I wonder if she had them really wiped or if they can be recovered. Wiping clean is rarely that so I question the brilliance.and, add in the recipient's email...yeah
She had her own server. As in, the physical hardware was in her home. Of course she wiped it clean. She had the power to do so.
I get she wiped it, but wiped it really isn't the case..there are ways to retrieve unless professionally done. And, if professionally done, ugh, even more questions
I also believe that this is a brilliant move on her part because 1) no more emails so the investigation is stopped in its tracks, and 2) as stated earlier, no one is really going to care.
I wonder if she had them really wiped or if they can be recovered. Wiping clean is rarely that so I question the brilliance.and, add in the recipient's email...yeah
It's her own server, so yeah, I'm thinking it was wiped clean.
Okay, I have to ask you or any other supporter of this line of thinking. Is it ok because it is Clinton? Because you believe she sent all gov emails and archived ALL of them? Would you(general) be okay if this were an R? I am just a bit dumbfounded that shadiness, at the very least, isn't an accepted thought on this so I am trying to honestly understand.
It's the same line of thinking that objects to the NSA listening to all my phone calls because I shouldn't care if I have nothing to hide. Am I shady if I refeuse to consent to a search of my home? Maybe I'm hiding something, or maybe not, but I have a right to privacy.
So far as I know, based on what's been reported, she hasn't broken any laws or regulations, and she's not the only official to do this. She hasn't been accused of a crime; in fact, I haven't even heard what it is people suspect she's hiding. People just want to peruse her emails to see if they can catch her in something.
You know, I agree with this. She's complied to the letter of the law. Nothing more and nothing less.
I wonder if she had them really wiped or if they can be recovered. Wiping clean is rarely that so I question the brilliance.and, add in the recipient's email...yeah
It's her own server, so yeah, I'm thinking it was wiped clean.
which begs the question(s) who did it? Why dirty delete a server so no work can be done to recover? Her brilliant move is lost. Im trying to, but can't
It's her own server, so yeah, I'm thinking it was wiped clean.
which begs the question(s) who did it? Why dirty delete a server so no work can be done to recover? Her brilliant move is lost. Im trying to, but can't
Her IT people did it.
Who else would do it?
She did it so people wouldn't nitpick everything to death. "Hey, we need this level of email." "Ok, here they are." "Hey, so we need the next level of emails." "Ok, here they are." "We only have 4 out of the 5 emails from this string." "I don't have the 5th email." "Well why not?" "I must have accidentally deleted it."
It's her own server, so yeah, I'm thinking it was wiped clean.
which begs the question(s) who did it? Why dirty delete a server so no work can be done to recover? Her brilliant move is lost. Im trying to, but can't
IDK. Maybe she doesn't want us to know about the wart on her ass, or how much they spent on Chelsea's wedding, or that she's having an affair, or that Bill has dementia. Whatever it is, it's obviously something private that is none of our business.
I'm not being obtuse. How do we know she gave us all of them? How do we know she doesn't have a secret snapchat account that she used to communicate with Putin? How do we know that ANY politician or public official doesn't use private email for official business? We don't, and we never will. That's the price we pay for living in a free society with privacy rights. I'd rather not know than live in a society where our leaders can't be trusted with discretion and need to be constantly monitored for perceived "shadiness".
which begs the question(s) who did it? Why dirty delete a server so no work can be done to recover? Her brilliant move is lost. Im trying to, but can't
IDK. Maybe she doesn't want us to know about the wart on her ass, or how much they spent on Chelsea's wedding, or that she's having an affair, or that Bill has dementia. Whatever it is, it's obviously something private that is none of our business.
I'm not being obtuse. How do we know she gave us all of them? How do we know she doesn't have a secret snapchat account that she used to communicate with Putin? How do we know that ANY politician or public official doesn't use private email for official business? We don't, and we never will. That's the price we pay for living in a free society with privacy rights. I'd rather not know than live in a society where our leaders can't be trusted with discretion and need to be constantly monitored for perceived "shadiness".
we don't, but foia allows, I thought, this info and she may have destroyed it when Slate asked. I dont care about her biding personal stuff. I care we don't know if she emailed top secret stuff as a public servant and became above the law there when another gov worker could lose their job, or worse, or that she went Edward Snowden on us. That's why it is shady at best.
IDK. Maybe she doesn't want us to know about the wart on her ass, or how much they spent on Chelsea's wedding, or that she's having an affair, or that Bill has dementia. Whatever it is, it's obviously something private that is none of our business.
