Clinton to hand over email server to FBI

[PokerGuy]

Hilarious to see the same usual cast of lefties spinning so hard that if you could harness it you could power a small city.

This case is remarkably similar to the IRS abuse scandal. Idiots like to think it was just a "faux scandal" etc because they support their team at any cost, but lets not forget that beyond all the political theater, there *was* abuse to start with, and the only question was who knew and how the abuse came to be. Lerner was exposed as a political tool and had to resign (good for all) and the ability of the IRS to properly screen non-profits in the future was effectively neutered (bad for all) because of the abuse. In the IRS case, just like now with hildabeast and her server, there is no dispute that there was wrongdoing -- that part is beyond dispute. The investigation will center around criminal wrongdoing, but we already know there was wrongdoing. Now it's just to determine to what level.

If the wrongdoing rises to the level of criminal activity, hildabeast is toast, no amount of spinning from all her little partisans will fix it. If not (and at this point I don't think it will because they already "scrubbed" the evidence), then we'll just have to see if the story sticks around long enough to hamper hildabeast or not. My money is on "no", it won't matter.

 

[Jhhnn]

I've said this repeatedly by I guess one more time is necessary ... No matter what the truth is with respect to the question of classified info on her server it was the very fact that she set it up and that whatever was on it, WHATEVER was on it would be more easily accessed by foreign hackers.

As I said, you're jumping to conclusions. Just because that conclusion is necessary to your argument doesn't mean it's true.

Explain why a private server is automagically more vulnerable to have a valid argument.

I don't think you can or that anybody can, but you're welcome to try.

 

[cabri]

As I said, you're jumping to conclusions. Just because that conclusion is necessary to your argument doesn't mean it's true.

Explain why a private server is automagically more vulnerable to have a valid argument.

I don't think you can or that anybody can, but you're welcome to try.

It is not automatically more secure or vulnerable.

Much depends on the quality of people setting it up and maintaining it.

Is it a IT security professional or just a campaign staffer that dickers around with computers?

A staffer was the person that changed it over for Hillary. Who set it up for Bill, I have not heard.

Then they hand over the server to a company that is not authorized for handing classified info. And turn over a thumb drive to a lawyer containing classified info.

The haphazard handling of info coupled with the lack of security (physical attitude and informational) raises serious red flags.

 

[Virge_]

Do you have evidence that she didn't follow protocol? Of course you don't and neither do republicans which is why exactly zero charges have been filed. But that won't stop the believers though, will it.

I simply don't understand what it is in your brain that doesn't seem to function correctly. This is purely an issue of causality, and your single digit IQ appears to be handicapping you from making the connection, so I'll break it down.

The bottom line is:

• Hillary Rotham Clinton used her own private e-mail server to perform her duties as Secretary of State for the United States - FACT
• US Government Officials abide by a system of accountability where there are various checks in balances to ones actions to ensure they are auditable in the future. This is even more important the higher the rank of any official, and her position is rather high
• Hillary Clinton's actions caused her to directly circumvent many "soft protocols" designed for accountability, specifically the Freedom of Information Act, and the Federal Records Act - FACT
• It is irrelevant if there are classified e-mails or not on the e-mail server in question, because it is the equivalent of using your own personal gmail account for work correspondence, which would only be done to circumvent the aforementioned bureaucratic annoyances (P.S. - go ahead and try to do that, it'll get you fired. It actually makes things WORSE the higher you get, imagine if every Fortune 500 CEO had his own private e-mail server for ALL his e-mail.. let that sink in before you bother to try and reply to defend this utter horseshit)

Hillary may or may not have known the protocols, but either way she participated in the actions that were recommended by staff she paid for, and when caught instead of just playing ball she had the entire thing wiped by a special forensics team to make it impossible to validate if she was innocent or guilty before handing it over to a judge, specifically violating his orders not to modify the contents of the server itself.

If all of that isn't treason and shouldn't land you in jail, then why the fuck is Chelsea Manning still being tortured on a daily basis for bullshit charges like reading a magazine or having expired toothpaste?

You and those who think like you are the degree of ignorance directly associated with the downfall of civilization.

