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, Troll) by hemocyanin on Thursday September 24 2015, @06:09PM
Fuck you. Why don't you provide a citation that says over the course of four years as SOS, absolutely no classified material was communicated to HRC via email. The chance of that being true is nil.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 24 2015, @06:30PM
Don't have to because fortunately in the real world, Fox News innuendo, rumor, and hunches aren't held as indisputable facts. Kind of like how, looking at a situation as a whole, if I have a state government and a hospital showing me a certificate of birth and attesting to its authenticity, and I have Fox News telling me that it is probably a fake, I'm going to side with the former over the latter. Especially when it comes to the topic of Clinton in particular, I prefer to wait and see what really happened rather than go on what Fox News is telling me probably happened.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Thursday September 24 2015, @06:37PM
...classified material was communicated to HRC via email.
As someone "who used to hold a "top secret" clearance" did you send much classified information over unencrypted protocols like Email?
Didn't think so....
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday September 24 2015, @08:03PM
I've never held any clearance of any kind.
(Score: 3, Informative) by tathra on Thursday September 24 2015, @07:06PM
its called "innocent until proven guilty" and "the fourth amendment of the United States of America". perhaps you've heard of them? they're key concepts upon which our country was built.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday September 24 2015, @08:05PM
Government employees do not have a 4th amendment right to keep their work product secret from their employee. The 4th is a total non-sequitur. As for innocence, HRC intercepted official communications and redirected them to her private server -- if anyone else committed a MIM attack like this, the Feds would be dreaming up 100 years of indictable offenses.
(Score: 2) by tathra on Thursday September 24 2015, @08:23PM
that only applies to work-specific things, it does not allow them to rummage through all of her private communications. and the 4th absolutely does protect public employees from their employers' unreasonable searches:
Public Employee Privacy Rights: When Is An Employee’s Workplace His Castle? [kmtg.com]
oh, did she? citation needed please, as it was my understanding that she was using her private email, run on her private server as her work email, rather than redirecting them there. and if she was merely forwarding it from one address to another, forwarding email is not a MITM attack.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday September 24 2015, @09:43PM
Communication to the SOS about SOS business, is communication with a government official and those communications must be archived. Everything work related sent to her private address was intercepted, and she then had a duty to maintain it, not destroy it.
There is no question she had official communications on her server. You admit that much right?
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2071 [cornell.edu]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tathra on Thursday September 24 2015, @11:55PM
and at the time, that was perfectly legal. what you're referring to is allegedly a violation of the Federal Records Act, i presume? it was amended in 2014 - after she left her office as SoS. wanting to punish her for laws that didn't exist at the time of the action but exist now is called "ex post facto", ex post facto laws are explicitly forbidden under Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 of the US Constitution. i'm pretty sure the law was changed to disallow what she did because she did it, but she nor anybody else can be punished for something that wasn't illegal at the time they did it.
honestly i don't care enough about this whole kerfluffle to do all the proper research and keep up to date on all the facts and discoveries because i hate the bitch and learning anything about her isn't worth my time. i'll be extremely happy if all this shit keeps her out of the presidency, but only if no constitution-shredding or law-ignoring precedents are set in the process. the absolute, most important time to ensure that due process is upheld and that all standards and technicalities are adhered to is when it comes to slimy scumbags like her, or child-raping pedophiles, because you want to say "Sure, go ahead, ignore all the rules because they deserve it!", but if you do, guess what? next week they'll be using that same precedent that you begged them to set to come after your ass.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Friday September 25 2015, @06:40AM
That law I cited was one of the ones Ollie North got convicted on. Are you telling me that doesn't predate all this?