Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Is there any other legitimate reason for the Clinton server other than blocking transparency? [View all]randome
(34,845 posts)105. So no conclusion then. Which means, of course, that Clinton is guilty of...something.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
121 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Is there any other legitimate reason for the Clinton server other than blocking transparency? [View all]
TipTok
May 2016
OP
No. Some will tell you that having her own server was safer than having it at State.
DisgustipatedinCA
May 2016
#2
At one point she was carrying three devices. Bad cover up line on her part. nt
IdaBriggs
May 2016
#19
I'm guessing they don't want to talk about the State Department cables, period?
JackRiddler
May 2016
#65
blocking transparency of federal records act and FOIA is a legitimate reason?
HereSince1628
May 2016
#9
Oh, right. It said she mitigated that by printing out the emails and handing them over.
randome
May 2016
#23
I love when the rules imposed by the federal government on employees become "Office policy".
cherokeeprogressive
May 2016
#67
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
And yet those 30,000 were recovered and what did they prove she was trying to hide?
randome
May 2016
#48
so my bank should keep its cash reserve under the lunchroom sink since no one would look there?
Amishman
May 2016
#99
Convenience and more security. State Department systems are notoriously insecure, outdated.
Jitter65
May 2016
#34
It was a monumentally bad move from a security standpoint--just want to make that clear.
DisgustipatedinCA
May 2016
#68
Convenience. By continuing to use her single unsecure Blackberry, she kept one hand free to >
leveymg
May 2016
#55
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
And I bet she had better things to do than worry about stupid bureaucracy and IT policies.
Hoyt
May 2016
#116
12 hour hearings that culminated from a puke witch hunt started by Darell Issa are witch hunts
BootinUp
May 2016
#88
I think the point is she's addicted to using her smart phone for everything.
JohnnyRingo
May 2016
#108
Not really. But I think what she thought would be an asset is a liability.
hollowdweller
May 2016
#86