Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 486 posts

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#51

Post by bpchaps »

I highly recommend that many others use FOIA to gather communication records of their elected officials.

About a month ago I received this pdf [1] (1700+ pages of email records) of Chicago's office of the mayor after about three months of resistance. Prior to that, it took a year and a half and a law suit to receive one week's worth of Chicago's mayor's logs [2] through Chicago's IT department. To my knowledge, prior to this work, records in volume have been impossible to get due to asinine rejections. The amount or resistance (and holy shit was there a lot) led me to run several chains of FOIA requests to gather bulk communication records.

Of note in the call records are many private investigator calls. I haven't had much chance to go through the email records and could use some help if anybody's interested.

[1] https://spaces.hightail.com/receive/oFwvr/fi-29853345-5f15-4... [2] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hgG79eIr8MbkjYrCvcTR... (four, mostly unstructured sheets)

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#52

Post by [deleted] »

mindcrime wrote: post #44
takeda wrote: post #40

And she still will be elected, because this year we had to have joke candidates on both sides. I guess it's probably the best time to vote 3rd party.

I honestly can't understand how anybody is considering voting for Clinton or Trump. If this world was anything close to reasonable, Gary Johnson would win in a landslide. shrug

[deleted]

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#53

Post by School-Cotton »

mcphage wrote: post #43
School-Cotton wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Bush administration ran private email servers to avoid FOIA requests, then nuked millions of saved emails when his term was up to avoid handing them over. Who cares? "But the other guys are corrupt too!" is not a great argument for your candidate. > I didn't see any huge circus or massive outcry about that. We can all agree this is a problem.

> We can all agree this is a problem. Funny how nobody seemed to think so until now.

Who cares? Literally what point are you making?

Dude, do you think this is a football game? That scoring a point against your opponent negates points scored against you?

I suspect a big chunk of the people complaining about this would have complained even harder when Bush did it (if what you say is true), if they had been old enough to be aware what was going on, and had social media like we do now.

So, what is your point? How does Bush doing it matter literally at all to whether Clinton should get in trouble?

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#54

Post by desdiv »

monochromatic wrote: post #25
xenadu02 wrote: post #11

> "As a PST file or exported MSG files, this could be done though, yes? > The issue is that these emails involve the private email address of someone you'd recognize, and we're trying to replace it with a placeholder address as to not expose it." From the way it reads it looks like he is asking how to bulk remove an email address from the archived messages so when they are turned over they don't contain the redacted…

We don't know the motive, but it seems at least equally plausible that this was in anticipation of responding to a discovery request that filtered on sender/recipient. > The Bush administration ran private email servers to avoid FOIA requests, then nuked millions of saved emails when his term was up to avoid handing them over. Citation needed if you're going to "correct the record."

He's probably referring to this:

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

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#55

Post by mark_l_watson »

I am getting even unhappier with the democratic national committee ranking members who did what they could to sabotage Sander's run for the nomination. Just my opinion, but as a democrat I think Sanders would have such an easier time winning the general election. I would like to see a major magazine do a "public shaming" article on the leading DNC actors who acted unfairly and non-ethically. I would like history to trash these people because they deserve it.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#56

Post by spinlock »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #37

Long-shot speculation: I wonder if the Democrats have decided that Hillary is going to lose against Trump. Maybe they, and not the GOP, are throwing her under a very fast bus. Does anyone know what happens in the unlikely event that Clinton is placed under indictment before the election? Does Kaine move up the ticket? Does the DNC pick someone else entirely? What options do the electors have?

Same thing that will happen with Trump although whatever that is isn't very clear. Though, I think it's a long shot that you indite clinton over this. She should be insulated. Trump, on the other hand, has been indited for TrumpU

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#57

Post by sillysaurus3 »

jimmywanger wrote: post #48
imron wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as her campaign camp looks like it's being run by a bunch of ~~clowns~~ as her campaign camp looks like it's being run by a bunch of criminals who delete incriminating evidence . FTFY

> being run by a bunch of criminals who delete incriminating evidence. I have no problems accepting the fact that politicians might hire crooks to do some things that are extra legal. The fact that they're incompetent criminals who get caught and who don't understand the internet, that worries me.

Can you help me understand your point of view?

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#58

Post by skylan_q »

mhomde wrote: post #35
danso wrote: post #2

The r/conspiracy thread where things unfolded: https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/53fw9x/bleachbi... One of several archived copies of the r/exchangeserver thread, "Remove or replace to/from address on archived emails?" (the user stonetear deleted his account during the r/conspiracy thread): http://archive.is/FXcao

Just when you thought this election couldn't get any weirder... there's a major scoop about Clinton on r/conspiracy

weirder

you have to admit, (fears of things going one way or another set aside) it's been pretty entertaining.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#59

Post by mkopinsky »

peteretep wrote: post #32

> Citation needed if you're > going to "correct the record." This is not Reddit, and it is not a place for accusing people of being paid shills. Please desist.

Where did he accuse anyone of that? All he asked for is a citation.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#60

Post by kevhito »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #37

Long-shot speculation: I wonder if the Democrats have decided that Hillary is going to lose against Trump. Maybe they, and not the GOP, are throwing her under a very fast bus. Does anyone know what happens in the unlikely event that Clinton is placed under indictment before the election? Does Kaine move up the ticket? Does the DNC pick someone else entirely? What options do the electors have?

I was getting ready to point out that Hillary really has a large lead, even if the day-to-day talking heads insist on making this and every race/issue seem as if it is 50/50 split. Then I checked 538.com [1]: they have her at 60% chance of winning -- pretty strong lead and hardly a normal time to throw someone under the bus -- but those graphs should be terrifying team Hillary.

[1] http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Post reply on HN