Richard S. wrote:You're mixing personal and government accounts. Of course you're entitled to personal accounts.
As far as the Bush controversy goes it's important those documents are archived but I also think it's important that the president should expect a certain amount of secrecy.
Entitled to have personal accounts, but not to do government business with those accounts.
Yes, secrecy is necessary, but who can be trusted with it? Seems like an unsolvable dilemma.
One of the controversies about Lisa Jackson is her use of e-mail accounts for official business.
She had an e-mail account int the name of "Richard Windsor". It was used for official business. What's unclear, from what's publicly available, if it completely private (i.e. gmail like) or another account created for her on the official EPA e-mail system. If it's on the EPA system one has to ask why. Was it done to avoid Congresses requests for her e-mail records or simple a way for an Agency head to have some way of private communications. If it's a completely private account, why was she using it for official communications, outside the confines of government e-mail security and open to greater security risks.
Most, including our government leaders, are incredibly naive about e-mail security. Just look at the Petraeus-Broadwell affair. If you want private e-mails you must use encryption and a system of private-public key combinations to each recipient. It's doable but it takes considerable effort to get it right.