Ed clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kestrel said:
Courts have routinely allowed the government to delay FOIA requests for years.

This is rather clearly a fishing expedition. An investigation that didn't start with a crime but will continue as long as certain GOP operatives remain in a position to keep it going.
Click to expand...

The AP issued the FOIA request to State, not "GOP Operatives."

the AP sued State to compel compliance with FOIA, not "GOP Operatives."

The Judge in the lawsuit that the AP sued State to compel compliance with FOIA, said “I am a little bit mystified that the government is not more forthcoming in just answering questions that will help this case proceed on a systematic basis, and on a basis that will allow everyone to get the answers that will eventually help resolve these cases."

protip: The AP's suit against State did not cover Benghazi. (It covered: 1. schedules; 2. Huma Abedin; 3. Bil laden; 4. BAE Systems; 5. NSA snooping) So...
 
Last edited:
Kestrel said:
Courts have routinely allowed the government to delay FOIA requests for years.

This is rather clearly a fishing expedition. An investigation that didn't start with a crime but will continue as long as certain GOP operatives remain in a position to keep it going.
Click to expand...

Your court argument is a total red herring. It's so far removed from the facts that to bring it up seems to be an intent to mislead. Even were this the case, and it is not, it still would not serve as a justification as to why Clinton did not turn over government records as required by law.

Almost all FOIA requests are, definitionally, fishing expeditions. You ask to see everything usually because the agency you are requesting it from are trying to not make something public. You aren't asking for what you have but what you don't have.

FOIA request, among other features, exposes crimes and what the government is doing when it shouldn't be doing it. It's the most powerful tool we have as citizens to see what is being done on our behalf (or to us).
 
 
Calls for Clinton to turn over server grow.

In light of the disclosure that the IG's have requested the Justice Department to open a criminal inquiry, the calls for Hillary to turn over her cowboy server grow louder and more forceful.

“Two inspector generals appointed by President Obama have now called on the Justice Department to investigate Secretary Clinton’s mishandling of classified email. If Secretary Clinton truly has nothing to hide, she can prove it by immediately turning over her server to the proper authorities and allowing them to examine the complete record,” House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a statement Friday.
Click to expand...

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/2...renew-calls-for-clintons-private-email-server

Check back to this thread frequently for late breaking developments.
 
Rather then simply posting and running, there are a few questions outstanding.
16.5 said:
dj: What crime did Hillary commit?
Click to expand...
DavidJames said:
Based on your response, you aren't able to provide a quote from me that you attributed to me. Did you misread, did you misremember, did you out and out lie? Attributing words to a member they didn't say? Is that a rules violation?
Click to expand...
and
DavidJames said:
Please tell us who you think those posters are? Please include the quotes which you think suggest they would vote for her and allow them to respond to your claims.
Click to expand...
 
16.5 said:
Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.

The request follows an assessment in a June 29 memo by the inspectors general for the State Department and the intelligence agencies that Mrs. Clinton’s private account contained “hundreds of potentially classified emails.”

While it is certainly gratifying to see these developments, I am sure that everyone joins me in urging the Justice Department to act without delay.
Click to expand...

Do you even read the links you post?

In the course of the email review, State Department officials determined that some information in the messages should be retroactively classified. In the 3,000 pages that were released, for example, portions of two dozen emails were redacted because they were upgraded to “classified status.” But none of those were marked as classified at the time Mrs. Clinton handled them.
In a second memo to Mr. Kennedy, sent on July 17, the inspectors general said that at least one email made public by the State Department contained classified information. The inspectors general did not identify the email or reveal its substance.

Apparently, Boehner does not understand what retroactive means:

16.5 said:
In light of the disclosure that the IG's have requested the Justice Department to open a criminal inquiry, the calls for Hillary to turn over her cowboy server grow louder and more forceful.
“Two inspector generals appointed by President Obama have now called on the Justice Department to investigate Secretary Clinton’s mishandling of classified email. If Secretary Clinton truly has nothing to hide, she can prove it by immediately turning over her server to the proper authorities and allowing them to examine the complete record,” House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a statement Friday.
Click to expand...



http://thehill.com/policy/defense/2...renew-calls-for-clintons-private-email-server

Check back to this thread frequently for late breaking developments.
Click to expand...

Does 16.5 understand what retroactive means?
 
wareyin said:
Do you even read the links you post?

In the course of the email review, tate Department officials determined that some information in the messages should be retroactively classified. In the 3,000 pages that were released, for example, portions of two dozen emails were redacted because they were upgraded to “classified status.” But none of those were marked as classified at the time Mrs. Clinton handled them.

In a second memo to Mr. Kennedy, sent on July 17, the inspectors general said that at least one email made public by the State Department contained classified information. The inspectors general did not identify the email or reveal its substance.

Apparently, Boehner does not understand what retroactive means:

Does 16.5 understand what retroactive means?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do understand that the IG's have identified HUNDREDS of potentially classified documents and thus have requested a criminal investigation.

I also read the spin which you have cherry picked while ignoring the fact that a criminal investigation has been requested, "retroactive" designation of a hand full of them or not.

Excellent cherry picking, tho.
 
Last edited:
16.5 said:
Yes, I do understand that the IG's have identified HUNDREDS of potentially classified documents and thus have requested a criminal investigation.

I also read the spin which you have cherry picked while ignoring the fact that a criminal investigation has been requested, "retroactive" designation of a hand full of them or not.

Excellent cherry picking, tho.
Click to expand...

Speaking of cherry picking, did you catch the "potentially" qualifier? Did you notice that the investigation is being requested over the State Dept's handling of Clinton's emails, not Clinton's handling?

I mean, if you are looking for spin, you already has it!
 
wareyin said:
Speaking of cherry picking, did you catch the "potentially" qualifier? Did you notice that the investigation is being requested over the State Dept's handling of Clinton's emails, not Clinton's handling?

I mean, if you are looking for spin, you already has it!
Click to expand...

Sure I did, I typed it! thanks for hiliting it for some odd reason.

Ummm, Hillary was in charge of the State Department then and the documents were mishandled when they were sent and stored on her personal server.

If you think the subject of the criminal investigation does not include Hillary's handling, well I am just going to wish you the best of luck on that!
 
16.5 said:
Sure I did, I typed it! thanks for hiliting it for some odd reason.

Ummm, Hillary was in charge of the State Department then and the documents were mishandled when they were sent and stored on her personal server.

If you think the subject of the criminal investigation does not include Hillary's handling, well I am just going to wish you the best of luck on that!
Click to expand...

Ah, I see you have not read your own link. The requested investigation is not over the handling of emails that were not classified at the time Clinton was Secretary of State. The requested investigation is over the handling of emails after they were retroactively deemed classified, after being made public June 30, 2015. Was Clinton Secretary of State on June 30, 2015?
 
wareyin said:
Ah, I see you have not read your own link. The requested investigation is not over the handling of emails that were not classified at the time Clinton was Secretary of State. The requested investigation is over the handling of emails after they were retroactively deemed classified, after being made public June 30, 2015. Was Clinton Secretary of State on June 30, 2015?
Click to expand...

No, that is utterly completely wrong. That in fact makes no sense at all.... In fact the article specifically mentions that the memo was sent to Undersecretary Kennedy on June 29....
 
16.5 said:
No, that is utterly completely wrong. That in fact makes no sense at all.... In fact the article specifically mentions that the memo was sent to Undersecretary Kennedy on June 29....
Click to expand...

Wow, let me walk you through it: the memo issued on June 29 was not the request for criminal investigation. "The request follows an assessment in a June 29 memo by the inspectors general for the State Department and the intelligence agencies that Mrs. Clinton’s private account contained “hundreds of potentially classified emails.” The memo was written to Patrick F. Kennedy, the under secretary of state for management."

Follows means came after.

"The department is now reviewing some 55,000 pages of emails. A first batch of 3,000 pages was made public on June 30.

In the course of the email review, State Department officials determined that some information in the messages should be retroactively classified. In the 3,000 pages that were released, for example, portions of two dozen emails were redacted because they were upgraded to “classified status.” But none of those were marked as classified at the time Mrs. Clinton handled them.

In a second memo to Mr. Kennedy, sent on July 17, the inspectors general said that at least one email made public by the State Department contained classified information. The inspectors general did not identify the email or reveal its substance.

The memos were provided to The New York Times by a senior government official."

On July 17, 2015 the inspectors general sent a memo claiming that at least one email made public on June 30, 2015 contained classified information. Note that July 17, 2015 is after June 30, 2015, and further that both dates are well after Clinton ceased being Secretary of State.



*all hilighting and bolding mine
 
Who gives a flying **** other than the ever popular conspiracy nuts and the republickers who use them??????
 
jhunter1163 said:
You do understand that DOJ is under no obligation to actually proceed with a criminal investigation?
Click to expand...

that depends how one defines "obligation."

At this stage, I do not think it makes sense to speculate and I am sure that we all remain optimistic that the DoJ will do their job and let the facts fall where they may.

It is nice, however, to get vindication of the concerns that we have all discussed for so long.

Lets hope we can keep this momentum going!
 
wareyin said:
Wow, let me walk you through it: the memo issued on June 29 was not the request for criminal investigation. "The request follows an assessment in a June 29 memo by the inspectors general for the State Department and the intelligence agencies that Mrs. Clinton’s private account contained “hundreds of potentially classified emails.” The memo was written to Patrick F. Kennedy, the under secretary of state for management."

Follows means came after....
Click to expand...

:eye-poppi Um, you are completely wrong that the request for a criminal investigation involves handling of documents after June 30. That claim is utterly ludicrous...
 
16.5 said:
:eye-poppi Um, you are completely wrong that the request for a criminal investigation involves handling of documents after June 30. That claim is utterly ludicrous...
Click to expand...

Somehow, I am sure accidentally, you snipped the part of my post containing the quotes which prove you wrong. Let me repeat them for you:

"The department is now reviewing some 55,000 pages of emails. A first batch of 3,000 pages was made public on June 30.

In the course of the email review, State Department officials determined that some information in the messages should be retroactively classified. In the 3,000 pages that were released, for example, portions of two dozen emails were redacted because they were upgraded to “classified status.” But none of those were marked as classified at the time Mrs. Clinton handled them.

In a second memo to Mr. Kennedy, sent on July 17, the inspectors general said that at least one email made public by the State Department contained classified information. The inspectors general did not identify the email or reveal its substance."

3000 pages were made public on June 30, 2015. At least one email in those pages contained information that had been retroactively deemed classified, according to the inspectors general. The requested criminal investigation is in regards to the State Dept releasing at least one email on June 30, 2015, that contained (retroactively deemed) classified information.

Honestly, I wonder how you are missing this.
 
Face palm:

The Justice Department said Friday it has been asked to investigate the “potential compromise of classified information” in connection with the private e-mail account that Hillary Rodham Clinton used while serving as secretary of state.

None of those reviewed by his office “had classification or dissemination markings, but some included” intelligence community information “and should have been handled as classified, appropriately marked, and transmitted via a secure network,” McCullough wrote.

In other words, not kept on a cowboy server next to Bill's old Hustler Magazines.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...0bf598-31f8-11e5-97ae-30a30cca95d7_story.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom