You are asserting that she did this to avoid oversight. If that were truly the case, wouldn't she have had a drastic hard drive failure and unreliable backups? That model has worked for IT departments for years.

Isn't it far more likely that she instructed someone on her staff to instruct someone in the back office to instruct some underpaid admin to just "make crap work so I can stop using dialup?"

I know we cannot prove a negative, but I'd bet $100 she couldn't edit an /etc/sendmail.cf without bricking it. (I know that's not your point, I just find it an amusing thought.)

Edit: parent was edited and my reply appears nonsensical. The parent stated that the server was set up to avoid oversight, which I do not believe has been established as true.

> parent was edited and my reply appears nonsensical. The parent stated that the server was set up to avoid oversight

Still does.

> I do not believe has been established as true

The only reason for someone in her position to set up a private email server is to avoid oversight - it's bizarre that anyone could think otherwise - the burden of proof is on her at this point.

But not in AOL servers, or yahoo. Private servers can be set up pretty freaking well for security. Not sure how hers were setup though.

The extremely low physical security of Hillary's server probably outweighs all of this.

It was just sitting in an office. A single person could have literally kicked in the door and waltzed off with a huge cache of state secrets, and we probably wouldn't even have a video tape of the theft.

The server was not secure enough to be storing state secrets. There's no arguing against this.

It wasn't accidental at all, they all knew they weren't on government email servers.