Lawsuit Filed Against Hilary For Racketeering (RICO)

[habsheaven]

if this is the case then your company needs to hire new tech people. you should have a backup on site and off site which would be "something sitting dormant with information on it".

also, the backup of your servers would take place before they were replaced.

also there is a major difference from a company destroying data to protect itself from theft and a person destroying data so the authorities can't see it.

but depending how long ago she did this and what all was replaced we can recover most of it. forensic recovery of data on devices and a network has come a long way, in fact it is what I went back to school for.

By using the word "dormant" I was referring to Duane's assertion that he keeps data on hard drives for 10 years or more. Of course you have backups on and off site. That's a given. Once you determine the data on the old servers and hard drives is obsolete you destroy it.

And no, there is no difference between companies and people destroying data. 2 years ago I bought a portable hard drive and purged both of my old PCs and both of my laptops and spent 6 months deleting stuff I no longer needed or wanted, after destroying the hard drives on all the devices.

[37jetson]

Okay Captain Obvious, thanks for that explanation as to why someone would erase a hard drive. Shockers, they want to hide/destroy their data on it. We destroy hard drives ALL the time in my office, and servers every time we upgrade. NOTHING sits dormant with information on it.

Kind of guessing that it is illegal for a business to destroy a hard drive with data, but of course we should not hold our highest ranking politicians accountable for intentionally destroying information. It would be hilarious if Stephen Harper's administration would do the same thing in Canada because we all know that you fully support what Hillary has done and see no problems with her actions.

[habsheaven]

Kind of guessing that it is illegal for a business to destroy a hard drive with data, but of course we should not hold our highest ranking politicians accountable for intentionally destroying information. It would be hilarious if Stephen Harper's administration would do the same thing in Canada because we all know that you fully support what Hillary has done and see no problems with her actions.

You would kind of be wrong. A private business can do whatever it wants to it's own intellectual property. As for Harper, if you knew anything about how he runs a government it would shock you. He is the complete opposite of transparent. He actively goes out of his way to keep the citizens in the dark. When he rarely holds a news scrum, he never takes questions. His whole political persona is scripted. He will go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers the country has known only rivalled by the likes of Kim Campbell and John Turner.

[duane1969]

Okay Captain Obvious, thanks for that explanation as to why someone would erase a hard drive. Shockers, they want to hide/destroy their data on it. We destroy hard drives ALL the time in my office, and servers every time we upgrade. NOTHING sits dormant with information on it.

Well I guess that since you do it that way then EVERYBODY must do it that way.

By the way, what do you do? Does your office have ANYTHING to do with national security? My guess is no it doesn't and my guess you are comparing apples and oranges and your office destroying an occasional hard drive has absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the former Secretary of State erasing a hard drive that had emails related to her job on it.

And hopefully this isn't too obvious...but destroying a hard drive that was in an office work station and erasing a hard drive that was in a main server which is specifically intended for storage are two entirely different things. So once again, apples/oranges.

[habsheaven]

Well I guess that since you do it that way then EVERYBODY must do it that way.

By the way, what do you do? Does your office have ANYTHING to do with national security? My guess is no it doesn't and my guess you are comparing apples and oranges and your office destroying an occasional hard drive has absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the former Secretary of State erasing a hard drive that had emails related to her job on it.

And hopefully this isn't too obvious...but destroying a hard drive that was in an office work station and erasing a hard drive that was in a main server which is specifically intended for storage are two entirely different things. So once again, apples/oranges.

I could respond the same to your original post:

"Well I guess that since you do it that way then EVERYBODY must do it that way."