Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Communications Government

Alaska Must Release Palin E-mails By May 211

Posted by Soulskill
from the hitting-fwd-is-complicated dept.
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from msnbc.com: "The state of Alaska has until May 31 to release about 25,000 pages of e-mails from former Gov. Sarah Palin and senior members of her administration, the state attorney general declared Wednesday. ... the delays in dealing with public records from the Palin administration will have stretched out longer than the Palin administration itself. She was governor for 966 days. By May 31, the request from msnbc.com for the official records will be 986 days old. State regulations usually require records to be made available within 10 days, but state officials said they were overwhelmed by the volume of the e-mails."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Alaska Must Release Palin E-mails By May

Comments Filter:
  • Slashdot: (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 28, 2011 @06:53PM (#35038978)
    News for nerds, stuff that matters.
  • Oh, no! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by intellitech (1912116) * on Friday January 28, 2011 @06:53PM (#35038984)
    Oh, no! They have only until May 31st to deliver 25,000 pages of e-mails to the metaphorical shredder? What ever will they do?!? /humor

    Seriously, though, any chance that they're poking through those e-mails more and reading them more carefully than they did when they were originally written/read, and "shredding" those e-mails which make Sarah Palin look like even more air-headed? Either way, I highly doubt the lengthy delay in release of these records is due to anything other than a PR spring cleaning for her almighty. As it stands, they should be able to suppress quite a bit of them, anyway.

    How easy is it for a government official to get away with erasing documents of this nature? I would like to assume there are adequate data-retention policies in place to make this exceedingly difficult, but who knows..
    • Re:Oh, no! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MoonBuggy (611105) on Friday January 28, 2011 @07:07PM (#35039084) Journal

      I don't really see what can be taking this long other than censoring them; just locating the relevant files and dropping the few gigs of data on a flash drive would take a few days, at most. If it's taking years, it means that something is being done with the actual content. According to TFA there are rules allowing certain messages to remain private, so some of the censorship will be legal, but I imagine that they'll just stamp a big red "privileged" restriction on anything that's too embarrassing to Palin.

      • According to TFA there are rules allowing certain messages to remain private, so some of the censorship will be legal, but I imagine that they'll just stamp a big red "privileged" restriction on anything that's too embarrassing to Palin.

        My thoughts exactly.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by davester666 (731373)

          Hopefully, they are busy converting all the emails to PDF, then drawing black boxes over all the redacted content.

        • by mwvdlee (775178)

          Which probably explains why it's taking so long. Would YOU know where to get 25,000 pages worth of red ink?

      • Really? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by TiggertheMad (556308) on Friday January 28, 2011 @07:48PM (#35039434) Homepage Journal
        I know that /. is full of cynical and borderline paranoids, but really. Think about this for a second...

        There there is probably one state IT guy that this got dumped on. Being that he is a state employee in IT, he probably has plenty of other shit to do, and picking through 25k email is a huge time sink. It will need to be evaluated, because a Governor could be, in theory, privy to sensitive material. So, he will probably catch hell if a missed sensitive e-mail goes out, especially in light of the whole wiki leaks thing.

        In addition, there is probably a clause that says personal mail doesn't have to be released, and so he has to pick through this idiot woman's mad rambling about pointless shit that shouldn't be on a state mail server anyway. I don't envy the people who have to pick through all the e-mail that is out there when information requests come in.

        But in general /., don't be so quick to see a conspiracy, when idiocy and ineptitude are so much more likely.
        • by MoonBuggy (611105)

          I see your point, but I don't think it too far fetched that, when more-or-less given carte blanche to mark certain emails as 'not for release', those doing the marking will choose to use that power for a little pre-emptive damage limitation. Sure, there are probably strict rules, but in reality nobody with clearance to see the un-redacted archive will ever bother checking, and on the off chance that something is noticed as mis-marked it's easy to put down to human error.

