the Archiveswrote to the WhiteHouseCounsel's officeasking foran "emailupdate." In that e-mail,he wrote:"youhave statedthat emailsappear to be missing from the WhiteHouse from the timeperiod of late 2003through late2005, although you have not been able to provideany estimate of howmanyemails are actually missing."He remindedthe Counsel's off,rce that'oon May2l,wewere informedthat the OACIOaudit of the missing email situation should be completedin about 4 weeks." He stated that it is "imperative"that the Archivesbe updated on theprogress of the investigation intoboth these e-maillosses and -WhiteHouse progress intoplanningfora recovery of presidential records from the RNC.t'The e-mailrenewed theArchives'request that the WhiteHouse commence restoration of missing e-mails fromthe backup tapes.

June 29, 20072 In an e-mailsummarizing a meeting withthe new Generaland DeputyCounsel of the WhiteHouse Office of Administration.the General Counsel of theArchives writes:

We did note that during thelast two years NARAhad experienced a notable dropoffin open communicationand interactionwithOA.V/e also touched on the

5t Id.s2 Id.s3 E-mail fromGary Stem to Emmet Floodand Christopher Oprison (June 20,2007)

(NARABates No. 001624).

t4



issue of the missingWhiteHouse email. ... [T]heystillhave not completed theirreview... and therefore stillhad nothingconcrete to report to us.54

September 5120072 TheGeneral Counselof the NationalArchivessent a memorandumto the Archivistabout the status of the missing WhiteHouse e-mailsand the "Bush43Transition."Accordingto the memorandum:

We ... had a furtheropportunity todiscuss the email and transitionrelated issuesthat we have discussed on numerous occasions, includingwhen you, I, and othersmet withFred Fieldingin late Apriland in your letter to Fieldingof May1,2007.Despite a number of verypositivemeetings and discussions since then, ... we stillhave rnade almost zero progress in actually movingahead withthe importantandnecessary work that is required for a successful transition.Even our simple andrather mundane request that the WhiteHouse provideus withformalauthorizationto begin move planning ... has lain dormant for months.

Moresignificantly,our repeated requests to begin office-by-offrcemeetings toscope out and inventorythe volume,formats, and sensitivities of the PRA recordsthat willbe transferred to the NationalArchiveshas gone unheeded. ...

Of most importance, westillknowvirtuallynothingabout the status of the allegedmissing WhiteHouse emails. We have not received a writtenresponse to ourMay5, 2007,letter regarding alleged missingFederal recordemails. And as westressed to the'WhiteHouse last spring, it is vitalthat any needed backuprestoration projectbegin as soo-n as possible, in order that it be completed beforethe end of the Administration.tt

October 10,20072 Michael Kttrtz,the Assistant Archivistfor Records Services, wrote to

allWhiteHouse officesthat create federal records to request that they "lookintowhetherany electronicmail records of your agency maintained on the WhiteHouse email systemwere lost or alienated,as has been widelyreported.")Õ

October 11,2007: Ameeting was held withstaff from the National Archivesand theWhiteHouse ChiefInformation Officer,Theresa Payton. According toa record of thismeeting prepared by the Archives,the WhiteHouse informedthe National Archivesthatits analysis of the missing e-mailproblem had been delayed and there wouldbe "no

5aE-mail fromGary Stern to Jason Baron et al. (June 29,2007) (NARABates No.00r62s)

5t Memorandum from Gary Stern to Allen'Weinstein,Bush 43Transition,et al. (Sept. 5,2007) (NARABates No. 001626to001627).

s6 Letter from MichaelJ. Kurtz,Assistant Archivistfor Records Services, to JohnVy'alters, Director of NationalDrug ControlPolicy(Oct. 10, 2007) (NARABates No. 001807 to001 808).

15



results before theend of November at the earliest."Accordingto the Archives'meetingrecord:

We expressed great concem that the process was movingso slowly,and that wewere very skeptical that thereport results from the new toolcould completelyeliminate the possibilityof messages missing from the collectionssystem. Vy'epointed out that some type of restoration project would inevitablybe necessary ifsignificantdoubt remained that messages had not been collected, and that theyshould beginplanningforsuch a project by requesting fundingfor the currentFY."

October 15,20072 The General Counselfor the Archivesupdated the Archiviston theunsuccessful attempts by theArchivesto reviewthe "2005OAReporlchart ...onproblems withWhiteHouse email system."58According tothe General Counsel:

V/e have repeatedly asked to see this report,and have been ignored, or, morerecently, told it is hard to comprehend and of little value.WhiteHouse has showncopies to House Oversight Committeeand DOJ.se

October22,20072 Sam'Watkins, a member of the Archivesstaff who attended theOctober II,2007,meeting withthe WhiteHouse wrote to Theresa Payton renewing hisrequest foran opportunity to viewthe 2005 analysis:

Vy'e are certainlywillingto participate in the analysis of the data related to the"missingemails,"but we are stilltrying to figureout how we can help withoutanunderstanding of what the"2005report" says. Obviously,the report must give^some indicationthat there was a problem, or we wouldnot be in thissituation.o'

October 31r2007:The NationalArchives staffwere finally"affordeda briefopportunity to viewa paper copy" ofthe spreadsheet prepared in 2005 listinghundreds ofdãys of missing WhiteHouse e-mail. They were not permitted to retain a copy.6t

s7 National Archivesand Records Administration,Record of Meeting(Oct. I1,2007)(NARABates No. 001628 to 001630).

58 E-mailfrom Gary Stern to Donna Goldand AllenWeinstein(Oct. 15, 2007)(NARABates No. 001631 to 001633).

te Id.60 E-mailfromSam Watkinsto Theresa Payton (Oct.19, 2007) (NARABates No.

00179s).6l E-mailfromSam Watkins, National Archivesand Records Administration, toTheresa

Payton (Nov. 6,2007) (NARABates No. 001634 to 001635).

r6



IV. EXTENT OF'THE MISSINGE-MAILS

At this point, it is not possible to quantiffthe extent of the missing WhiteHouse e-mails,but it appears that the problemis significantand has twoseparate components: (l)'WhiteHousee-mails sent using RNC e-mailaccounts that were destroyed by the RNC,and (2) WhiteHousee-mails sent using officialWhiteHouse e-mailaccounts that were notarchived.The WhiteHouse's ownanalysis from 2005 identifiedover 700 days when there were eitherno e-mails fora component of the ExecutiveOffrceof the President or significantly fewere-mails thanpredicted in the WhiteHouse archive system.

In recent meetings, theWhiteHouse has disputed the extentof the e-mails missing fromthe WhiteHouse servers. However,documents that the WhiteHouse providedand showed toCommittee staff for reviewshow that the archive system did not preserve e-mails from theOffice ofthe Vice President that were sought by Special CounselPatrick Fitzgerald.

A. WhiteHouse E-mailsMissinefromRNCAccounts

In June 2007, the majority staffof the OversightCommittee issued an interimreport of aninvestigationinto the use of RNC e-mailaccounts by WhiteHouse officials.62This report foundthat more than 88 WhiteHouse officialshad e-mailaccounts maintained by theRNCor the BushCheney '04 campaign, and many officialsused these politicalaccounts extensively.WhiteHouse officialswithRNC e-mailaccounts includedsenior WhiteHouse personnel, such as KarlRove, the formerSenior Advisor tothe President; AndrewCard, the former WhiteHouse Chiefof Staff;and several directors of the WhiteHouse Officeof PoliticalAffairs.In some cases,WhiteHouse personnel used RNC accounts almost exclusively,thus circumventingthe officialgovernment e-mailsystem.63

The RNCdeleted most of these e-mails pursuant to a "document retention"policyunderwhiche-mails more than 30 days old were deleted. One indicationof the scale of the loss ofWhiteHouse e-mailis the fact that theRNChas retained noe-mailmessages for51 of the 88WhiteHouse officialswithRNC e-mail accounts.Moreover,even forWhiteHouse officialsforwhomthe RNChas e-mailrecords, these records appear to be incomplete.Of the 37 offlrcialsforwhomthe RNChas retained e-mails,only 15 have any e-mailrecords that date frombefore2006.64

The case of Mr.Rove provides an example of the extent of the missing e-mail.The RNCpreserved only130 e-mails sent by Mr.Rove priorto November2003, and it preserved no e-

