What exactly did Hillary Clinton do that was so bad with the email scandal?

[LonghornDave]

I just think it squashes the idea that using this was more simple than setting up a .gov account since she was just continuing to use the same email system as before. She had to set up a new domain and upgrade the system in order to handle the new capacity. No way that is more simple than getting a .gov account.

[sleestak]

@Ravenman

I’m not sure that putting in a new hard drive and establishing a new domain name is exactly smoking gun evidence of anything.

I will say that the weakest part of the “Hillary just isn’t comfortable with learning new computer stuff” is that she apparently had several types of mobile devices, including iPads and Blackberries. Kind of hard to square that circle.

Did Clinton actually have a new hard drive installed or did they just re-purpose the server? My understanding (and what makes sense to me as a sysadmin*) is that they just took the old server and changed the email domain.

If so, that is troubling unless a full blown check was done of the system. If she had new drives put in that is better though it doesn’t necessarily mean the computer is clean. No way in hell I would have re-purposed an email server for SecState. Not a chance.

And, yeah, Clinton claiming to not want to carry around multiple devices because it is too hard after bragging about carrying around multiple devices is pretty weak.

Slee

*I re-purpose a lot of servers. Good thing to do, unless of course, the server needs to be really secure.

[LonghornDave]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/us-judge-weighs-deeper-probe-into-clintons-private-email-system/2016/02/23/9c27412a-d997-11e5-81ae-7491b9b9e7df_story.html

A federal judge on Tuesday ruled that State Department officials and top aides to Hillary Clinton should be questioned under oath about whether they intentionally thwarted federal open records laws by using or allowing the use of a private email server throughout Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state from 2009 to 2013.

Sullivan also suggested from the bench that he might at some point order the department to subpoena Clinton and Abedin to return all emails related to Clinton’s private account, not just records their camps previously deemed work-related and returned.

“There has been a constant drip, drip, drip of declarations. When does it stop?” Sullivan said, “This case is about the public’s right to know.”

In granting Judicial Watch’s request, Sullivan said that months of piecemeal revelations about Clinton and the State Department’s handling of the email controversy created “at least a ‘reasonable suspicion’ ” that public access to official government records under the federal Freedom of Information Act was undermined.

[UberArchetype]

Leading Nominee for the understatement of the Year Award:

…the State Department’s handling of the email controversy created “at least a ‘reasonable suspicion’ ” that public access to official government records under the federal Freedom of Information Act was undermined.