I'm not being obtuse. How do we know she gave us all of them? How do we know she doesn't have a secret snapchat account that she used to communicate with Putin? How do we know that ANY politician or public official doesn't use private email for official business? We don't, and we never will. That's the price we pay for living in a free society with privacy rights. I'd rather not know than live in a society where our leaders can't be trusted with discretion and need to be constantly monitored for perceived "shadiness".
we don't, but foia allows, I thought, this info and she may have destroyed it when Slate asked. I dont care about her biding personal stuff. I care we don't know if she emailed top secret stuff as a public servant and became above the law there when another gov worker could lose their job, or worse, or that she went Edward Snowden on us. That's why it is shady at best.
^o) Is this the concern? That she's secretly a traitor? Obama is a fucking Muslim and no one is asking for his private emails to double check he isn't in cahoots with ISIS.
A FOIA request has to be specific; it isn't a blank check to dig for dirt.
we don't, but foia allows, I thought, this info and she may have destroyed it when Slate asked. I dont care about her biding personal stuff. I care we don't know if she emailed top secret stuff as a public servant and became above the law there when another gov worker could lose their job, or worse, or that she went Edward Snowden on us. That's why it is shady at best.
Is this the concern? That she's secretly a traitor? Obama is a fucking Muslim and no one is asking for his private emails to double check he isn't in cahoots with ISIS.
A FOIA request has to be specific; it isn't a blank check to dig for dirt.
please don't act obtuse like this is the same damn thing. It is not. We don't know and now never will. You are obviously ok with this of a public servant. I am not.
My experience with in-home or small business servers has been the sort where you do the backup tape once a day and you only have as many days backups as you do tapes- usually 5, which you just tape over again every new work week.
What are the sort of severs that can holds months or years of info at once?
To Nitaw's point, it would make sense that she'd be advised to get rid of non-official record copies once the official records had been submitted. Hell I've been on two measly hiring committees at work and we are told to submit official notes and shred our original "drafts". BUT, that's not how the lawyer presented the facts but I don't want to assume either way.
The reality is that until we make all federal employees use only certain accounts, hardware, software, etc., we are going to continue to have this issue with other govt. workers.
How she, with a too secret clearance is allowed to use private email for work is beyond me. Sos, or anyone with one...to.take Clinton out of it. Workers at, say, nsa, are not allowed such a "luxury".
we don't, but foia allows, I thought, this info and she may have destroyed it when Slate asked. I dont care about her biding personal stuff. I care we don't know if she emailed top secret stuff as a public servant and became above the law there when another gov worker could lose their job, or worse, or that she went Edward Snowden on us. That's why it is shady at best.
Is this the concern? That she's secretly a traitor? Obama is a fucking Muslim and no one is asking for his private emails to double check he isn't in cahoots with ISIS.
A FOIA request has to be specific; it isn't a blank check to dig for dirt.
You seriously don't see how there could be something about Bengazi in there? Or anything about her time as SOS that qualifies as "our business"?
No, this is not a 4th amendment issue. Our democracy is founded on our leaders being transparent. She deliberately communicated in a method where she controlled what was archived. Then when pushed, she deliberately deleted everything else.
I'm just fucking agog that you see this as some sort of witch hunt of a patriot.
It is shady as fuck but as far as I'm concerned the only thing that makes her worse than nearly everyone in government and politics is that she got caught.
I'm sure many, many people in DC conduct at least some business on personal emails and trash what they don't want people to see. If it were not par for the course, we would have known about her private email address years ago.
It is absolutely shady as fuck, but it isn't going to be a deal breaker for most people, as most voters don't trust any politician.
This is exactly what I'm thinking. IMO, it feels 1) "figures. fecking dirty politicians. grumble mutter" or 2) A-HA! I knew that liberal hor had something to hide! Happydance!"
If an individual has never expected anything more or less than shade out of a political figure, this probably does not move them.
which begs the question(s) who did it? Why dirty delete a server so no work can be done to recover? Her brilliant move is lost. Im trying to, but can't
IDK. Maybe she doesn't want us to know about the wart on her ass, or how much they spent on Chelsea's wedding, or that she's having an affair, or that Bill has dementia. Whatever it is, it's obviously something private that is none of our business.
I'm not being obtuse. How do we know she gave us all of them? How do we know she doesn't have a secret snapchat account that she used to communicate with Putin? How do we know that ANY politician or public official doesn't use private email for official business? We don't, and we never will. That's the price we pay for living in a free society with privacy rights. I'd rather not know than live in a society where our leaders can't be trusted with discretion and need to be constantly monitored for perceived "shadiness".
