Yes, she should.
Yes, she should.
Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields
Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy
The server has probably already been wiped with DBAN and maybe a belt-sander for good measure.
Yes. By using solely that server to conduct government business, she made it into government property. By deleting those emails without getting permission from the State Department, she is destroying tens of thousands of government documents. If she doesn't like that, then she is free to run for President, get elected, and change the law.
She has her own rules just like Slick Willie!
I think the server is already Government property, and as such she has no implied right of privacy,
from the Government. The Government can request an audit anytime they want!
Yeah and I think we should audit all politicians as well. Let normal people do it, and let them all go down. That's what its about right? What's fair is fair, and do you really think that we won't find revealing things from all government officials?
"We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary, and that’s crazy." -Reagan
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"
Cicero Marcus Tullius
On the one hand, State Dept policy gives her the option under certain circumstances and with approval to use a private email account. If it was determined the she used the account improperly, i.e., didn't set up email encryption or classified emails were hacked due to poor software security, then perhaps there could be a legal standing to seize her server. There may even be enough reasonable cause to do it because she didn't follow Dept. archiving protocol.
On the other hand, if she purchased the server out of pocket, then it's her property and there's little that can be done without a warrant. And what would be the justification? Suspicion of not turning over unclassified email pertaining to decisions she might have made as SoS via email? Sorry, but that doesn't cut it.
Although even I call her decision on this matter into question, I seriously doubt suspicion is enough to seizing her server.
PS: Her taxpayer salary - assuming she paid for the server - stops being the people's money the moment those tax dollars hit her bank account. Just saying...
Last edited by Objective Voice; 03-21-15 at 08:25 PM.