          I don't see it as some great Orwellia

        • 1) All government emails are released regardless; except security issues which are DELAYED x years
          2) All private emails are recorded solely for litigation and archival purposes.
          3) use private emails for government business is prohibited and punishable by mandatory JAIL TIME upon completion of the job. Yes, I think every gov should spend a week in jail for their mistakes... but the number grows rapidly as the infraction count gets higher!

          Idiocy and ineptitude are the easiest defense and with so many sympath

        • Re:Really? (Score:5, Informative)

          by kenrblan (1388237) on Friday January 28, 2011 @08:40PM (#35039806)
          I doubt some poor IT guy is sifting through these emails checking for sensitive information. Having worked in public higher education, I had to respond to these types of requests, either for subpoenas or freedom of information act requests. Our procedure was to produce an archive file for the legal staff to handle. The legal staff was aware of what could or could not be released in order to comply with the release. If there is one thing state governments have, it is lawyers. Of course, we are talking about Alaska and judging by the debatable competence of the governor in question, one could speculate about the abilities at all levels of the state government.
          • by gd2shoe (747932)

            Of course, we are talking about Alaska and judging by the debatable competence of the governor in question, one could speculate about the abilities at all levels of the state government.

            Oh, common. There are elected officials every bit as inept throughout the country. There just aren't many in the limelight.

        • To place even more limits on his time, he's probably had meetings with lawyers, and anything that he thinks is marginal goes to the lawyers for review. To make matters worse, Alaska has long had a shortage of technical types: Engineers, IT, et c. I've been in southern CA for a while, but the recession left me with nothing but the occasional odd job. I recently started applying with the state of Alaska (where I'm from) and have received the following advice: Apply early and often, because of a shortage
        • by PopeRatzo (965947) *

          because a Governor could be, in theory, privy to sensitive material.

          I'm not doubting you, but short of personal information of citizens (which shouldn't be in any emails anyway) could you give an example of something "sensitive" that the governor of Alaska might be "privy" to?

          And if the governor of a state is so foolish as to put such information in an email, wouldn't you want to at least know that she had done so?

          I say, turn the whole thing over to some journalists at the Alaskan Sentinal or something and

          • by gd2shoe (747932)

            I'm not doubting you, but short of personal information of citizens (which shouldn't be in any emails anyway) could you give an example of something "sensitive" that the governor of Alaska might be "privy" to?

            Oh, easy. Much of the oil infrastructure up there could be tempting to terrorists. There may easily be other security and/or terrorism issues local to Alaska that the governor would be privy to. (Ports, gubernatorial security procedures, etc.) Use your imagination.

            And if the governor of a state is so foolish as to put such information in an email, wouldn't you want to at least know that she had done so?

            Not necessarily. Let's say she had an email discussion between herself and someone in charge of a sensitive matter. The email may never have left government computers at all. She could easily have responded with sensitive information that h

            • Re:Really? (Score:4, Informative)

              by PopeRatzo (965947) * on Saturday January 29, 2011 @09:41AM (#35042186) Homepage Journal

              We see how well that worked for Wikileaks.

              It seems like it's worked out really well. I still haven't heard of anyone being killed because of anything wikileaks has published. But it's possible something happened that I didn't hear about, but with the frenzy over wikileaks, you'd think it would have hit the news if something like that had happened.

      • I don't really see what can be taking this long other than censoring them;

        Are you kidding? Do you know how long it takes to print 25,000 pages of emails, even without paper jams? That's at least ten boxes of tractor feed. Plus it needs to be separated and edged.

        They didn't say HOW they wanted them delivered. Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!

        • I was guessing it would be etched into ice sheets and then delivered to south cali for examination.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by wiredlogic (135348)

      How easy is it for a government official to get away with erasing documents of this nature?

      Do what Bush did and arrange for a conversion from Lotus to Exchange or vice versa and let the inconvenient bits get dropped on the floor in the process.

      • How easy is it for a government official to get away with erasing documents of this nature?

        Do what Bush did and arrange for a conversion from Lotus to Exchange or vice versa and let the inconvenient bits get dropped on the floor in the process.

        Or, just do what Palin did and use non-audited email accounts like yahoo or hotmail for government business too.
        Fortunately alaskan sunshine laws [motherjones.com] don't have enough lumens to shine on those and aren't strong enough to make using them illegal either.

  • by neoevans (179332) <neoevansNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Friday January 28, 2011 @07:00PM (#35039032) Homepage
    It's all lolcats and forwarded emails from people who swore they received checks from Microsoft, sprinkled with the occasional note to the president (at the time) somewhere along the lines of,

    "Do you like me? Check one:

    -Yes
    -No
    -Maybe"
  • Alt Source (Score:5, Funny)

    by NEDHead (1651195) on Friday January 28, 2011 @07:01PM (#35039038)

    Can't they just get them from Wikileaks?

  • Overwhelmed? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by wiredlogic (135348) on Friday January 28, 2011 @07:02PM (#35039044)

    Overwhelmed? They really must try to come up with better BS than that. Even princess half-term can spout off more believable nonsense.

    • by geekoid (135745)

      sadly, no she can't.

    • by Obyron (615547)
      No joke. I'd hate to see how long it takes them to release the records of a governor who actually served a full term. And they're saying the volume of requests was a factor? Whether they get 1 request or 1 million, they only have to go through the data once. This is some combination of administrative incompetence and whitewashing the Tea Party's golden gi-- oh wait, even they're sick of her, and they're on the Michelle Bachmann bandwagon now.
  • Openleaks! To! The! Rescue!

    Would actually make a great soft-pitch, first at-bat for the start-up. Would be refreshing to see what these celebrity politicians really say and think... You know, without the cameras and the scripts.
  • by MikeMacK (788889) on Friday January 28, 2011 @07:06PM (#35039076)
    Just add a colon and it becomes a more interesting story..."Alaska Must Release Palin: E-mails by May"
    • Better with a semi-colon or a comma.</grammar steve cohen>
    • by spun (1352)

      No, not the punctuation mark, like so: "Alaska Must Release Palin's Colon, Emails by May" Not sure what we'd do with Palin's colon, but I imagine we could find some use for it.

      • by dbIII (701233)

        Not sure what we'd do with Palin's colon

        The popular Australian phrase "bugger that for a joke" comes to mind.
        Ignore her. She doesn't have any Republican or Koch money behind her anymore and they were really the only things that make her more noticable than possibly well over a thousand others. Being former governor of Alaska is no longer a political asset considering what happened during the short period she was governor.
        These days she's nothing but your Pauline Hanson. Just like Pauline she stirred up s

      • by Dahamma (304068)

        Nah, it's gotta be all blocked up with caribou meat by now, I'd stay away.

  • Irony (Score:4, Insightful)

    by cosm (1072588) <thecosm3@nospaM.gmail.com> on Friday January 28, 2011 @07:10PM (#35039112)
    So the kid who guesses her security questions with answers that were guessable based on her Wikipedia profile gets hard time for posting her private emails online (not to mention that she used her private account for some work emails as well allegedly), all the while Palin Inc. LTD LLC is taking its sweet time releasing the actual campaign emails because I'm guessing (this is pure speculation) that there is content in there that the GOP is afraid the Palinites won't cherish dearly.

    I hope she runs for office, and is put to shame at the ballot box. I am so sick of hearing about this washed up nobody anti-intellectual and her following of people who have been fleeced by her PR handlers into thinking she actually has the mental cahones of more than a donut.
    • all the while Palin Inc. LTD LLC is taking its sweet time releasing the actual campaign emails

      It's the State of Alaska, not Palin's political supporters. While there probably are a couple of Palinites left in the state, most Alaskans would just as soon use her for wolf bait. She's an embarrassment for a state that has a long line of political embarrassments.

