Clinton's IT head found on Reddit asking how to hide email info.

Most people consider this a flaw in Hillary. I, on the other hand, find it the most appealing thing about her (I'm not a big fan of hers). She doesn't let deluded punks roll her.

So?

 

Get a clue Jerry....then get back to us when you catch up to reality.

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally....

a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 795; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title V, § 552(a), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1566; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(I), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

Hillary willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so.....and that's just the first part of the statement.

When you can actually understand the law. Then you can talk. Until then.....it would be best if you just sit back and take some notes with the learning.

 

I read the link. It doesn't support your argument.

I will confess, I don't think you have an argument. You can't articulate one that is cogent. You hate Hillary. We get it.

 

If you actually read it you would not have posted the above.

 

Dude... do you even believe the things you are saying?

Destruction of evidence is a crime. She deleted whatever she wanted, and is laying it on the techs whom we are asked to believe destroyed various emails on their own after being subpoenaed to retain them. She used a private server for everything, outside of the proper channels so that she could control what was retained by the public records act. She destroyed work related emails under the guise of being private... This is fact. What the (*)(*)(*)(*) are you trying to sell here?

 

This has ZERO to do with PRIVATE emails.

If you think her private emails to Sid are really public. Then get a judge to issue a warrant based on PROBABLE CAUSE.

 

And you think that makes it legal?

 

I like this answer to the first question linked in the OP:

Question:

[–]exproject 1 point 2 years ago

Hello all- I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP's (VERY VIP) email address from a bunch of archived email that I have both in a live Exchange mailbox, as well as a PST file. Basically, they don't want the VIP's email address exposed to anyone, and want to be able to either strip out or replace the email address in the to/from fields in all of the emails we want to send out.

I am not sure if something like this is possible with PowerShell, or exporting all of the emails to MSG and doing find/replaces with a batch processing program of some sort.

Does anyone have experience with something like this, and/or suggestions on how this might be accomplished?


Answer:

To my knowledge, there's no way to edit existing messages, that's a possibility for a discovery nightmare.

Sweetie, your nightmare is in full view and isn't about to end any time soon!

lolololol.

 

Sorry you don't understand what a subpoena is but your lack of education is not my problem.

 

So if her and Sid were sending emails back and forth that were consider work related. Emails we only know about because a hacker exposed them. You should be able to understand how people jump to the conclusion that there could be more. The way she went about this whole thing olny adds to the doubt that she's on the level.

 

Private emails aren't public records. She can destroy them all she wants.

Furthermore, emails go to people. Those people have them on their servers, and the people they send them to others who have them of their servers, etc., etc.

If you think grandma Hillary ever had the thought enter her mind that digital records could be permanently annihilated then you really have gone off the rails on this crazy Trump train. That is just an insane belief.

 

Again....are you slow on the uptake. What confused with Comey saying they recovered the Deleted work emails.

You do understand that one isn't suppose to delete classified materials, Right. Tell us that much has at least filtered thru.

 

Then that begs the question. Why would her tech need to change her email address on emails that would be destroyed? Bet you still don't get it.

 

That who considers work related?

Vladimir Putin?
Donald Trump?
Trey Gowdy?

I will decide what my work emails are and which are private. Why would you think it is OK for Obama or me to decide that for you?

- - - Updated - - -

I get it just fine. You have nothing. If you did. She would be prosecuted. But since there is nothing, there is nothing to prosecute.

 

Because she was using a private server in an official capacity. Had she been using a gov server we would not be having this conversation.

 

shows what you know, what purpose would striping Clinton email address out of email headers on her own server do?

Clinton was not hiding her email address it was known to the public, she had a private server, so any emails on the server were hers, I think the right is really really reaching on this one

 

where did you get your law degree, failure to comply with a subpoena from congress amounts to contempt of congress, which can be a punished action... just because they rarely ever do so does not mean its not possible to do so... how many postings in this thread are you going to make that are just flat out factually incorrect...

as much as I hate generic wikipedias... you may want to read up... they cite numerous cases on various angles, its a real thing, ignore a subpoena, you can be arrested...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress

they even have the very short and brief list of people actually charged with contempt of congress for refusing to adhere to a subpoena... you'll also notice, in most of those cases the people eventually just complied because it wasn't worth sitting in federal prison for a year... hell even Eric Holder was found in contempt, Lois Lerner also... its a short list for a reason, most want it rarely used to punish those who refuse to answer question or provide evidence requested, because some day it'll be used against them...

 

Right, if she wasn't a grandmother like virtually every grandmother who is anxious if you try to get them to use more than one gadget to access digital media. That is hardly interesting.

My father was in the electronic intelligence business his entire career, in the Air Force and private sector. He was so irked when the government wanted Apple to crack the code of the San Bernadino shooter’s iPhone. He was describing things I still don't understand.

Despite that level of expertise, my father will not communicate electronically any other way than using AOL and a AOL email account, on a desk top computer. We can't get him to use an iPad, a laptop or a phone, even though he now needs a walker to get to the computer room.

He is VERY typical.

 

Comey outlined plenty and even more damning evidence comes out but you seem to think that just because the Obama administration doesn't prosecute that nothing wrong has been done.

 

The GOP led congress is a kangaroo court. And everyone knows it. Incarceration of a nominee of the other party would rightly cause a constitutional crisis.

 

Meh, I've been in computers probably longer than many on this forum of been alive (45 years) and I communicate in a variety of different formats.

 

Again, I couldn't care less what Comey’s opinion of her is.

She didn't commit a crime, nor anything even close to a crime. That is why she isn't being charged and prosecuted.

 

Ahh the old hillay is to stupid to know better excuse. She knew exactly what she was doing.

This is a weak excuse. Why would you want some one so inept making decisoins about cyber warfare?

Oh and you don't need more then one device for multipe email addresses.

 

I think YOU CANT JUST covers it quite well.

 

everyone knew her email, all they had to do was look it up, what was new was she was running for President and the Benghazi witch hunt was failing, they needed something new

.