• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Motivation for Private Servers

Patrickt

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
1,096
Location
Oaxaca, Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I'll admit I haven't been as obsessive as some on trying to follow the E-Mail Scandal stories and so I've missed information about the motivation for private servers.

Bryan Pagliano, the IT guy, was being paid both by the State Department and the Clintons. He refused to testify and was granted immunity from prosecution to force him to testify under oath.

The equipment was purchased by someone and I'm assuming it was the Clintons. Of course, I could easily be wrong with that. The taxpayers might have paid for the servers.

But, what I haven't heard is why. We know the server system was not in keeping with government policy and regulations. We know that classified documents were sent over the unsecure server and I think we know the system was hacked. We know that there was an attempt to destroy work-related emails in violation of the Open Records law.

What I don't know is why? What was the motivation for buying the equipment and paying Bryan Pagliano to set up the system. I read something about Sen. Clinton saying she didn't want to carry more than one portable device but I can manage three email addresses on one portable and I suspect she could have, too. If not, they could have given her three devices, color coded for State Department, Family, and Charity Work.

Was the motivation to conceal information from the public? From the IRS? If this was Bill Clinton's doing I would suspect the motivation was to hide emails from his wife but he didn't seem to be involved, well, with the email servers.

So, what's your information or opinion on why the server farm set up in the spare bathroom?
 

LowDown

Curmudgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,767
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I'll admit I haven't been as obsessive as some on trying to follow the E-Mail Scandal stories and so I've missed information about the motivation for private servers.

Bryan Pagliano, the IT guy, was being paid both by the State Department and the Clintons. He refused to testify and was granted immunity from prosecution to force him to testify under oath.

The equipment was purchased by someone and I'm assuming it was the Clintons. Of course, I could easily be wrong with that. The taxpayers might have paid for the servers.

But, what I haven't heard is why. We know the server system was not in keeping with government policy and regulations. We know that classified documents were sent over the unsecure server and I think we know the system was hacked. We know that there was an attempt to destroy work-related emails in violation of the Open Records law.

What I don't know is why? What was the motivation for buying the equipment and paying Bryan Pagliano to set up the system. I read something about Sen. Clinton saying she didn't want to carry more than one portable device but I can manage three email addresses on one portable and I suspect she could have, too. If not, they could have given her three devices, color coded for State Department, Family, and Charity Work.

Was the motivation to conceal information from the public? From the IRS? If this was Bill Clinton's doing I would suspect the motivation was to hide emails from his wife but he didn't seem to be involved, well, with the email servers.

So, what's your information or opinion on why the server farm set up in the spare bathroom?

Clinton had control of the emails. She deleted 30,000 of them so that nobody else could see them. That was the whole point.
 

Patrickt

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
1,096
Location
Oaxaca, Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Clinton had control of the emails. She deleted 30,000 of them so that nobody else could see them. That was the whole point.

That could have been accomplished with simply three different systems. I can imagine having given my father a blue phone for personal use and a red phone for business use. The first would have no retention issues but the second might need to have archives for the IRS.

I think the problem might have been that she was planning from the start to be sending and receiving emails as Secretary of State that she did not want open to public scrutiny.

If she were mixing her families Foundation and her State Department duties that would be a big problem. She could scarcely asked State Department employees and others in the government to use one email address for some emails but to use another email address for "sensitive" emails.

I really don't know. Motivation is often difficult to nail down and sometimes its not even clear to the criminal. Perhaps Sen. Clinton has some strange sort of obsessive need to control things and the thought of someone else managing the emails was intolerable. She could easily be that nutty.
 
Last edited:

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
31,009
Reaction score
9,029
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
That could have been accomplished with simply three different systems. I can imagine having given my father a blue phone for personal use and a red phone for business use. The first would have no retention issues but the second might need to have archives for the IRS.

I think the problem might have been that she was planning from the start to be sending and receiving emails as Secretary of State that she did not want open to public scrutiny.

If she were mixing her families Foundation and her State Department duties that would be a big problem. She could scarcely asked State Department employees and others in the government to use one email address for some emails but to use another email address for "sensitive" emails.

I really don't know. Motivation is often difficult to nail down and sometimes its not even clear to the criminal. Perhaps Sen. Clinton has some strange sort of obsessive need to control things and the thought of someone else managing the emails was intolerable. She could easily be that nutty.

If she was relying on people from the DNC to manage her e-mails, they weren't the best choice. ;)
 
Top Bottom