Waxman, RNC Servers, and Digital Forensics Experts

[CorpGovActivist]

As many of you know, Chairman Waxman and his staff have already fired a broadside at the Administration, the RNC, and Bush/Cheney 04 regarding preserving digital data: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=waxman+servers

As Karl Rove may - or may not - know, attempts to delete such data can be traced back to the guilty perp: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=digital+forensics

Chairman Waxman's committtee budget have any recent outlays to digital forensics experts?

; )

- Dave

[Pirate Smile]

1. I was at a meeting that had a computer forensic specialist give a presentation.

I asked him if he had been contacted by anyone regarding the 5 million missing e-mails.

He answered that he was on retainer with Karl Rove's attorney.

[CorpGovActivist]

3. Seriously, or Pulling Our Leg?

Putting all the major experts on retainer would be akin to a major corporation putting all the major law firms in their hometown on retainer - to create a conflict of interest (and an early warning system) if a prospective plaintiff approaches that firm for representation.

- Dave

[Pirate Smile]

7. Seriously, he used to work for the Secret Service but he is a computer forensic expert.

Sometimes the government (State or Feds) hire him to search the computers of suspects, sometimes attorneys hire him in civil suits to do computer forensic work for their clients.

He said he was just on retainer. I'm sure the Senate and House have their own computer forensic experts and the WH does too.

I had been hoping he was on the good guys side but from listening to his stories, he has had situations where he finds that the client he is working for is lying and he has had to tell the attorney that - some of whom he says practically start crying because they have been doing a lot of work on a contingency basis for the client. The attorney wants to cry because he isn't going to get a dime for all those hours of work he or she has done. The case falls apart.

edit to add - He mentioned all the programs people can buy to destroy the data on their computers but, of course, the computers show that "Destroy Data" was purchased and used on such and such date so it isn't exactly a clean way to get ride of info on your computer.

edit to add II: He likened deleting your e-mails to a library and destroying the card in the card catalog for a book. The book is still in the library but the pointer to how to find the book has been destroyed.

[CorpGovActivist]

12. Interesting...

... I'd be curious to hear his take, and the circumstances that led to his being retained by them.

- Dave

[enough]

8. I was involved in a legal case where a Public Utility did exactly that.

Lawyer after lawyer, in firm after firm, said they would "like to help" but couldn't because of the work they had been doing with the utility.

[CorpGovActivist]

11. Maddening, Isn't It?

Since they're on retainer, they also have an obligation to report to the client that they've been approached by someone shopping the case.

: /

- Dave

[Toots]

9. How does one become all?

It was one computer digital forensic specialist that was on retainer and you somehow came up with it being all specialists on retainer.... Sometimes the jumps around here are astronomical :shrug:

[CorpGovActivist]

10. Common Tactic: Put All Major Law Firms (or Experts) on Retainer...

... as a precautionary measure. Then, if/when one of them is approached by the other side, they have to decline to take the case or to work with the opposing team.

It's not a leap of logic, but rather an extrapolation based in actual real-world experience.

- Dave

[papau]

2. Monica Goodling Instructs DOJ Officials to Delete Documents - 5 yrs in prison problem?

http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2007/04/monica-goodling-instructs-doj-officials.html
Friday, April 27, 2007
Monica Goodling Instructs DOJ Officials to Delete Documents


Yes, that's an instruction to delete documents. And notice the date: February 12, 2007. That's well after Congress began investigating this matter. I don't believe any subpoenas or document requests had yet been issued (someone please correct me if I'm wrong about that), but it was pretty clear by then that document requests were likely.

Let's review the timeline. On January 17, 2007, Senators Feinstein and Leahy grilled Alberto Gonzales on the recent spate of U.S. Attorney firings. On January 25, 2007, Senator Schumer announced that he was going to hold hearings on the firing of U.S. Attorneys. And on February 6, Schumer held the first set of hearings, in which Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty testified that Bud Cummins was not asked to leave for "performance-related" reasons, but rather to make way for Karl Rove protege Tim Griffin. That damaging testimony helped propel this story to the front pages.

And two days later, on February 8, 2007, Senators Durbin, Schumer, Murray, and Reid sent a follow up letter to Alberto Gonzales asking all sorts of questions arising out of McNulty's testimony, including a number of questions about the replacement of Bud Cummins with Tim Griffin.

It is in this context that Monica Goodling, four days later, sends out the above-displayed email, which attaches updated talking points re: Griffin/Cummins and various other U.S. Attorney related issues and instructs the recipients to delete prior versions of the documents.

As a litigator, I can tell you, that's a real no-no. You never instruct people to delete documents that are relevant to a pending investigation. Never. That's true even when the investigating body hasn't yet got around to requesting those documents. It smacks of obstruction. Indeed, the Obstruction of Congress statute, 18 U.S.C § 1505, specifically prohibits any attempts to obstruct "the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress." The penalty is up to 5 years in prison.<snip>

[CorpGovActivist]

5. Brandeis: "Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher..."

"Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or ill, it teaches the whole people by its example."

This is why corporate white collar criminal investigations so often falter on "oops, we lost the data, due to a new records retention policy. Our bad."

- Dave

[Subdivisions]

4. There you are! I was beginning to worry about you!

"Chairman Waxman's committtee budget have any recent outlays to digital forensics experts?"

I'm sure it has!

[CorpGovActivist]

6. No Worries; Very Busy

It's an exciting time to be inside the Beltway.

: )

- Dave