6'More informationregarding theCommittee'sinvestigationis available in a reportprepared by MajorityStaff,InterimReport: Investigationof Possible PresidentialRecords Act

Violations(June 2007) (online athttp,,lloversight.house.gov/documents/200706181052a3.pdf).63 Interviewof Scott Jennings by Staff, Committee on Oversightand Government

Reform(Oct.9, 2007).6a Ma¡orityStaff, Committeeon Oversightand Government Reform,InterimReport:

Investigationof PossiblePresidentialRecords ActViolatiozs(June 2007).

t7



mails sent to Mr. Rove duringPresident Bush's firstterm. For the period that the RNC doeshave records, however, Mr.Rove was a prolificuser of his RNC e-mail account. In2007, Mr.Rove frequentlysent more than 100 e-mails per day and received over 200e-mails.6s

There is also evidence that many of the e-mails sent through RNC e-mailaccountsinvolvedofficialgovernment business. In total,the RNCpreserved 140,216 e-mails sent orreceived by KarlRove; over half of these e-mails (75,374) were sent to or received fromindividualsusing official ".gov"e-mail accounts. Ofthe 674,367 WhiteHouse e-mailspreserved by the RNC, 240,922 (36%)were sent to or received from government e-mailaccounts. In response to requests by the Committee, federalagencies provided partialinventories of WhiteHouse e-mails sent to the agencies through RNCe-mail accounts.These e-mails involvedofficialappointments, federal grants, and other officialbusiness.66

There does not appear to be any active process for recovering thedeleted RNC e-mails.Ata briefingin May2007, the RNCprovidedCommittee staffwithan accounting of the varioussystems on which e-mail mightbe saved. In additionto e-mails saved on active RNC serversand individuals'computers and blackbeny devices, the RNChas retained a number of back-uptapes. Several of these tapes contain data from early 2007, and an additional twoboxes of back-up tapes contain data fromearlier periods.o' However, the RNChas not undertaken anyeffort torecover recordsfrom these tapes. The WhiteHouse has also made no effortsto obtain the back-up tapes from the RNC or recover data from them.68

B. WhiteHouse E-mails MissinsFrom WhiteHouse Accounts

Congress, the NationalArchives,and the public firstlearned about a potentiallylarge lossof WhiteHouse e-mails from WhiteHouse servers in April2007, when CREWreleased a reportdescribing the potentiale-mail loss.6e The WhiteHouse, however, had knownabout thisproblem for several years. Officialstold Committee staff at an October 2007 brief,rngthat theWhiteHouse firstdiscovered a problemin August orSeptember of 2005. Thisdiscovery led to abroader analysis of the .pst filestorage process led by Çteven McDevitt,a senior officialin theWhiteHouse Offrce ofthe ChiefInformation Officer./u

6s Id.66 Id.67 Briefingby Rob Kelnerand Eric Friedberg forStaff, Committeeon Oversightand

GovernmentReform(May11,2007).68 Telephone conversationbetween Rob Kelnerand MajorityStaff,Committee on

Oversight and Government Reform(Feb. 25, 2008).6e Citizens for Responsibilityand Ethics in Washington,Withouta Trace (Apr.2007);

see also Il.hiteHouse: Millionsof E-Mails MayBe Missing, CNN(Apr.14,2007).70 Briefingby Theresa Payton for Staff,Committee on Oversight and Government

Reform(Oct. 10, 2007).

18



According toMr. McDevitt,he led a team in analyzing what he believes to have been"over 5,000 .pst files"to determine whatdata was preserved in each fileand whetherarry datawas missing."Thisanalysis found over 700days with lowor no e-mailforany one of 12components of the WhiteHouse between January 2003 andAugust 2005.

According toa copy of a spreadsheet provided to this Committee by the WhiteHouse,there were 473 days duringthis period in whicha component of the EOP had no e-mailspreserved on the servers, as wellqs229 in whicha component had an unusuallylownumber ofe-mails preserved on the ,"*ers.t'The spreadsheet shows 12 days of missing e-mailfor theWhiteHouse Office,16 for the Offrce ofthe VicePresident, and 103 days for the CouncilofEconomic Advisers.''

