Breaking: Hillary 'Wiped Clean' Server, Emails Permanently Deleted

originally posted by: damwel
Who cares? Get real about the problems facing the USA

You forgot what does it really matter? Yeah many people like to pick and choose what does. Well like Al Gore said, let's not get snippy!

Obviously it is you that does not comprehend the fact that Hillary Clinton is a real problem facing the USA.

I love all the high and mighty lectures from the we gotta focus on this or that, instead of Hillary, peanut gallery crowd. ~$heopleNation

It takes more than just hitting 'delete' to totally erase data from a hard drive... like over-writing it a thousand times or degaussing with a loop. Neither are accidental innocent actions.

originally posted by: elfrog
It takes more than just hitting 'delete' to totally erase data from a hard drive... like over-writing it a thousand times or degaussing with a loop. Neither are accidental innocent actions.

I would be very surprised if that hard drive didn't meet a demise by fire.

As someone who dislikes conservatives and liberals equally, I'd just like to say to the folks supporting Hillary:

When your only response is "it's not a big deal" or "well what about this stuff that Bush did!?" or "yeah, so what, all politicians are corrupt", it proves that you can't actually defend what she did and you don't have a leg to stand on in the argument. Basically, the response from Hillary supporters has been "hey, what's that over there?!" while they desperately try to change the subject. That's weak and extremely transparent.

If you don't have a legitimate defense, it's best to stay out of the argument altogether than to attempt a rebuttal and expose the weakness of your position.

a reply to: MOMof3

You are the one defending her actions. Either by dismissing what she did and/or using this tired old blame Bush statement.

Now I'm not trying to defend Clinton here but didn't she already turn in all official correspondences...55k pages worth? I think all that was left on those servers were personal emails. While suspect wouldn't those emails be her personal property?

If my understanding is wrong please point me toward the actual facts of the case!

Thanks!

originally posted by: Answer
As someone who dislikes conservatives and liberals equally, I'd just like to say to the folks supporting Hillary:

When your only response is "it's not a big deal" or "well what about this stuff that Bush did!?" or "yeah, so what, all politicians are corrupt", it proves that you can't actually defend what she did and you don't have a leg to stand on in the argument. Basically, the response from Hillary supporters has been "hey, what's that over there?!" while they desperately try to change the subject. That's weak and extremely transparent.

If you don't have a legitimate defense, it's best to stay out of the argument altogether than to attempt a rebuttal and expose the weakness of your position.

THIS!!

Right on. I feel the same way. And they SERIOUSLY think they can get Independents to vote for her. This is just one of many scandals that make me say no way.

originally posted by: moresco
Now I'm not trying to defend Clinton here but didn't she already turn in all official correspondences...55k pages worth? I think all that was left on those servers were personal emails. While suspect wouldn't those emails be her personal property?

If my understanding is wrong please point me toward the actual facts of the case!

Thanks!

How can anybody determine if "personal" emails are personal if nobody can see them?

originally posted by: moresco
Now I'm not trying to defend Clinton here but didn't she already turn in all official correspondences...55k pages worth? I think all that was left on those servers were personal emails. While suspect wouldn't those emails be her personal property?

If my understanding is wrong please point me toward the actual facts of the case!

Thanks!

For me, the whole thing about this email thing is where is the 3rd party to review the emails she says are private? If she chose to use a personal server for Government work, then her personal emails are no longer private. They are subject to the review. If they are private, and in no way involve the Government or her work for the Government, then fine. But she had them deleted, so the question is, is it illegal for her to have done that. Basically we are going on her word about her own emails. It's a conflict of interest that should have been submitted to be reviewed. She could have hid all kinds of things by deleting those emails.

IMO, her thinking is, whatever punishment she may get, or damage may be done to her reputation for deleting them is far less than what she would have faced if the things were made public.

