Bloch’s description sounds less like crappy erasure on his part — which he surely would have know was documented by OSC 2000 — than something else causing both data and his system to act as it did.

If somebody had been deleting child porn, the very last thing they’d do would be to let a department IT person work on it; Wing Leung wouldn’t have been called in first.

And if there’d been child porn involved, why would two other subordinates be involved? Again, as member of law enforcement, the last thing one would do is get others involved.

I buy steps 1 through 5 — but after that, I don’t know. The first steps have the ring of truth to them, explain the subordinates’ possible roles.

Knowing what we know about MZM, the wide-open network at EO-OA, the lack of controls on email accounts outside of .gov domains and equally uncontrolled devices like Blackberries, it seems far too likely that something outside of DOJ could have been picking at data on Bloch’s system. More simply put: we can’t rule it out based on what we know.

Michael Levine, a 65-year-old and openly gay radio technician, claimed that, after he blew the whistle on a coworker’s and his supervisor’s workplace misconduct, a personnel officer engaged in retaliatory action against him: pursuing knowingly false allegations of child pornography against Levine, suspending Levine for 14 days, seizing his computer, and referring to gay people as “those fucking faggots”.[11]
One year after filing both a retaliation and antigay discrimination complaint with the OSC, Levine received a letter from the OSC on December 28, 2004. Without interviewing even a single witness, the OSC wrote that it was unable to investigate the complaints because only conduct, not sexual orientation, was protected under the Civil Service Act of 1978 [11] — a reversal of Bloch’s April 8, 2004 statement that sexual orientation-based discrimination was prohibited due to imputed conduct and therefore that the OSC has the authority to pursue such complaints. [7]
After being embroiled in a related “internal purge” controversy (see below), Special Counsel Bloch testified before a Senate panel on May 24, 2005 and reiterated his original position that he lacked the authority to protect federal employees on the basis of sexual orientation. [12] The next day, the Log Cabin Republicans called on Bloch to resign. [13

Maybe there were child porn images residual on computers from that or other similar investigations. Maybe Bloch caught someone in his office engaging in child porn and wanted to protect the person and scrub the evidence? Maybe it was Bloch? Who knows. Also, there was, earlier in 2006 a DOD official indicted for child porn and, of course, there was Brian Doyle, the Dept. of Homeland Sec. Deputy Press Secretary arrested on child porn. Maybe Bloch got wind of some Bushco trolling/snooping program that was initiated in late 2006 probing government computers looking for porn/child porn and was desperate to get something off of the three computers he knew might have it (whether semi-innocently acquired or culpably acquired). A religious zealot like Bloch might freak out over something like this.

Not saying I necessarily but into any of this, just dunno, but it is an interesting hypothesis you all have going here.

This thing just gets weirder, doesn’t it?

1. Whistleblower W emails Bloch’s Subordinate S1 some secret evidence E of wrongdoing, either in the text of the email or as an attachment. Let’s imagine it’s one or more image files attached to an email. We can infer that the accused wrongdoer is either somebody exceptionally powerful, or else somebody under the protection of somebody exceptionally powerful. Now E is on 1 computer.

2. Maybe S1 appreciates its importance or maybe not, but in any event S1 forwards E to Subordinate S2 as email, with a Cc: (or maybe a Bcc:, as long as we’re sleuthing) to Bloch. (Alternatively, S1 sends it to immediate superior S2 who sends it to immediate superior Bloch.) Now E is on 3 computers.

3. Bloch looks at E. Maybe he appreciates its importance immediately, or maybe he has to go investigate with his Evil White House Overlords before he understands just what he’s got, but at some point he either is told, or else determines himself, that E must not result in an investigation, indeed E must be utterly disappeared.

4. Bloch makes sure email containing E was not distributed to anyone other than S1, S2, and himself.

5. Bloch makes a copy of the email containing E, not on any of the computers, on the plan that this will soon be the only extant copy of the info. Many ways to do this, including but not limited to pocket USB drives (encrypted or not, I don’t think we know that and I don’t think it matters much); transmission to a remote computer over the public internet; printing it on paper; etc. There are a few possible motivations for Bloch keeping a copy, including “To Be Opened In Case Of My Untimely Death or Dishonor”, extortion leverage in his own interest, and extortion leverage in the interest of someone else Bloch is working for. Maybe Bloch starts wearing a thumb drive around his neck at this point, ostensibly using it for the other (slightly silly) reasons he gave in the interview but really to keep the only copy of E where he can control it. Maybe a copy goes to his lawyer and/or safe deposit box, and/or home wall safe.

6. At this point, Bloch may or may not have attempted to secretly delete E from one, two, or all 3 computers, either successfully or maybe botching it, perhaps badly botching it. This could be on his lonesome, or else with the help of a trusted (though not necessarily talented) techie, not necessarily somebody on staff. (Check the visitor logs?)

7. Bloch hires Geeks on Call and sics them on the computers of S1, S2, and himself. Either to unrecoverably erase E, or else in an attempt (perhaps successful) to repair or, in the alternative, eradicate all traces of whatever erasure he did (or attempted and botched) in step 6, plus any attendant damage. (NB: It is possible that the services Geeks On Call performed are different from the ones listed on the bill. It is also possible that the Geeks On Call service tech let it drop that he knew some guy who could do other services and for a fee connected Bloch with him — I’m sure there must be computer tech “fixers” in DC, and GOC could well know, even pimp, them.) In any event, at this point Bloch thinks he is the only one who knows he has the only copy of E.

So far so good from Bloch’s perspective, but then again this is the point in the crime movie plot where things start to go wrong, isn’t it? I have no theory to offer that incorporates the leaking of the receipt or the genesis of the FBI raids and the underlying Grand Jury process and search warrants. (Did the GOC tech flip?) Or for that matter, that explains why after all this time whistleblower W hasn’t found another way to get evidence E out to the world.

Bloch could of course be lying, but maybe the weird uncontrollably-rolling-screen scene, the long difficult repair process, and Bloch’s “virus” hypothesis could be explained by some unrelated spyware/rootkit that had been installed on the computer(s) before this whole incident started — maybe by some government or intelligence entity? Dunno about that part.

BTW:
Would the NIE release in Dec 2007 be at all relevant for Bloch’s hard drive erasures?

Oct 26, 2007 McConnell reverses existing policies of releasing NIEs. He says that NIEs will **not** be publicly released.

Dec. 3, 2007 NIE released (surprise!) probably as a martial-arts-like reverse-turn from sources inside CIA who are p*ssed over the fact that Cheney/WH has kept it buried for over a year, plus they got burned in 2003.

The only item relevant to the NIE that comes under Bloch’s jurisdiction would be GSA contracts. The USAG, Siegelman, Guitierrez, and Bishopic don’t seem relevant to the NIE kerfuffle.
However, GSA contracts could be quite relevant.

Don’t want to send anyone down rabbit warrens; just a random thought in case others have more info to add.

Some enterprising novelist could use this thread as the plot for a thriller.