Egads! Another scandal rears its pointy head.

[Apologies if this has been diaried; will delete this if this is the case.]

Considering the fact that the House - having just passed a series of measures to hobble this administration's efforts to shield its workings from any ray of sunshine by a rock-solid, veto-proof margin - is clearly in no mood to allow the White House to continue to conduct so much of its business in the shadows, I think we've got ourselves another major item on the oversight commitee's docket.

More on the flip

Via TPM, we find that today Froomkin has a list of questions regarding the DOJ's recent email doc-dump. A sampling:

1. Does White House policy allow White House staffers to use non-White House e-mail addresses for official White House business? Does it prohibit it? What is the policy?

2. Would these e-mails be treated any differently from official White House e-mails when it comes to archiving or subpoena purposes?

3. Does it create either impropriety or the appearance of impropriety that gwb43.com is a domain owned by the Republican National Committee?

4. Do other White House staffers regularly use non-White House e-mail accounts for White House business, and if so, why?

[...]

5. Does non-White House e-mail fulfill security requirements for White House communications?

6. If other non-White House e-mail accounts are used, who are the providers for all of the other accounts? (Any others besides the RNC?)

7. Does White House policy allow White House staffers to use non-White House e-mail addresses from their computers, even for non-official business? I'm told that during the Clinton administration, access to external e-mail, including Web mail, was shut off from White House (eop.gov) computers. Was there a conscious change of policy by the Bush administration?

8. Have there been any recent changes in policy relating to e-mail practices, or are changes in policy contemplated?

This matters, of course, because not only does it appear that this is a White House attempt to skirt presidential archiving protocol, but it fits cleanly with all appearances that this type of skirting is a major MO of this administration. And with CREW writing Waxman about the matter, I think we can all expect to hear more about this.