I think our leaders - all of them - have demonstrated that no one can be trusted with that level of power. The whole point of having government email accounts is to set up yet another check and balance on their communication. It's not free societies in which leaders are blindly trusted.
You keep saying this is her personal email or questioning who hasn't used personal email for work. Everyone has. We're talking about her work email though. She wiped out her work email after people wanted to inspect it. LOL that we are supposed to just trust her that she handed over every work-related email. This is someone who lived through Whitewater and all of the associated shady bank/loan dealings that were investigated for years. She controlled her own email server for a reason. How many people who use personal email for work actually set up their own server? Come on now.
Now I on the other side can speculate on so many things... Like, what effect did foreign contributions to the Clinton Foundation have on the State Dept diplomacy? She probably deleted any proof the Rs would find, but she also now can't disprove any allegations. I actually agree she'll still be the nominee. I even still think she'll win. But she smells.
Is this the concern? That she's secretly a traitor? Obama is a fucking Muslim and no one is asking for his private emails to double check he isn't in cahoots with ISIS.
A FOIA request has to be specific; it isn't a blank check to dig for dirt.
You seriously don't see how there could be something about Bengazi in there? Or anything about her time as SOS that qualifies as "our business"?
No, this is not a 4th amendment issue. Our democracy is founded on our leaders being transparent. She deliberately communicated in a method where she controlled what was archived. Then when pushed, she deliberately deleted everything else.
I'm just fucking agog that you see this as some sort of witch hunt of a patriot.
She could have used private email to "cover up" Benghazi even if she was using a dot gov email, too!! How do we know *anyone* isn't covering up shady shit in their personal email? We don't, we can't, and we won't. Not in this system of government. I'm agog that the public feels entitled to review her private email to double check that she knows the difference between private and official.
And, yes, I do believe it's a witch hunt. How many investigations and congressional hearing and reports did we have on Benghazi? And not one turned up any evidence of wrong doing. She was even exonerated by a Republican House committee! Yet let's keep digging, digging, digging. Maybe if it's not in her personal email, we can go through her mail, or her trash. Maybe we should tap her phones and follow her around, too.
IDK. Maybe she doesn't want us to know about the wart on her ass, or how much they spent on Chelsea's wedding, or that she's having an affair, or that Bill has dementia. Whatever it is, it's obviously something private that is none of our business.
I'm not being obtuse. How do we know she gave us all of them? How do we know she doesn't have a secret snapchat account that she used to communicate with Putin? How do we know that ANY politician or public official doesn't use private email for official business? We don't, and we never will. That's the price we pay for living in a free society with privacy rights. I'd rather not know than live in a society where our leaders can't be trusted with discretion and need to be constantly monitored for perceived "shadiness".
I think our leaders - all of them - have demonstrated that no one can be trusted with that level of power. The whole point of having government email accounts is to set up yet another check and balance on their communication. It's not free societies in which leaders are blindly trusted.
You keep saying this is her personal email or questioning who hasn't used personal email for work. Everyone has. We're talking about her work email though. She wiped out her work email after people wanted to inspect it. LOL that we are supposed to just trust her that she handed over every work-related email. This is someone who lived through Whitewater and all of the associated shady bank/loan dealings that were investigated for years. She controlled her own email server for a reason. How many people who use personal email for work actually set up their own server? Come on now.
Now I on the other side can speculate on so many things... Like, what effect did foreign contributions to the Clinton Foundation have on the State Dept diplomacy? She probably deleted any proof the Rs would find, but she also now can't disprove any allegations. I actually agree she'll still be the nominee. I even still think she'll win. But she smells.
Well she has said, and her lawyers and the state department and the president have all said that she DID properly archive by copying/forwarding official communications to a dot gov account. That was allowed under the law. It had been done before. If we don't like the uncertainty that opens up, then fine. Petition your representatives to make it a crime to use personal email for official business.
Okay, I have to ask you or any other supporter of this line of thinking. Is it ok because it is Clinton? Because you believe she sent all gov emails and archived ALL of them? Would you(general) be okay if this were an R? I am just a bit dumbfounded that shadiness, at the very least, isn't an accepted thought on this so I am trying to honestly understand.
It's the same line of thinking that objects to the NSA listening to all my phone calls because I shouldn't care if I have nothing to hide. Am I shady if I refeuse to consent to a search of my home? Maybe I'm hiding something, or maybe not, but I have a right to privacy.
So far as I know, based on what's been reported, she hasn't broken any laws or regulations, and she's not the only official to do this. She hasn't been accused of a crime; in fact, I haven't even heard what it is people suspect she's hiding. People just want to peruse her emails to see if they can catch her in something.
Wait what? Why does it need to be a crime in order for it to be wrong? I am not saying she should go to jail I just think it is shady. I also was not a huge fan of hers during 2008 because my perception of her is that her desire to be president is all about her. Not about what she wants for the country. It took the concession speech before she even seemed human to me again (I loved her as First Lady). That being said she is a savvy politician who I think can get stuff done but i can't even pretend it is inspiring. This doesn't help.
I think our leaders - all of them - have demonstrated that no one can be trusted with that level of power. The whole point of having government email accounts is to set up yet another check and balance on their communication. It's not free societies in which leaders are blindly trusted.
You keep saying this is her personal email or questioning who hasn't used personal email for work. Everyone has. We're talking about her work email though. She wiped out her work email after people wanted to inspect it. LOL that we are supposed to just trust her that she handed over every work-related email. This is someone who lived through Whitewater and all of the associated shady bank/loan dealings that were investigated for years. She controlled her own email server for a reason. How many people who use personal email for work actually set up their own server? Come on now.
Now I on the other side can speculate on so many things... Like, what effect did foreign contributions to the Clinton Foundation have on the State Dept diplomacy? She probably deleted any proof the Rs would find, but she also now can't disprove any allegations. I actually agree she'll still be the nominee. I even still think she'll win. But she smells.
Well she has said, and her lawyers and the state department and the president have all said that she DID properly archive by copying/forwarding official communications to a dot gov account. That was allowed under the law. It had been done before. If we don't like the uncertainty that opens up, then fine. Petition your representatives to make it a crime to use personal email for official business.
She and the people on her team say she followed the rules, as interpreted solely by them. Well great! Nothing to see here.
If the Democrats run someone shady who people don't trust, and the Republicans run a fringe lunatic, do you think this will finally be the catalyst to get Americans voting for a third party?
Yes! I'm thinking I will vote for someone that is not out for their own agenda although they all have their own agendas. I most likely won't decide who I'm voting for until all the candidates start coming out.
You know, I hadn't really thought of it that way before MrsAxilla's arguments, but it's absolutely true that we trust every single government official to determine what is personal and what is work-related electronic communication. There's nothing stopping Ted Cruz from having any number of Gmail accounts for sending whatever he wants to whomever he wants related to his job, and we don't have anything in our system set up to prevent that beyond trust.
You know, I hadn't really thought of it that way before MrsAxilla's arguments, but it's absolutely true that we trust every single government official to determine what is personal and what is work-related electronic communication. There's nothing stopping Ted Cruz from having any number of Gmail accounts for sending whatever he wants to whomever he wants related to his job, and we don't have anything in our system set up to prevent that beyond trust.
And that is the problem. Thankfully, though, Cruz is not SOS or the Pres. But, as others have said....Hillary says she followed the letter of the law so, move along people. MOVE ALONG!
You know, I hadn't really thought of it that way before MrsAxilla's arguments, but it's absolutely true that we trust every single government official to determine what is personal and what is work-related electronic communication. There's nothing stopping Ted Cruz from having any number of Gmail accounts for sending whatever he wants to whomever he wants related to his job, and we don't have anything in our system set up to prevent that beyond trust.
And that is the problem. Thankfully, though, Cruz is not SOS or the Pres. But, as others have said....Hillary says she followed the letter of the law so, move along people. MOVE ALONG!
WTF? Ok, tef. Time to calm down now.
We're not saying that because HRC said she didn't do anything wrong that we need to move along. We're saying that until it is further hashed out it doesn't appear that she has broken any laws.
You know, I hadn't really thought of it that way before MrsAxilla's arguments, but it's absolutely true that we trust every single government official to determine what is personal and what is work-related electronic communication. There's nothing stopping Ted Cruz from having any number of Gmail accounts for sending whatever he wants to whomever he wants related to his job, and we don't have anything in our system set up to prevent that beyond trust.
Thank you!! That's my point. We don't know and we can't possibly know. Honestly, I shudder at the thought of the system we'd have to put into place to make sure our leaders aren't fucking us over. I imagine it would look a little like China or North Korea.