 

[Blackjack200]

I simply don't understand what it is in your brain that doesn't seem to function correctly. This is purely an issue of causality, and your single digit IQ appears to be handicapping you from making the connection, so I'll break it down.

The bottom line is:

• Hillary Rotham Clinton used her own private e-mail server to perform her duties as Secretary of State for the United States - FACT
• US Government Officials abide by a system of accountability where there are various checks in balances to ones actions to ensure they are auditable in the future. This is even more important the higher the rank of any official, and her position is rather high
• Hillary Clinton's actions caused her to directly circumvent many "soft protocols" designed for accountability, specifically the Freedom of Information Act, and the Federal Records Act - FACT
• It is irrelevant if there are classified e-mails or not on the e-mail server in question, because it is the equivalent of using your own personal gmail account for work correspondence, which would only be done to circumvent the aforementioned bureaucratic annoyances (P.S. - go ahead and try to do that, it'll get you fired. It actually makes things WORSE the higher you get, imagine if every Fortune 500 CEO had his own private e-mail server for ALL his e-mail.. let that sink in before you bother to try and reply to defend this utter horseshit)

Hillary may or may not have known the protocols, but either way she participated in the actions that were recommended by staff she paid for, and when caught instead of just playing ball she had the entire thing wiped by a special forensics team to make it impossible to validate if she was innocent or guilty before handing it over to a judge, specifically violating his orders not to modify the contents of the server itself.

If all of that isn't treason and shouldn't land you in jail, then why the fuck is Chelsea Manning still being tortured on a daily basis for bullshit charges like reading a magazine or having expired toothpaste?

You and those who think like you are the degree of ignorance directly associated with the downfall of civilization.

This is TREASON!!! ...DEATH TO TRAITORS!!!

For using a private email server

For her emails

This is the DOWNFALL OF ALL CIVILIZATION!!

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Criminal probe underway...it will be interesting to see how the chips fall on this one.

 

[werepossum]

Fluff off, twit. I've said a dozen times that her use of private email for public business was inappropriate:

"Finally, for the record again, I agree it was inappropriate for Clinton to use a personal email account for official business. I simply refuse to board the GOP smear machine where they (yet again) try to pervert a smaller issue into a major scandal. It's dishonest partisan propaganda."
​

You ignore such clear statements, of course, because dishonesty is your stock in trade. You'd be mute if you were restricted to discussing issues and people's positions honestly.

lol Right. The law was inconvenient, so breaking it is no big deal. It's merely "inappropriate".

It is the height of amusement to read someone who follows the far left line on every single issue refering to anything as "dishonest partisan propaganda."

 

[werepossum]

Hilarious to see the same usual cast of lefties spinning so hard that if you could harness it you could power a small city.

This case is remarkably similar to the IRS abuse scandal. Idiots like to think it was just a "faux scandal" etc because they support their team at any cost, but lets not forget that beyond all the political theater, there *was* abuse to start with, and the only question was who knew and how the abuse came to be. Lerner was exposed as a political tool and had to resign (good for all) and the ability of the IRS to properly screen non-profits in the future was effectively neutered (bad for all) because of the abuse. In the IRS case, just like now with hildabeast and her server, there is no dispute that there was wrongdoing -- that part is beyond dispute. The investigation will center around criminal wrongdoing, but we already know there was wrongdoing. Now it's just to determine to what level.

If the wrongdoing rises to the level of criminal activity, hildabeast is toast, no amount of spinning from all her little partisans will fix it. If not (and at this point I don't think it will because they already "scrubbed" the evidence), then we'll just have to see if the story sticks around long enough to hamper hildabeast or not. My money is on "no", it won't matter.

It is remarkably similar to the IRS abuse scandal in that government correspondence was willfully destroyed by people who then pointed out that there is no evidence of any wrongdoing, thus demanding that we ignore how the destruction itself is wrongdoing. Gotta give them points for brass anyway. These are the people who murder their parents and then demand mercy because they are orphans.

I still don't see any real consequences though. Finding the first stone-thrower in D.C. is gonna be a bitch. No way in Hell does Obama's FBI indict, and if they did her followers would declare it a badge of honor.

 

[Virge_]

This is TREASON!!! ...DEATH TO TRAITORS!!!

For using a private email server

For her emails

This is the DOWNFALL OF ALL CIVILIZATION!!

• Using a private e-mail server instead of the government provided service to do her official government business.
• For her e-mails relating to her job as secretary of state, a position compliant on the auditing powers of FOIA and FRA.

This individual is attempting to attain the job of the single most powerful person on the planet, and you seem to think this is the kind of example they should set?

You still have yet to reply to why it's okay for her to do any of that. Just because? Let me drop this little nugget on you and maybe it can feed the seed of reason within that small feeble little brainwashed mind of yours - if she had simply said, "Shit. I messed up. This was a bad recommendation by my staff which I am responsible for, so in an effort to get it out of the way here is my e-mail server and lets go ahead and be honest about whatever mistakes happened so we can learn from them and own up to it". IF she just owned up to it and did that I would be all for backing her up as a fucking mistake! We're only human..

You just don't seem to get it. I don't give a shit if she made a mistake or not - what I care about is isntead of dealing with said mistake she's now opting to pretend like it doesn't apply to her, instead. THIS PERSON WHO WOULD RATHER MAKE EXCUSES FOR A MISTAKE INSTEAD OF JUST DEAL WITH IT LIKE THE REST OF US ARE FORCED TO IS TRYING TO BE OUR FUCKING PRESIDENT. How does this not terrify you? How bought and paid for have you become that you just disregard shady shit for no reason?

This is hands-down an issue of accountability and reliability. Hillary had an opportunity to show me her integrity, and she did - the integrity of someone who deserves to be in jail, not running for President.

Christ you're an idiot.

 

[Bowfinger]

lol Right. The law was inconvenient, so breaking it is no big deal. It's merely "inappropriate".

Which law? At that time, it was perfectly legal for her to use personal email. It was inappropriate (just as it was inappropriate for Rice and Powell, and just as it was inappropriate for the Bush administration to use RNC email), but it wasn't illegal, and it was consistent with past precedent.

Knowingly storing or sending classified material in email is presumably illegal, but that has not yet been demonstrated. That's what the FBI is now investigating. And, as I've said before, if the FBI determines Clinton did break the law, I'm perfectly happy to have them prosecute her as appropriate.

The difference between us is you've already reached your conclusions based on the usual RNC propaganda: speculation and innuendo presented as fact. I, on the other hand, await objective investigation producing real facts. You are a partisan tool, plain and simple.

It is the height of amusement to read someone who follows the far left line on every single issue refering to anything as "dishonest partisan propaganda."

You're lying once again. It seems to be your sole talent.

 

[ivwshane]

You having the gall to talk about peoples low IQ is overshadowed by your ignorance on the subject.

I simply don't understand what it is in your brain that doesn't seem to function correctly. This is purely an issue of causality, and your single digit IQ appears to be handicapping you from making the connection, so I'll break it down.

The bottom line is:

• Hillary Rotham Clinton used her own private e-mail server to perform her duties as Secretary of State for the United States - FACT
• US Government Officials abide by a system of accountability where there are various checks in balances to ones actions to ensure they are auditable in the future. This is even more important the higher the rank of any official, and her position is rather high
• Hillary Clinton's actions caused her to directly circumvent many "soft protocols" designed for accountability, specifically the Freedom of Information Act, and the Federal Records Act - FACT
• It is irrelevant if there are classified e-mails or not on the e-mail server in question, because it is the equivalent of using your own personal gmail account for work correspondence, which would only be done to circumvent the aforementioned bureaucratic annoyances (P.S. - go ahead and try to do that, it'll get you fired. It actually makes things WORSE the higher you get, imagine if every Fortune 500 CEO had his own private e-mail server for ALL his e-mail.. let that sink in before you bother to try and reply to defend this utter horseshit)

Hillary may or may not have known the protocols, but either way she participated in the actions that were recommended by staff she paid for, and when caught instead of just playing ball she had the entire thing wiped by a special forensics team to make it impossible to validate if she was innocent or guilty before handing it over to a judge, specifically violating his orders not to modify the contents of the server itself.

