SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
FBI Said to Recover Personal E-Mails From Hillary Clinton Server
The FBI has recovered personal and work-related e-mails from the private computer server used by Hillary Clinton during her time as secretary of state, according to a person familiar with the investigation. ... A review by Clinton and her aides determined that about half of the 60,000 e-mails she exchanged during her four-year tenure as secretary of state were of a personal nature, the presidential candidate has said. ...
In 2013, the Clintons turned the private server over to a Colorado-based technology company to manage. The firm, Platte River Networks, installed the device in a New Jersey data center and managed and maintained it.
Andy Boian, a spokesman for the Platte River, said the FBI last month asked the company to hand over the server. Platte River asked the Clintons what it should do, and within 24 hours a representative for the Clintons told the company to provide the device to agents, Boian said.
There has been some question as to whether Clinton deleted her messages or took the more thorough and technical step of "wiping" the server. Boian said Tuesday that Platte River had "no knowledge of it being wiped."
Wow. What are the odds she just deleted the emails rather than doing a real wipe? It's obvious that she wanted personal total control over her emails -- that is the whole point of personal server -- and if she failed to get competent advice on how to actually wipe a machine, it demonstrates her own lack of competence in selecting people who are actual experts to help her do the things she wants. Doing a multi-pass overwrite with random data isn't exactly esoteric knowledge -- that's pretty basic stuff. There is of course the brute force method as well. Surely she remembers the Air Force personnel smashing computer equipment when they had to land in China after a midair collision. Or the destruction of The Guardian's Snowden hard drives.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 24 2015, @05:02PM
> I'm a liberal and from my POV, she IS a fucking Republican.
Way to completely miss the OP's point. Its like you triggered on one word and went off on a completely unrelated rant because you are so angry about her that you couldn't stay focused.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday September 24 2015, @05:21PM
No -- he was saying:
GOP mad about email thus there is no issue with the email.
That's not logical.
I was gleefully pointing out this email issue because anything that harms a wallstreetcocksuckingwarmongeringneocon like HRC, is good. I admit that. But that doesn't change the fact HRC probably broke the law but in true 1%er fashion, faces no consequences. Let there be consequences, if only losing the primary -- not much punishment really when considering all the blood and death on her hands.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 24 2015, @05:31PM
GOP mad about email thus there is no issue with the email.
That's not logical.
That's not what he said. He said I can't believe anything the GOP gets mad about any more because little boy who cried wolf. But none of what you actually wrote disputed that. It was all just you haranguing on a tangent which you've now extended into a 2nd post and will probably do again in reply to this post.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday September 24 2015, @05:58PM
So, because the GOP is mad about the email server situation, in which she either intentionally or moronically tried to keep work data out of the hands of her Employer, I should just ignore it. Again, that isn't logical. Why don't you explain how it is logical. I imagine there are a lot of Republicans who are anti drunk driving. Should I be for drunk driving because of that fact?
A president should be trustworthy and intentional corruption or moronic decisions both undermine a person's trustworthiness.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 24 2015, @08:50PM
Or you could, you know, wait for the facts to come to light and judge the situation based on those instead of jumping at every shadow Faux News tells you to jump at.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday September 24 2015, @11:45PM
You missed the part where I said I was a liberal I guess.
We know she kept a private server. I ask: Why? The only reason I can envision that would be worth the hassle of people finding out, would be that it is a coverup tool. Bullshit about two phones? Seriously, if she is being honest about that, it shows she's unfit to live in modern society, and certainly fails at surrounding herself with people who understand technology. If she can't comprehend and isn't smart enough to get people working for her who can, then she is too stupid to be president. I don't think that's the case -- I think she knew exactly why she wanted a private server. Either way, stupid or slimy, she's unfit for office.