2016 Postmortem

TipTok

(2,474 posts) Thu May 26, 2016, 01:31 AM May 2016

Is there any other legitimate reason for the Clinton server other than blocking transparency? [View all]

121 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Is there any other legitimate reason for the Clinton server other than blocking transparency? [View all] TipTok May 2016 OP

Fantasy baseball? Press Virginia May 2016 #1

Binge watching? JackRiddler May 2016 #24

Pron? XemaSab May 2016 #95

Warcraft. JackRiddler May 2016 #102

Fantasy football? Glamrock May 2016 #107

Second Life. JackRiddler May 2016 #109

Porn Ferd Berfel May 2016 #119

No. Some will tell you that having her own server was safer than having it at State. DisgustipatedinCA May 2016 #2

Whenever this topic comes up... TipTok May 2016 #3

Was this dreadful lack of security at State addressed? JackRiddler May 2016 #25

safer is the absolutely stupidest argument tk2kewl May 2016 #26

She did not want to be inconvenienced. Silver_Witch May 2016 #4

At one point she was carrying three devices. Bad cover up line on her part. nt IdaBriggs May 2016 #19

Don't buy this. JackRiddler May 2016 #27

She wasn't even trying to keep it secret. VulgarPoet May 2016 #50

Speaking of SIPR... JackRiddler May 2016 #51

Isn't it funny? VulgarPoet May 2016 #64

I'm guessing they don't want to talk about the State Department cables, period? JackRiddler May 2016 #65

That doesn't hold. morningfog May 2016 #28

Convenience? ... spin May 2016 #5

No. No reason, other than lack of transparency, to take merrily May 2016 #6

This message was self-deleted by its author silvershadow May 2016 #7

Whitewater? Really? fun n serious May 2016 #8

OMG, someone made a factually accurate statement about Whitewater! merrily May 2016 #11

Time has only made that scandal stink worse... Yurovsky May 2016 #21

I don't think time made it stink worse. I think the brainwashing wore off. merrily May 2016 #92

"Wipe a server?" do you mean with a rag? nt Jack Bone May 2016 #41

blocking transparency of federal records act and FOIA is a legitimate reason? HereSince1628 May 2016 #9

And yet the latest report says she complied with record retention policies. randome May 2016 #16

Uh, no, it said the OPPOSITE of that. nt IdaBriggs May 2016 #20

Oh, right. It said she mitigated that by printing out the emails and handing them over. randome May 2016 #23

She did not mitigate either. Her mitigation was a lie. morningfog May 2016 #31

The report used the word 'mitigated'. randome May 2016 #33

The report said she claimed to have mitigated, morningfog May 2016 #36

If NARA says it's okay, why isn't it okay with you? randome May 2016 #42

Pitchforks? JackRiddler May 2016 #32

Office policies are a little different from violations of law. randome May 2016 #35

She clearly violated the law. FOIA is not office policy. morningfog May 2016 #39

And still no one cares. Except Judicial Watch. I wonder why that is? randome May 2016 #43

That is not true. So far John Kerry, the state IG, the FBI, the DOJ, morningfog May 2016 #44

Which is it? tazkcmo May 2016 #57

Maybe you don't care if choie May 2016 #58

She violated no law Demsrule86 May 2016 #62

Who the FUCK mentioned Bernie? morningfog May 2016 #63

I love when the rules imposed by the federal government on employees become "Office policy". cherokeeprogressive May 2016 #67

Are you actually this unaware of what the report says or do you honestly IdaBriggs May 2016 #38

You must be running out of fairies to chase by now. randome May 2016 #45

One of us is right and one of us is wrong. IdaBriggs May 2016 #54

You forgot one scenario: No indictment but Trump pounds her on it and wins. yodermon May 2016 #82

What report are you reading. I suggest you read the IG report. morningfog May 2016 #30

In the report, NARA -which is responsible for preserving public records- said it was mitigated. randome May 2016 #49

The OIG said the it could not be determined whether it was actually mitigated. morningfog May 2016 #60

So no conclusion then. Which means, of course, that Clinton is guilty of...something. randome May 2016 #105

I'm correcting your inaccuracies. I make no supposition about what the FBI will uncover morningfog May 2016 #110

except for the 30,000 or so, she deleted. Fuddnik May 2016 #37

And yet those 30,000 were recovered and what did they prove she was trying to hide? randome May 2016 #48

Sure: it's a "scandal honeypot". Same with the transcripts. Recursion May 2016 #10

The government servers had been hacked previously oberliner May 2016 #12

And that's with round the clock teams trying to keep it secure. Lars39 May 2016 #18

And round the clock hackers working like crazy to get in oberliner May 2016 #29

It's not the motives that count, it's the deed. Lars39 May 2016 #46

so my bank should keep its cash reserve under the lunchroom sink since no one would look there? Amishman May 2016 #99

She definitely screwed up oberliner May 2016 #118

To hide evidence of the murders of Vince Foster and Chris Stevens. JoePhilly May 2016 #13

DRINK! Hillary supporter brings up Vince Foster! nt IdaBriggs May 2016 #22

Of course not. She just isn't into accountability to the public or TheKentuckian May 2016 #14

No n/t merbex May 2016 #15

No. The lie about convenience was easily disproven by the IdaBriggs May 2016 #17

Convenience and more security. State Department systems are notoriously insecure, outdated. Jitter65 May 2016 #34

Bullshit 99Forever May 2016 #40

Let me second that - bullshit. Ferd Berfel May 2016 #121

It was a monumentally bad move from a security standpoint--just want to make that clear. DisgustipatedinCA May 2016 #68

No. cherokeeprogressive May 2016 #47

Simplicity JackInGreen May 2016 #52

Legit? No. But some are less shady than others. Jester Messiah May 2016 #53

"Vote for Hillary... She's less shady." cherokeeprogressive May 2016 #69

Heh. Jester Messiah May 2016 #84

So she hired a guy whose degree is in Political Science... ljm2002 May 2016 #85

Ignorant or arrogant, possibly both. n/t Jester Messiah May 2016 #101

Convenience. By continuing to use her single unsecure Blackberry, she kept one hand free to > leveymg May 2016 #55

Don't think there was any nefarious motive. Hoyt May 2016 #56

You'll trust H Clinton's website over the word of data security professionals? DisgustipatedinCA May 2016 #70

Yeah, most of the data security folks I've known can't think past the instruction/step they are on. Hoyt May 2016 #73

ah, yes, that bastion of unbiased information on this subject bonemachine May 2016 #76

Like the Berner diehards are unbiased, or rational. Hoyt May 2016 #78

That makes no goddamn sense XemaSab May 2016 #100

And I bet she had better things to do than worry about stupid bureaucracy and IT policies. Hoyt May 2016 #116

Nope laserhaas May 2016 #59

State was a mess...other SOS used private for the same reason Demsrule86 May 2016 #61

One could almost buy that... TipTok May 2016 #66

See post #2. DisgustipatedinCA May 2016 #71

What do you think she was hiding? 55,000 pages Got Anything? Anything? nt BootinUp May 2016 #72

Of self selected documents.... TipTok May 2016 #74

The voters are waiting for the BIG find still. nt BootinUp May 2016 #75

HRC depends on the public's general ignorance... TipTok May 2016 #80

The public recognizes partisan witch hunts. nt BootinUp May 2016 #81

It's not a witch hunt if it's true... TipTok May 2016 #83

Wait a sec... ljm2002 May 2016 #87

12 hour hearings that culminated from a puke witch hunt started by Darell Issa are witch hunts BootinUp May 2016 #88

See here's the thing... ljm2002 May 2016 #91

When the public perception is that there should be an investigation BootinUp May 2016 #93

Again: Issa did not refer the case to the FBI... ljm2002 May 2016 #94

You conflate wanting an investigation with findings of great importance. nt BootinUp May 2016 #96

I'm not conflating anything... ljm2002 May 2016 #103

its just so complicated for you isn't it? BootinUp May 2016 #104

Look, Boots... ljm2002 May 2016 #106

lookie here BootinUp May 2016 #111

Nope - but that said, I believe it allowed Bill to have a lot of input polly7 May 2016 #77

She wanted to use a Blackberry. dchill May 2016 #79

Wow, you're on a first name basis with the President... ljm2002 May 2016 #89

I think the point is she's addicted to using her smart phone for everything. JohnnyRingo May 2016 #108

I know all that. She still wanted one, the NSA said no. dchill May 2016 #114

Sorry I misinterpreted your post... ljm2002 May 2016 #115

Yep. dchill May 2016 #117

Not really. But I think what she thought would be an asset is a liability. hollowdweller May 2016 #86

No mmonk May 2016 #90

No. "Convenience" is a head-fake. lumberjack_jeff May 2016 #97

To keep President Obama from finding out that Blumenthal QC May 2016 #98

add her Foundation 840high May 2016 #112

The charitable foundation that was paying Sidney Blumenthal 007? n/t QC May 2016 #113

Derp derp, derpity derp Dem2 May 2016 #120