If all of that isn't treason and shouldn't land you in jail, then why the fuck is Chelsea Manning still being tortured on a daily basis for bullshit charges like reading a magazine or having expired toothpaste?

You and those who think like you are the degree of ignorance directly associated with the downfall of civilization.

Answer this simple question: if Hilary has violated a federal law or regulation for running her own email server why hasn't she been sued or formally charged?

 

[ivwshane]

More foam please!

• Using a private e-mail server instead of the government provided service to do her official government business.
• For her e-mails relating to her job as secretary of state, a position compliant on the auditing powers of FOIA and FRA.

This individual is attempting to attain the job of the single most powerful person on the planet, and you seem to think this is the kind of example they should set?

You still have yet to reply to why it's okay for her to do any of that. Just because? Let me drop this little nugget on you and maybe it can feed the seed of reason within that small feeble little brainwashed mind of yours - if she had simply said, "Shit. I messed up. This was a bad recommendation by my staff which I am responsible for, so in an effort to get it out of the way here is my e-mail server and lets go ahead and be honest about whatever mistakes happened so we can learn from them and own up to it". IF she just owned up to it and did that I would be all for backing her up as a fucking mistake! We're only human..

You just don't seem to get it. I don't give a shit if she made a mistake or not - what I care about is isntead of dealing with said mistake she's now opting to pretend like it doesn't apply to her, instead. THIS PERSON WHO WOULD RATHER MAKE EXCUSES FOR A MISTAKE INSTEAD OF JUST DEAL WITH IT LIKE THE REST OF US ARE FORCED TO IS TRYING TO BE OUR FUCKING PRESIDENT. How does this not terrify you? How bought and paid for have you become that you just disregard shady shit for no reason?

This is hands-down an issue of accountability and reliability. Hillary had an opportunity to show me her integrity, and she did - the integrity of someone who deserves to be in jail, not running for President.

Christ you're an idiot.

 

[ivwshane]

lol Right. The law was inconvenient, so breaking it is no big deal. It's merely "inappropriate".

It is the height of amusement to read someone who follows the far left line on every single issue refering to anything as "dishonest partisan propaganda."

What law was broken? This should be a very simple question for you or anyone else to answer. If you can answer that question then, as I previously suggested, you should tell congress because apparently they aren't aware of any violations.

 

[Bowfinger]

I simply don't understand what it is in your brain that doesn't seem to function correctly. This is purely an issue of causality, and your single digit IQ appears to be handicapping you from making the connection, so I'll break it down.

The bottom line is:

• Hillary Rotham Clinton used her own private e-mail server to perform her duties as Secretary of State for the United States - FACT
• US Government Officials abide by a system of accountability where there are various checks in balances to ones actions to ensure they are auditable in the future. This is even more important the higher the rank of any official, and her position is rather high
• Hillary Clinton's actions caused her to directly circumvent many "soft protocols" designed for accountability, specifically the Freedom of Information Act, and the Federal Records Act - FACT
• It is irrelevant if there are classified e-mails or not on the e-mail server in question, because it is the equivalent of using your own personal gmail account for work correspondence, which would only be done to circumvent the aforementioned bureaucratic annoyances (P.S. - go ahead and try to do that, it'll get you fired. It actually makes things WORSE the higher you get, imagine if every Fortune 500 CEO had his own private e-mail server for ALL his e-mail.. let that sink in before you bother to try and reply to defend this utter horseshit)

Hillary may or may not have known the protocols, but either way she participated in the actions that were recommended by staff she paid for, and when caught instead of just playing ball she had the entire thing wiped by a special forensics team to make it impossible to validate if she was innocent or guilty before handing it over to a judge, specifically violating his orders not to modify the contents of the server itself.

If all of that isn't treason and shouldn't land you in jail, then why the fuck is Chelsea Manning still being tortured on a daily basis for bullshit charges like reading a magazine or having expired toothpaste?

You and those who think like you are the degree of ignorance directly associated with the downfall of civilization.

As with others in this thread, it would help if you got your facts straight before you start attacking. Your third bullet is questionable. Clinton claims she tried to comply with the records retention requirements. How well did she do at that? The jury's still out, so to speak.

