Ed clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

Status
Not open for further replies.
JohnnyG said:
Are you suggesting she did not know her system was not approved for classified information storage? If she knew it, she is guilty, if not she should not be allowed to handle anything more dangerous than a Twinkie.
Click to expand...

No, if it wasn't clear, I'm suggesting her actions don't fit the description you posted. YMMV
 
TheL8Elvis said:
In a similar vein, I've been asking for a really long time in this thread ... how did the benghazi committee not know that HRC was running her own email server unitl recently. How is it that her email address could possibly a secret to so many people in govt for so long ?
Click to expand...

Well first of all, the Benghazi Committee has not been around for very long. Coincidentally, it was created after it was discovered that the Obama administration was playing fast and loose with their own documents (Rhodes Memo).

Second, when you ask for documents, the duty is on the person to disclose. No one at the State Department ever told anyone that the reason they were not turning over documents was because Hillary had them on a cowboy server. Hillary sure as hell did not mention it when she and kerry claimed that they were being transparent about the whole mess

Third, no one had a clue that Hillary ran all her emails through her own private account.

the whole thing came to a head in connection with FOIA litigation that had nothing to do with Benghazi.

tl;dr: They ********** up, they trusted her.

Bad move
 
Ziggurat said:
That's what you look for in a president? Someone who hasn't had charges filed against them?

You are welcome to that standard, but I'll set my sights a little higher.
Click to expand...

It's just such a shame that the Republicans aren't able to field a candidate that can beat her, isn't it?
 
logger said:
Because it shows she doesn't give a crap about security.

Leftist need to stop trying to polish this turd, just flush it down.
Click to expand...

sunmaster14 said:
Shhh! Ixnay ethay oodgay adviceway.

Logger's just trying to discourage you lefties. Don't you worry. There's still plenty of time to burnish this turd until it gleams like gold. This is just a little dump in the yellow brick road for Toto Dorothy.
Click to expand...

FFS! Can you guys give it a rest? This is an interesting read until you start waving around your petty adjectives.
 
16.5 said:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clintons-communications-problem-may-go-beyond-email/

So she was using an unsecured homebrew blackberry and she got the classified data from Huma Abedin and Jacob Sullivan, both of whom hold high places in her election Campaign.

Totally NOT Hillary's fault that her top staff sent her classified data and she hired them to help run her campaign.
Click to expand...

More importantly:
The first email, from April 2011, was forwarded to Clinton by aide Huma Abedin. It cited intelligence reports from the U.S. Africa Command on Libyan troop strength and movements.
Click to expand...

Intelligence reports containing foreign troop strength and movements are always classified information. This is not something that is ever done retroactively. It is not something that is a judgement call. We don't like to let people know what we have and to the extent we have it. It takes decades for this information to become declassified, usually long after the methods of data gathering and the data itself has become obsolete.

When it comes to knowingly, it's not a matter of proving that she knew but should she have known. And she should have known, given her security clearance level and position, that foreign troop strength and movements was classified information.

She should also have known that her private server was not an authorized location. This is why she is banging the "no classified information" drum so loudly.

People can continue with their "Cop of the Gaps" arguments. They state it's all noise until the IG makes a referral. They state that she is not the target while the FBI is all over her and her actions. They state that she hasn't been arrested while the investigation is recently started.
 
Leftus said:
More importantly:

Intelligence reports containing foreign troop strength and movements are always classified information. This is not something that is ever done retroactively. It is not something that is a judgement call. We don't like to let people know what we have and to the extent we have it. It takes decades for this information to become declassified, usually long after the methods of data gathering and the data itself has become obsolete.

When it comes to knowingly, it's not a matter of proving that she knew but should she have known. And she should have known, given her security clearance level and position, that foreign troop strength and movements was classified information.

She should also have known that her private server was not an authorized location. This is why she is banging the "no classified information" drum so loudly.
Click to expand...

Did you read this article ?
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/disputed-clinton-emails-identified/

It contained what Davis believed to be sensitive but unclassified information from U.S. Special Envoy to Libya Christopher Stevens -- "(SBU) Per Special Envoy Stevens," according to the email. The email mentioned the diplomat's concerns about departing from Benghazi and also detailed the "phased checkout" of Stevens' envoy delegation from the area.

The document, which is entirely unredacted, also includes references to military intelligence. "AFRICOM reported Qadhafi's forces took the eastern and western gates of Adjabiyah, with 5 vehicles at the eastern gate and 50 at the western gate," the email reads. "More Qadhafi forces are heading to Ajdabiyah from Brega." A government official with knowledge of the investigation tells CBS News that this was the section of the email that intelligence officials believe should have been marked "Classified" at the time it was sent.
...

...The government official says that doesn't change the fact that his email, which was eventually forwarded to Clinton, contained military intelligence that should have been marked "classified." "SBU" is a generic State Department classification level that is not used by the rest of the intelligence community.

