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, @06:21PM
I'm not addressing that issue. I'm only addressing your statement that Clinton setting up a private email server is somehow fundamentally different (and worse) than a 3rd party running one because she has full control over hers but not the 3rd party's.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday September 24 2015, @08:07PM
How are you addressing that issue? There is a fundamental difference over having total control over one's data, and having the illusion of control but in fact having none.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 24 2015, @10:11PM
I'm saying Bush/Cheney/Rove/etc. had full control over the RNC server and data so there is no difference. That is my point. That is the point to which I am making; the point that was expressly and implicitly stated. When they wanted the data deleted, it was deleted (oh, sorry, "lost"). That is directly addressing the point.
In case you don't know what I'm talking about because hypocrisy has a very short memory, look here [wikipedia.org]. In comparison, this Clinton thing is a non-issue. Compare her emails in terms of number of accounts and number of emails to the RNC server (50+ accounts and 22 MILLION emails deleted).
And you are trying to argue the Clinton thing is not only different, but WORSE? " having the illusion of control but in fact having none."??? Wow. Just wow. Or are you just in the plug-the-ears-and "that never happened, it was all just lies from the Liberal media" stage?
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday September 24 2015, @11:38PM
Your argument boils down to this:
A bunch of GOP assholes did it, thus it is the right and proper thing to do. That's a crap argument.
Secondly, even if the 3d party is totally friendly, that is not the same as having personal total control.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 25 2015, @04:35AM
Yes, it is a crappy argument. That is why I never made that argument. Man, you are really really dense. Really dense. There is a reason you find that so many people seem to argue with you all the time, it is because you completely lack the ability to grasp the crux of an argument, even when it is painfully spelled out for you, and you go and run with something else. Let's rewind. You made the point that others have done it using third-party services, but this is MUCH different because she set it up and had full control. I argued that the "others" had complete control and it is no different. I even pointed you to a nice summary of the "others" and how they set up third-party server for 50+ people and deleted 20 million emails. Then I went to great lengths to point out that THIS WAS MY ONLY POINT I WAS MAKING, that your statement about them being much different and that Clinton's case was in fact worse, was a stupid and ridiculous thing to say. I mean, come on Dude, I went out of my way to explicitly point out three or four times that was all I was saying, and your rejoinder is my argument is summarized in the above quote?
To your remarkably on-topic second point, yes, indeed, they did have total control of the RNC server (I know, it is clear you didn't follow the helpful link I gave you, but here we are). However, if you want to try to make that lawyer-like weasel-out pedantic argument to try to score a "win", then I would point out that Clinton did not have full control of her server because she had someone set it up and run it for her, just like those other guys did. Clinton at least had the better system because she didn't have to share it with four score people, and she only lost 30k emails, which is only like 1/700th of the emails that those other guys "lost".
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Friday September 25 2015, @06:50AM
again, your point boils down to "but the GOP did it". Even if I was to take that at face value -- so what? It's slimy.
(Score: 1) by timbojones on Friday September 25 2015, @09:09AM
No, that was your point: that RNC did something similar but what Clinton did is way worse. He is denying the "what Clinton did is way worse" part.
You need to start putting things in more boxes than "us" and "them" and understand that this AC doesn't actually like HRC. When he says "You're wrong" you keep reading in this phantom extra "and HRC is right" that isn't actually there.