You fourth bullet is hyperbole. The FACT is that Clinton using personal email was allowed at that time, and was consistent with precedent set by her two immediate predecessors, Rice and Powell. I agree it was a poor practice, but it wasn't so clearly over the line as you insinuate.

Her original server was wiped in 2013, when she upgraded to a new server. This was long before she was asked to turn it over.

 

[Virge_]

You having the gall to talk about peoples low IQ is overshadowed by your ignorance on the subject.



Answer this simple question: if Hilary has violated a federal law or regulation for running her own email server why hasn't she been sued or formally charged?

So.. you're.. trying to say that nobody in our government ever gets away with crimes, right? That's your justification? Seriously?

You tell me, did she comply with ALL 4 of these?

• The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.
• FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information."
• The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress."
• Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison.

Hint: Section 1924 of Title 18 is NOT ambigious. A judge ordered her to turn over her e-mail server, in tact, to VALIDATE she did not violate Section 1924.

SHE REFUSED TO PERFORM SAID VALIDATION AS REQUIRED BY A JUDGE. Get off your high horse and tell me plainly if you think you would not be in jail right now if this was you instead of a Clinton?

Bottom line, by deleting the e-mails nobody will ever know if she violated the rules, which is precisely why she SHOULD be punished for deleting the e-mails when instructed not to by a Federal Judge.

This is not the kind of behavior we need from someone leading the country.

 

[ivwshane]

Criminal probe underway...it will be interesting to see how the chips fall on this one.

What criminal probe would that be?

 

[Virge_]

As with others in this thread, it would help if you got your facts straight before you start attacking. Your third bullet is questionable. Clinton claims she tried to comply with the records retention requirements. How well did she do at that? The jury's still out, so to speak.

You fourth bullet is hyperbole. The FACT is that Clinton using personal email was allowed at that time, and was consistent with precedent set by her two immediate predecessors, Rice and Powell. I agree it was a poor practice, but it wasn't so clearly over the line as you insinuate.

Her original server was wiped in 2013, when she upgraded to a new server. This was long before she was asked to turn it over.

• At this point, why should ANYONE take Clinton's word for ANYTHING? She's literally the boss of the organization responsible for investigating these types of issues, is it really a surprise they just said, "well she said it's clean, so it's clean!".
• I am not arguing if it was ALLOWED. I am arguing that if it was determined to be a mistake after the fact, a reasonable person will acknowledge the situation, take responsibility, and once it's been understood what the problem was and made very clear what steps would be taken in the future life goes on. That's it! No lynch mobs and pitch forks, just recognition of a mistake (which is fucking human) and moving on. This is my problem with this whole situation in a nutshell.
• These people are public servants and are held to various higher standards of accountability. Bottom line is it was not appropriate to have a personal e-mail server handling any official government business for various reasons, and the legality is not the issue at hand as much as the accountability of the person responsible for professionally handling this situation and information.
• She was asked to turn over the current server without making any changes. The current server was handed over wiped. Nobody gives a shit about some server from three years ago that was upgraded, that's just smoke and mirror bullshit intended to give people like you who are either too stupid or too oblivious to the technicals of the situation an easily digestible answer. This is my primary source of anxiety and concern that she is not being honest. I'm a digital forensics expert for the department of defense so I can tell you right now the answer is bullshit.

 

[ivwshane]

Lol! Good lord you are all over the place!

First you make claims about the legality of using a private server and when asked to show what law were broken you quickly move on to record keeping. Why do you think that is?

I guess in your mind Hilary is a criminal mastermind and way smarter than anyone in congress or whoever is investigating her. Is that your claim? Or are you claiming that congress is so incompetent that they can't even charge Hilary with a crime, a crime that has been so obviously committed that someone as dumb as you can see it and all the evidence surrounding it but congress cannot?

So.. you're.. trying to say that nobody in our government ever gets away with crimes, right? That's your justification? Seriously?

You tell me, did she comply with ALL 4 of these?

• The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.
• FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information."
• The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress."
• Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison.

Hint: Section 1924 of Title 18 is NOT ambigious. A judge ordered her to turn over her e-mail server, in tact, to VALIDATE she did not violate Section 1924.