The government official acknowledged that this kind of mistake is not unusual for the State Department when officials are discussing information gleaned from both intelligence and local sources.


Leftus said:
People can continue with their "Cop of the Gaps" arguments. They state it's all noise until the IG makes a referral. They state that she is not the target while the FBI is all over her and her actions. They state that she hasn't been arrested while the investigation is recently started.
Click to expand...

It's not simply people with their "Cop of the Gaps" stating that she is not the target ... it's the FBI.
(I understand you think this somehow means she actually is the target)
 
Leftus said:
..."Cop of the Gaps" arguments...
Click to expand...

Hey, I like that! "God of the Gaps" arguments are the ones with believers in God, constantly being proven wrong about their claims of God, keep having to pretend their God is in smaller and smaller minutia? Then a "Cop of the Gaps" argument would be something like believers that there are cops investigating Clinton, constantly being proven wrong, keep having to find smaller and smaller minutia that might be investigated, at some point?
 
I don't understand this whole attitude that as long as Hillary herself didn't actually commit a crime, then everything is OK.

No, that's a lie, I do understand it: it's blind partisan loyalty. I just don't sympathize with it.
 
Ziggurat said:
I don't understand this whole attitude that as long as Hillary herself didn't actually commit a crime, then everything is OK.

No, that's a lie, I do understand it: it's blind partisan loyalty. I just don't sympathize with it.
Click to expand...

If people aren't outraged that she didn't commit a crime then it's blind partisan loyalty. If people are outraged that she didn't commit a crime, it's what then?

That's right, "Skeptical". It's "skeptical". I forgot about this new wave pouring through the forum where everyone that agrees is skeptical, and everyone that doesn't is a moron that can't think properly.
 
plague311 said:
If people aren't outraged that she didn't commit a crime then it's blind partisan loyalty. If people are outraged that she didn't commit a crime, it's what then?

That's right, "Skeptical". It's "skeptical". I forgot about this new wave pouring through the forum where everyone that agrees is skeptical, and everyone that doesn't is a moron that can't think properly.
Click to expand...

So the category of things you can do which aren't actually crimes but are still very bad to do... that category simply doesn't exist?

That's not what skepticism means.

And if you can't recognize that running your own unsecured email server that people are sending you classified information on as Secretary of State is a very bad thing to do, then indeed, you cannot think properly.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
I'm not sure the assumption that day-to-day activities of SoS require email, much less access to classified email, is a good assumption.

My guess is she had lots of deputy-secretaries or some such to handle things. You send it to so-and-so, he will brief the SoS in person.
Click to expand...

Yes, that could be. I don't know either how the day-to-day activities of the State Department work. I would think that the Secretary of State may have need to communicate with Station Chiefs throughout the world and others in Washington while she traveled. In this day and age so much business communication is performed via e-mail. According to Hillary she sent an average of 20-30 business-related e-mails on her personal server per day throughout her tenure as Secretary of State, but none of those discussed classified information.

It could be that all classified info was communicated to her verbally or by hard copy. Though it seems odd that not once in four years did anyone want to send a file attachment to her.

As a (very) loose basis of comparison, my brother worked for the FBI in a Foreign Counter Intelligence group pre- and post- 9/11. He was not allowed to have anything on his personal e-mail, could not use his bureau car for any personal business, and had to use an encrypted cell phone for business. It may be very different from the State Department, but the FBI drilled into their employees the importance of the fact that their job dealt with sensitive information.


TheL8Elvis said:
In a similar vein, I've been asking for a really long time in this thread ... how did the benghazi committee not know that HRC was running her own email server unitl recently. How is it that her email address could possibly a secret to so many people in govt for so long ?
Click to expand...

That's a very good question. Anyone sending an e-mail to her should have recognized the e-mail address was different from others in the State Department. I'm assuming that her personal address was something like <hillary@clintonemail.com> whereas if she had a business e-mail it would have been <hillary@statedepartment.gov> or something like that.
 
Ziggurat said:
I don't understand this whole attitude that as long as Hillary herself didn't actually commit a crime, then everything is OK.
Click to expand...
That's a false dichotomy. It's amazing you even presented it.
Ziggurat said:
No, that's a lie, I do understand it: it's blind partisan loyalty. I just don't sympathize with it.
Click to expand...
That's a strawman. Not having a good skeptical day are you, sorry...
 
Monza said:
As a (very) loose basis of comparison, my brother worked for the FBI in a Foreign Counter Intelligence group pre- and post- 9/11. He was not allowed to have anything on his personal e-mail, could not use his bureau car for any personal business, and had to use an encrypted cell phone for business. It may be very different from the State Department, but the FBI drilled into their employees the importance of the fact that their job dealt with sensitive information.
Click to expand...

Your brother isn't a Clinton and the presumptive Democratic Nominee for the 2016 Presidential Election. Some laws don't apply to Hillary. She's special. Your brother is not. Get back in line, pleb.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom