They are clearly trying to

a) run out the clock and
b) turn this mess over to the next Administration.

Agree w/a). IMO b) is more accurately characterized as: destroy all evidence of crimes. I’ve read elsewhere that expenditures for document shredding (don’t have link) are many times greater for this bunch than any previous admin. Also in support of “destroy all evidence” notion (which I’ve suspected since early Iraq invasion days) is Cheney/Rummy on record describing their Watergate sentiments as not regret over Nixon’s actions/motives, rather betrayal by media that shone light on those actions. Or in other words, they regret only getting caught.

The idea that they would institutionalize “coordinated deleting of emails” (as you say) was predictable… and was predicted, if only in my personal suspicions (I’m sure many others saw same writing on the wall).

This was also predictable based on W’s “executive order” suspending release of Reagan & Bush I prez records pending “further review”. The media made some note of this for a month, 2, 3… then poof. 7 yrs later, no release/compliance.

Wan’a bet daddy’s records have been permanently & irretrievably redacted?

…

OT: a COUNTERPUNCH link “snipped” via MofA:

SueAnn Arrigo is … a high-level CIA insider. Her title was Special Operations Advisor to the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI). She also established the Remote Viewing Defense protocols for the Pentagon … It earned her a two-star general rank in the military.

…
In August 2001, DCI George Tenet told her to assemble “a moving van full of Pentagon documents showing Defense Contractor kickbacks to Pentagon officials.”
…
CIA used the material to blackmail or bribe its officials “into ‘working on’ the Halliburton-Carlyle team.” Top CIA types were involved, and Tenet laid it out for Arrigo: You’ve “given me the keys to the kingdom. (These) documents will make me rich.”
…
Arrigo worked at CIA for over 30 years and reported directly to Tenet. But she wasn’t prepared for what she found – a new section at the Agency without her knowledge. It employed 40 people, all working for Halliburton “while being paid by the US taxpayer as if they were CIA.”
…
Arrigo knew too much, took risks to learn it, and what happened next is shocking. Halliburton’s “CIA Representative” confronted her, tore out her phone, ransacked her office, removed every shred of paper, and hauled her off bodily “to a prison cell” inside its basement offices. She was intimidated and threatened. Thought she might be killed. She survived, but the message was clear. She complained to Tenet. Showed him her bruises. He responded dismissively: “There, there, everything will be all right in the morning.”
…
In 2002, Arrigo tried a new tact (sic) – ingratiating herself with “Halliburton’s Man” and using it to her advantage.
…
First off, it’s pure myth that Dick Cheney stopped running the company. “He called in orders to the man I worked for almost every day and sometimes two or more times a day. He remained (Halliburton’s) functional head in all but name. No one….had the power to override his orders.” Second, Cheney never divested himself of Halliburton profits. “He merely hid how (he got them) through a series of shell companies.”

Similiarly, any emais sent or received after the latest back-up but prior to the disaster or catastrophic incident may not be backed up on tapes and, thus, may not be reflected in a reconstructed system. This limitation in the disaster recovery back-up process is consistent with industry standards for these types of disaster recovery systems.

Just replace “coordinated deleting of emails” for catastrophic incident and you realize that the government’s pleadings are getting ridiculously inconsistent.

This is in the theatre of the absurd AFAIC.

I read a bunch of those CREW docs, most of gov’s pleadings as ridiculous as what you describe in #40.

Finally, EOP defendants established that even “email erased from individual mailboxes and residing in trash boxes,” is likely to be captured on back-ups.

I don’t know how anyone who knows anything about the technologies involved could support that statement. In fact, the opposite is true; replace “likely” with “unlikely”.

Then, the government makes a bizarre argument:

In an attempt to support its request for relief, NSA, in effect, pretends that the Court never issued the November 12, 2007 Order.

That’s just silly. What the NSA argued (and the magistrate, to his credit, accepted as blindly obvious) was that the government’s assertion that the backup tapes should contain all the emails is laughable. For much of the time in question, the .pst files where completely unsecured. There is no plausible way to assert that a backup schedule would ensure that all emails were preserved. Add to that, the government doesn’t even know what is on those tapes.

I really don’t know how the government lawyers can put their names on this stuff, but here’s whose responsible:

GREGORY G. KATSAS
Acting Assistant Attorney General
JEFFREY A. TAYLOR
United States Attorney
ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO
Assistant Branch Director

Thanks, Bmaz…