SHE REFUSED TO PERFORM SAID VALIDATION AS REQUIRED BY A JUDGE. Get off your high horse and tell me plainly if you think you would not be in jail right now if this was you instead of a Clinton?

Bottom line, by deleting the e-mails nobody will ever know if she violated the rules, which is precisely why she SHOULD be punished for deleting the e-mails when instructed not to by a Federal Judge.

This is not the kind of behavior we need from someone leading the country.

 

[ivwshane]

Oh! So now you admit that she didn't break any laws with regards to using a private server? You just feel it was inappropriate? Congrats! You and I as well as other "Hilary defenders" feel the exact same way!

• At this point, why should ANYONE take Clinton's word for ANYTHING? She's literally the boss of the organization responsible for investigating these types of issues, is it really a surprise they just said, "well she said it's clean, so it's clean!".
• I am not arguing if it was ALLOWED. I am arguing that if it was determined to be a mistake after the fact, a reasonable person will acknowledge the situation, take responsibility, and once it's been understood what the problem was and made very clear what steps would be taken in the future life goes on. That's it! No lynch mobs and pitch forks, just recognition of a mistake (which is fucking human) and moving on.
• These people are public servants and are held to various higher standards of accountability. Bottom line is it was not appropriate to have a personal e-mail server handling any official government business for various reasons, and the legality is not the issue at hand as much as the accountability of the person responsible for professionally handling this situation and information.
• She was asked to turn over the current server without making any changes. The current server was handed over wiped. Nobody gives a shit about some server from three years ago that was upgraded, that's just smoke and mirror bullshit intended to give people like you who are either too stupid or too oblivious to the technicals of the situation an easily digestible answer. I'm a digital forensics expert for the department of defense so I can tell you right now the answer is bullshit.

And now you move away from the facts and dive right into conspiracy?!

 

[Virge_]

Lol! Good lord you are all over the place!

First you make claims about the legality of using a private server and when asked to show what law were broken you quickly move on to record keeping. Why do you think that is?

I guess in your mind Hilary is a criminal mastermind and way smarter than anyone in congress or whoever is investigating her. Is that your claim? Or are you claiming that congress is so incompetent that they can't even charge Hilary with a crime, a crime that has been so obviously committed that someone as dumb as you can see it and all the evidence surrounding it but congress cannot?

Jesus, I don't know how to dumb this down any more. Okay. Since you've shown to have to comprehension of a toddler, let me try to make this very simple:

• Bad Hillary lady instructed by judge to turn over e-mail server without wiping pursuant to FRA and Title 18
• Bad Hillary lady turns over wiped server instead, ignoring FRA and Title 18 (also basically a smile and a "fuck you!" to said Judge, showing they have zero power over her)
• Bad Hillary lady is the boss of the government organization responsible for investigating breaches of FRA and Title 18, a clear conflict of interest, yet they still simply take her word for the data's integrity without actually doing their job
• Bad Hillary lady is now in a Schrodinger's Cat scenario where we cannot prove she violated any FRA or Title 18 laws directly, but we also cannot prove she didn't! Simple logic suggests an innocent party would not invite this controversy, ergo logic suggests guilt
• This person is not honest, has no accountability, and has no integrity

Replace "Bad Hillary lady" with "ivwshane" for all of the above. Does the scenario play out the same as it does today, or are you bunking next door to Chelsea Manning?

The fact that you're so sadly oblivious to the privilege this traitor has is simply sickening.

 

[cabri]

Lol! Good lord you are all over the place!

First you make claims about the legality of using a private server and when asked to show what law were broken you quickly move on to record keeping. Why do you think that is?

I guess in your mind Hilary is a criminal mastermind and way smarter than anyone in congress or whoever is investigating her. Is that your claim? Or are you claiming that congress is so incompetent that they can't even charge Hilary with a crime, a crime that has been so obviously committed that someone as dumb as you can see it and all the evidence surrounding it but congress cannot?

She thought that her status would protect her and that she did not have to comply with the records act.

To comply fully, would also reveal private correspondence which she apparently did not want to do.

By turning over to State the records that SHE FELT were applicable, it forces trusting of her judgement.