Why else would she not submit them for review? Is she afraid we'll find out more personal tidbits about her and Bill? We know too much about their personal life as it is, and I doubt anything about them would shock anyone at this point. I think it's deeper than that. You simply do not delete something AFTER you know they might be subpoenaed. It looks really bad.

a reply to: poncho1982

Yup I don't think there it was a bunch of spam, diet plans and cookie recipes.

Does "wiping" the server indicate that the data is really gone? Even back in the 1980's we (U.S. Navy) could retrieve data that was supposedly deleted.

With Congress on a two-week Easter vacation, Hillary has time to concoct and shore-up a really good excuse, before getting hammered again by certain members.

a reply to: carewemust

Deleting itself is not sufficient. At the least the drive should be overwritten using software. The safest bet is to take the drive out, remove the platters and physically destroy them.

originally posted by: moresco
Now I'm not trying to defend Clinton here but didn't she already turn in all official correspondences...55k pages worth? I think all that was left on those servers were personal emails. While suspect wouldn't those emails be her personal property?

If my understanding is wrong please point me toward the actual facts of the case!

Thanks!

Those pages were vetted by Clinton and members of her staff.

The only emails that were turned over to the State Dept were those that she wanted them to see.

The timeline of events as we currently understand them:

-Clinton is appointed Secretary of State
-She sets up a private server for all of her personal and official email.
-The State Dept. comes under investigation for Benghazi but intentionally delays the investigation and makes life exceedingly difficult for the investigative committee. www.washingtonexaminer.com...
-During that investigation, the State Dept. claimed they handed over all information pertaining to the investigation but Hillary's emails were never seen because of her private server.
-After realizing that Hillary was using a private server, investigators requested her emails and they received 850 emails chosen by Hillary and her staff.
-In October 2014, the State Dept. requested that Hillary turn over all official email correspondence. This is when the supposed 55,000 pages (of course they're printed off so no one can easily search and sort them) were turned over to the State Dept. after being vetted by Hillary's staff members.
-Sometime after October, Hillary wiped her server ensuring that none of her emails could be recovered by the ongoing investigation.

The obvious problem is that a public official created a private server so she had total control over who could see her correspondence. She and several of her aides maintained email accounts on that server. Once she realized that her emails were going to be part of the investigation, she turned over a hand-picked pile to the State Dept. and destroyed the rest. In the early days of email, Clinton is on tape saying "Why would I ever want to use email? As many times as I've been investigated, can you imagine?" Clearly she prefers to hide her corruption.

To some people, none of the above is the least bit suspicious.

a reply to: IAMTAT
Why the surprise? We all know that our elected officials (and especially the Clintons) are above the laws that apply to "us common folk" - I.e., the people that elected them.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: MOMof3
Good. This is the end of it.

Really? You are okay with public officials destroying evidence in Federal investigations?

Is it just okay with you because it was Hillary...or because it was a Democrat?

Where to start? She effed up the minute she opted for a personal server and an email address used both for personal and government matters.

That said...she is on the hook for it because she was a high profile government official and is now running for President.

Lord help us if we ever dove into Rand Paul's email correspondence or Ted Cruz's or any other political candidate.

Do I think she had embarrassing stuff on there? Absolutely. Do I think her use of personal email servers was a mix of stupidity and arrogance? Sure...

Do I think it warrants endless tax payer funded multi-million dollar GOP hearings to score political points with frankly only people they have in their camp already?...Please no.

If the House decided they were going to "Investigate" ...even just .gov emails...for House and Senate members running for POTUS...the .gov servers themselves would suffer an immediate crash with a tonnage of data lost

originally posted by: skeptikal1
a reply to: IAMTAT
Why the surprise? We all know that our elected officials (and especially the Clintons) are above the laws that apply to "us common folk" - I.e., the people that elected them.

You should rephrase your quote to read: "Why the surprise? We all know that our elected officials (and especially the many Bushes, Clintons, Cheney, and Obama, to name a few) are above the laws that apply to us "common folk" - i.e., the people that elected them.