What Is The Reason For Clinton Using A Private Server?

[thebeautifulstruggle]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by mcar (a host of the General Discussion forum).

if not to attempt to evade public scrutiny?

I defend that they are fishing with the classified stuff, but why do it in the first place?

Doesn't help with the trust factor

[sharp_stick]

1. Because it was easy

The same reason that Powell and Rice used one. It's a pain in the ass to work through regular channels and they didn't feel they needed too.

It's a stupid reason and a dumb thing to do.

[moonbabygo]

7. Powell and Rice

did not have a private server, however they did receive a couple of emails to their private emails.

As for Hillary I do believe she used it for convenience, but it was still wrong. There is a reason the FBI is all over this and someday we will find out. Until then she is innocent of any wrong doing

[thesquanderer]

9. re: "The same reason that Powell and Rice used one"

Powell and Rice did not use a private server.

They did occasionally use a personal email account (not exclusively, as Hillary did). If they took steps to make sure that those emails were still archived on a government system, it is permitted. (I don't know the details of what the two of them did or didn't do.) There is a separate issue as to (in any of these cases) whether any of the messages sent via personal account contained classified information, which would be prohibited regardless.

[CentralCoaster]

10. Clinton ran the business of this country on personally owned equipment in the basement of her home.

Powell and Rice merely used private email services.

Do you now understand the problem?

[cali]

21. Fail. Neither had a private server.

[polly7]

2. Foundation interests with foreign powers, to keep certain activities ie. with Blumenthal from

Obama's scrutiny, Bill being able to work with her on it more easily, as he knew all these foreign countries and leaders. Those are the reasons I believe. Jmho.

[stopbush]

3. Probably because a private server is more secure than a government server.

I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't an open secret in government circles. Something you don't talk about because you don't want our enemies to know how poor our cybersecurity really is.

[philosslayer]

8. Especially when kept in a bathroom in a loft apartment

Instead of a government facility.

[bkkyosemite]

12. That is a unreasonable reason.

[lumberjack_jeff]

14. Secure from whom? Obviously not hackers. n/t

[lagomorph777]

16. OMG you have never worked for the gov't have you?

There are a lot of things our government is bad at. IT security is generally not one of them. Considering the massive volume of highly motivated and well-funded attacks on govt systems, the actual occurrence of breeches is stunningly low. No private company in the world could withstand such attacks.

When breeches have happened, it is usually because of the human element. For example, operating a private e-mail server which is exchanging e-mails with government employees. That provides valuable header information and social engineering clues to hackers.

[femmocrat]

4. Didn't she explain that it was more compatible with her other devices?

Something like that. This article says the NSA wouldn't give her a secure iPhone:

http://fortune.com/2016/03/17/clinton-email-server/

[bkkyosemite]

6. 1. Because if she screwed up as SOS (and she did plenty) it would be hidden from us and the MSM

when she ran for President.

2. Because she was not qualified to be SOS she could have Billy boy help her with the stuff she needed to do.

[QC]

11. To keep the president from knowing that Blumenthal was advising her?

That's my theory, at least.

[leftofcool]

13. Why don't you ask her. Seems to me her server was more secure.

Take this shit to GDPee!

[lumberjack_jeff]

15. Didn't seem all that secure to Guccifer

The infamous Romanian hacker known as “Guccifer,” speaking exclusively with Fox News, claimed he easily – and repeatedly – breached former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s personal email server in early 2013.

"For me, it was easy ... easy for me, for everybody," Marcel Lehel Lazar, who goes by the moniker "Guccifer," told Fox News from a Virginia jail where he is being held.

Guccifer’s potential role in the Clinton email investigation was first reported by Fox News last month. The hacker subsequently claimed he was able to access the server – and provided extensive details about how he did it and what he found – over the course of a half-hour jailhouse interview and a series of recorded phone calls with Fox News.

[haele]

17. Because a government server is not as accessable as a private server?

I've used government networks quite a bit before.
While for the most part, government servers they are a bit more secure than private servers - and they are managed 24/7 - government networks are cludgy; limited availability, limited bandwidth, slow, incompatible with many platforms, devices, software or other even other government networks (especially if you're looking for information in a hurry), and they're always pushing updates and requiring re-boots during inconvenient working hours.
If a federal government employee (state or local employees may have different rules) that is constantly traveling wants to use a dedicated personal VPN because a government server access may not be optimal in some areas, there are rules in place to be able to have, use, and secure that network. Including the requirement to dedicate that server to government work (limited personal work), allowing complete government access for audits. Just as if it were an official government network.
The private server is not an issue. That a high-level government manager who traveled a lot had one is not uncommon.
What was done on the server is the issue. So long as the State Department has complete access to her server, who cares? It's a State Department issue, and they're the ones to make the decision on whether or not that information can be released.

Haele

[Kingofalldems]

18. GDP nonsense.

What is the reason you are posting this? Already been asked and answered by Hillary Clinton herself.

Looks like you have some other motivation.

[thebeautifulstruggle]

20. i have always thought of it as a non-issue

but have recently wondered why she would even go there given her intentions to run again for president

[karynnj]

23. Not completely

She said it was convenience. She said it was a mistake to combine personal and work email. She said that the SD actually had 95% or so of her email.

What she never explained, is:

- If the issue was JUST convenience, why not have her IT person set up a process that in real time archived the incoming and outgoing email at the State Department. (That could happen without impacting what HRC does. Of course, a good first step would have been to have 2 accounts on her very own server - one personal and one work. )

- Why it took MONTHS and NEGOTIATIONS to get the emails back that they needed to comply with inquiries. Not to mention, why does her team continue to lie about the timing - pretending the official October request to all SoS was the first they heard. (The difference is that it was about 9 months from when the SD first spoke to her team and when they got the emails)

[NightWatcher]

19. To avoid FOIA requests/laws that would show what she was up to.

That being using the Clinton Foundation as a front to accept bribes for things she did do as Sec of State and will do as Prez.

[karynnj]

22. While this is a good question, a better one is why she did not leave SD emails with the SD

She has admitted that having one account for everything was a "mistake". To me, it brings up an additional question. Did she, at any point, intend to archive her emails? Having just one account makes that seem highly unlikely.

Seriously? Wouldn't you at least expect that she would create folders to keep the emails organized. This was correspondence dealing with national security issues by the third highest ranked person in the administration. Yet, her email was just read in - no sort at all? Yoga schedule followed by emails on embassy security??

Hillary had FOIA and Congressional inquiries even when she was the secretary. The career professionals whose jobs it were to search to find what matched the request did not have her email .. or at least all of it. Did it simply not occur to her that this was concealing information? Worse, did it not occur to her when she left none of it behind, that at some point, the problem would rise to the Secretary level? Did she really expect Kerry to just cover for her rather than demand the emails?