She claims that there was no classified info on the server; that has been turned out to be false.

Did she not understand what classified means and the rules for handling such? 😕

Did she not understand what the judge stated - turn over everything and DO NOT DESTROY anything !!!
She was not told that she could filter out info.
She also should not have had a private company destroy the old server.
And did Platte transfer info from the old server to the new one?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

It appears to me that when she wiped the server, she broke the law. The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.

§ 3105. Safeguards
The head of each Federal agency shall establish safeguards against the removal or loss of records he determines to be necessary and required
by regulations of the Archivist. Safeguards shall include making it known to officials and employees of the agency—
(1) that records in the custody of the agency are not to be alienated or destroyed except in accordance with sections 3301–3314 of this title,
and
(2) the penalties provided by law for the unlawful removal or destruction of records.

§ 3106. Unlawful removal, destruction of records
The head of each Federal agency shall notify the Archivist of any actual, impending, or threatened unlawful removal, defacing, alteration,
or destruction of records in the custody of the agency of which he is the head that shall come to his attention, and with the assistance of the Archivist shall initiate action through the Attorney General for the recovery of records he knows or has reason to believe have been unlawfully removed from his agency, or from another Federal agency whose records have been transferred to his legal custody. In any case in which the head of the agency does not initiate an action for such recovery or other redress within a reasonable period of time after being notified of any such unlawful action, the Archivist shall request the Attorney General to initiate such an action, and shall notify the Congress when such a request has been made.

 

[fskimospy]

It appears to me that when she wiped the server, she broke the law. The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.

§ 3105. Safeguards
The head of each Federal agency shall establish safeguards against the removal or loss of records he determines to be necessary and required
by regulations of the Archivist. Safeguards shall include making it known to officials and employees of the agency—
(1) that records in the custody of the agency are not to be alienated or destroyed except in accordance with sections 3301–3314 of this title,
and
(2) the penalties provided by law for the unlawful removal or destruction of records.

§ 3106. Unlawful removal, destruction of records
The head of each Federal agency shall notify the Archivist of any actual, impending, or threatened unlawful removal, defacing, alteration,
or destruction of records in the custody of the agency of which he is the head that shall come to his attention, and with the assistance of the Archivist shall initiate action through the Attorney General for the recovery of records he knows or has reason to believe have been unlawfully removed from his agency, or from another Federal agency whose records have been transferred to his legal custody. In any case in which the head of the agency does not initiate an action for such recovery or other redress within a reasonable period of time after being notified of any such unlawful action, the Archivist shall request the Attorney General to initiate such an action, and shall notify the Congress when such a request has been made.

Federal Records Act wasn't in effect when she was in office.

 

[ivwshane]

Did she or did she not hand over documents or emails that she felt were work related? She did in fact hand over documents that were work related (50,000 in fact). Were they handed over in the normal fashion? No, they were printed and not digital copies. Is that illegal? No, in fact it is not illegal.

With regards to turning over her server do you know why she was asked to do so? You apparently don't.

Jesus, I don't know how to dumb this down any more. Okay. Since you've shown to have to comprehension of a toddler, let me try to make this very simple:

• Bad Hillary lady instructed by judge to turn over e-mail server without wiping pursuant to FRA and Title 18
• Bad Hillary lady turns over wiped server instead, ignoring FRA and Title 18
• Bad Hillary lady is now in a Schrodinger's Cat scenario where we cannot prove she violated any FRA or Title 18 laws directly, but we also cannot prove she didn't! Simple logic suggests an innocent party would not take this step
• This person is not honest, has no accountability, and has no integrity

Replace "Bad Hillary lady" with "ivwshane" for all of the above. Does the scenario play out the same as it does today, or are you bunking next door to Chelsea Manning?

 

[Virge_]

Federal Records Act wasn't in effect when she was in office.

Who gives a shit? The FRA request is for her current e-mail server, which she fucking deleted before turning over!

I just need to figure out why you can't seem to grasp such simple concepts and why you say something so blatantly deceptive and irrelevant. You either do not understand on a fundamental level, are brainwashed too badly, or are an outright shill trying to deceive people on her behalf.