According toMr. McDevitt,more thalr. adozenpeople were involvedwiththis analysis,and the results were independentlyvalidated.'*John Straub, the Director ofthe OfficeofAdministrationat this time, toldCommittee staff thathe oversaw theeffort.Mr.Straub toldCommitteestaff thathe was "consumed by this"issue of what he called "misplacedfiles"andworkedclosely withMr. McDevittto locate the missing e-mails.75Documents that were shownto Committee staffyesterday indicate that theWhiteHouse Counsel's officewas aware of theseissues and met frequentlywithMr. McDevitt's team.For example,on November21,2005,Mr.McDeviusent "the current versionof the Exchange Message AnalysisSpreadsheet" to AssociateWhiteHouse Counsel Bob Hoyt.On December 5,2005, Mr.Straub met withthe'vVhiteHouseCounsel's officeand Joe Hagin, Deputy WhiteHouse Chiefof Staff, regarding "issues that havearisen withthe e-mailsystem."Both Mr. McDevittand Mr.Straub told the Committee that theybriefedWhiteHouse CounselHarriet Miersregarding their analysis.T6

Since reports of the missing e-mailsbecame publicin April2007, Committee staffhavereceived several briefingsfrom the White House.On May 29,2007,KeithRoberts, the DeputyGeneral Counselof the Office ofAdministration,toldCommittee staff that thedays of lowandno e-mailfound in the 2005 analysis were from the time period when .pst fileswere createdmanually.He stated that human effor or generator or electricalproblems could have led to thesemissing days. He said, however, that the2005 analysis had been a quickexamination of the

7t Letter fromSteven McDevittto Rep. HenryA. 'Waxman (Feb. 21, 200S) (Attachment2,page 3).

72 EOP Exchange EnvÌronment- AtlComponents;Summary- Messages Per Day(Feb. 6, 2006) (HOGR6OA-000002-Cto 000024-C).

73 Id.

LetterfromSteven McDevittto Rep. Henry A. V/axman (Feb. 21, 2008) (Attachment2, at 4 and 6).7s Interview ofJohn Straub by Staff, Committee on Oversightand Government Reform

(Feb. 15,2008).76 Interview ofJohn Straub by Staff, Committeeon Oversightand Government Reform

(Feb. 15, 2008); letter fromSteven McDevittto Rep. Henry A. Waxman (Feb. 21, 2008)(Attachment2,af 7).

r9



problem, and that the WhiteHouse was conducting a more comprehensiveanalysis.TTAroundthe same time,Mr.Roberts briefedofficialsat the National Archivesand told them that the newanalysis wouldbe completed withinthe next month.78

In October 2007, Committeestaff werebriefedagain by WhiteHouse officials.At thisbriefing,staff were told that the Off,rceof the Chief Information Officerhad tried to recreate thefindingifrom the2005 analysis and was unable to do so.7e Committee staff have been briefedtwice since that time. In these briefings,current WhiteHouse CIOTheresa Payton explainedthat the WhiteHouse is using a new toolfor conducting the analysis of e-mails and has foundapproximately100 .pst fileswithnames that do not match their contents.ðu

On February 22,2008, Theresa Payton shared some preliminaryfindings fromthis newanalysis. According to Ms.Payton, the new analysishad identified23 millionmore e-mails forthis period than the 2005 analysis.She also toldCommittee staff thather officehad found e-mails for some of the days identifiedin the 2005 analysisas having no e-mails preserved.Althoughshe could not quantiffhow many e-mailswere found for these days, she said that somee-mails had been found forallof the missing days for the WhiteHouse Office,the OfficeofPolicyDevelopment,and the Officeof Management and Budget. Similarly,some e-mails hadbeen found for fiveof the 16 missing days for the Officeof the Vice President. However,shestressed that these findingsare preliminaryand that the analysiswillnot be completeduntilsometime in March.sl

Althoughthe current effortmay uncover some e-mails that werenot included in the 2006analysis, other documents provided to the Committee by theWhiteHouse indicate that therehave been serious problems using thearchivingsystem to recover WhiteHouse e-mails.One ofthese documents, dated January 20,2006, describes effortsby the Officeof the ChiefInformation Officerto "recoverOffice ofVicePresident email from the target period ofSeptember 30,2003 toOctober 6,2003.-82

77 Brief,rngby KeithRoberts and Emmet Floodfor Staff, Committeeon OversightandGovernmentReform(May29,2007).

78 E-mail fromGary Stern to AllenV/einstein (May23,2007) (NARABates No. 001620to 1622).

t' Briefittgby Theresa Payton, WilliamReynolds, EmmetFloodand Elizabeth MedagliaforStaff, Committeeon Oversightand Government Reform(Oct.17,2007).