    • by Greyfox (87712)
      Maybe they should let him out of jail and put him in charge of releasing her E-Mail. He seems pretty good at that, and they don't seem pretty good at that.
  • Thought these were already public thanks to a now-incarcerated /b/tard.
  • You might read that subject line and go "wait, that's totally impossible! A populist is someone who believes in power of the people for the people and a plutocrat is someone who believes in the power of the rich and wealthy, and those two just can't really mix". Except that they can. I would guess that Palin thinks she should be the rich and wealthy of the 'people' so she can then be more powerful, all of course 'for' those same people while being a part of them. The pretext for this sort of situation w
  • What consequences does the state of Alaska face if they aren't published by that date?
  • Is it just me, or in the "new layout" are comments seriously hidden if their parent isn't within the current threshold, but the child is? This [slashdot.org] comment contains a +5 child, but since it is under a troll-rated parent, I can't see it when browsing on a 5-2 threshold range. How does this stuff even make it to deployment?
    • Is it just me, or in the "new layout" are comments seriously hidden if their parent isn't within the current threshold, but the child is? This [slashdot.org] comment contains a +5 child, but since it is under a troll-rated parent, I can't see it when browsing on a 5-2 threshold range. How does this stuff even make it to deployment?

      Well, as the author of the post you cite...

      It's not a big deal. If the OP in the thread was a troll (I don't think it was... I think the writer of that post was trying to make a

      • by cosm (1072588)
        I don't know, I still think its a big deal, because if it is as I suspected above, downmodding one parent with 100 children could hide a handful of +3 to +5 insightful comments for no reason other than their parent was rated unworthy. That seems like a design flaw to me, and good and final reason to not obsessively press F5 on this site any more.
      • by nuckfuts (690967)

        If the parent to my post wasn't visible, then there's no reason to display my post.

        Suppose you made +5 Funny riposte to a -1 Troll. I'd want to see it.

      • Looks to me like this is correct, and this would be a major and unnannounced change to slashdot
    • Its not just you. The +5 child post is only visible if the parent is not abbreviated. I want to see ALL posts, with low-rated posted abbreviated, as per my comment settings. I've tried to be open to change, but I am really starting to dislike the recent 'upgrade'!

      • by macshit (157376)

        Yup, I agree, the new code is really broken in a lot of ways, though it's hard to tell whether it's bugs, or simply bad design.

        I actually really liked the immediately previous incarnation of slashdot -- it was much nicer than "traditional" slashdot, because many things like expanding comments were dynamic and didn't require jumping to a new page (which I used to hate about the traditional code), but also seemed to be reasonably solid and well thought-out. This new slashdot is basically a regression in alm

    • Imagine if folded responses suppressed quoted text.

  • As a friend mentioned during a FOIA discussion, it's easy to do a Meat-space Denial of Service on a public entity by requesting "all of X" records, and forcing them to go through and redact. It's even worse when they ask for "all of X" where X is a department in NASA with highly trained people, like engineers or scientists. And they have to redact it instead of letting some bureaucrat decide what should be included. Just imagine a case like this where everyone and their mother did a FOIA request. It's a
  • c'mon Alaska! there has to be someone who can send this to Julien Assange pronto.
  • I think it is funny how whenever Palin's name is mentioned both the left and the right start barking like crazy rabid dogs..

    Of course if the Left didn't hiss like vampires hiss at people holding crucifixes and would just ignore her inane ramblings the right wouldn't be so fired up about her and we would all remember he like we Remember the the GOP VP candidate in 1996, I don't even remember who was the Republican Vice President Candidate in 1996, I remember the Old Geezer Bob Dole the viagra dude, but his r

    • by tsm_sf (545316)
      The problem is that, on one side, Palin is a walking, talking stereotype of how the left views the right, and on the other side every redneck with MILF fantasies wants to nail her.

      I actually feel sorry for her. Were we better people she would have quietly sunk to an anonymous level of middle management that matched her talents a long time ago.
  • Why not just hire the kid that got into Palin's emails before???
  • Palin (Score:4, Funny)

    by DarkIye (875062) on Saturday January 29, 2011 @07:04AM (#35041818) Journal

    ...state officials said they were overwhelmed by the volume of the e-mails.

    Make sure to give all Republican party members one of those ChromeOS laptops without the capslock key in future.

The universe is like a safe to which there is a combination -- but the combination is locked up in the safe. -- Peter DeVries

Working...