80Telephone briefing byTheresa Payton and Emmet Floodfor Staff, Committee onOversight and Govemment Reform(Feb. 14, 2008);Telephone briefing byTheresa Payton and

Emmet Flood for Staff,Committee on Oversight and GovernmentReform(Feb.22,2008).8l Telephone briefingby Theresa Payton and Emmet FloodforStaff Committee on

Oversight and Govemment Reform(F eb. 22, 2008).82 E-mailfromSusan Crippen to Steven McDevittand Jaime Borrego (Jan. 23,2006)

(HOGR6OA-010s81to 010584).

20



Accordingto thisdocument, even after restoring backuptapes, the WhiteHouse teamwas unable to findany joumalfiles or.pst files forthe Vice President's officeduringthis period.The team's firsteffort involvedrestoring from the backup tape o'the fileservers that were used tostore .pst filedduring the target period."This search uncovered "no messages ... that filledthegap." The team next restored from the backup tape the "server thatcontained the joumal

mailboxes for the target period."Accordingto the document,the'Journalmailboxes were

examined and no *.rrug"rfor the target p.iiodwere present in thejournalmailbox."83Theteam then restored from the backup tape the personal mailboxes of officialsin the VicePresident's officeand recovered messàges from70 individualusers.sa

According toa document dated just four days later that was shown to Committee staff,but not providedto them, the WhiteHouse team recovercd 17,956 e-mails from these individualmailboxes on the backup tape and used these as their basis to search fore-mails responsive to theSpecial Counsel's request. A restoration of personal mailboxes froma backup tape does notrecover any e-mails deleted by the user before the backup tape was made. The fact that theWhiteHouse couldnot find .pst files or joumalfiles on backup tapes from this time period raisesquestions

about thelikelihoodthat these fileswillbe found duringthe current search.

Althoughthe Archiveshas repeatedly urged the WhiteHouse to commence restoring e-mails from its backup tapes, the WhiteHouse has refused to start this process. The onlyrestoration of e-mails frombackup tapes that has occurred is the restoration of the e-mailsresponsive to Mr. Fitzgerald's request.

V. LÄCKOF COOPERATIONWITHTHECOMMITTEE

The Committee'sinvestigationinto the extent of the missing WhiteHouse e-mailshasbeen complicated by a lack of cooperation fromthe WhiteHouse. On December 20,2007,theCommittee issued document requests to the NationalArchivesand the WhiteHouse Counsel onissues related to e-mailpreservation, the developmentof e-mailarchivingsystems, andpreparation for the 2009 transition.

More than two months afterthe Committee made its request, the WhiteHouse appears tohave produced only a small percentage of the documents that it believes to be responsive totherequest. In addition,the WhiteHouse is withholding,withoutan assertion of ExecutivePrivilege,an unknownnumber of documents that are described as being deliberative.Justyesterday, the WhiteHouse made accommodationsforCommittee staff to review somepercentage of those withhelddocuments. However, there are more that have not been shown toCommittee staff.

In addition,the WhiteHouse directed the NationalArchivesto withholda range ofdocuments that contained WhiteHouse equities. The NationalArchiveswas unwillingto releasethese documents to the Committee withoutWhiteHouse approval. As a result, the Committeewas forced to issue a subpoena to the Archiveson February 20,2008, to obtain thedocuments.

83 Id.8a Id.

2l

CREW v. EOP: Regarding Missing WH Emails: 2/26/08 - Committee Report on WH Email

Documents

Transcript of CREW v. EOP: Regarding Missing WH Emails: 2/26/08 - Committee Report on WH Email