RE: clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DavidJames

Penultimate Amazing
D
Joined
Sep 17, 2001
Messages
10,493
Location
Front Range, CO
RE: clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

16.5 said:
Hillary could have avoided this whole situation if she had just decided not to indulge her rank paranoia, and put her selfish interests ahead of the Nation.
Click to expand...
use her own server. That, I would agree with.

What you wrote is simply mind reading unbecoming of and not in the spirit of this forum, also which says much more about you then HRC.

The old thread was getting a bit long in the tooth. I created this new thread for your continued enjoyment. As always, please keep your arms and legs inside the ride at all times and thank you for comming to Six Flags Great Amer..no, that's not right

As always, please mind your ps & qs.

The old thread was here
Posted By: kmortis
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DavidJames said:
use her own server. That, I would agree with.

What you wrote is simply mind reading unbecoming of and not in the spirit of this forum, also which says much more about you then HRC.
Click to expand...

Hillary ain't a member of the forum, so I can accurately describe her as a pathologically self absorbed congenital liar who is utterly unfit to run for dog catcher let alone President while fully embracing the "spirit of the forum."

I, on the other hand, am a member of the forum... so kindly do try to embrace the letter if not the "spirit" of the forum.

Namaste
 
Last edited:
Geez, I wonder if he applies the same standard to people who malign George Bush...
 
Geez, I wonder what he thinks about people who malign conservatives. Surely there's not a double standard!
 
Do not personalize the argument. Keep it civil. Keep it on topic. the topic is not the other posters, no matter how wrong you think they are; how much they annoy you or any other excuse you think of to justify your not following the MA.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: kmortis
 
TheL8Elvis said:
And of course, no one is ever going to prove she wasn't hacked, right ? But it would be silly to ask someone to prove a negative, wouldn't it ?
Click to expand...
16.5 said:
No it would not be silly to ask Hillary to prove she wasn't hacked, because basic damage controls dictate treating an uncontrolled server as compromised unless shown otherwise. Further, she had exclusive control over the server and we know she took steps to modify/delete the data on it.
Click to expand...

16.5, would you mind fleshing out how Clinton can prove that she wasn't hacked? As far as I know, it's impossible to prove a negative, so this appears to be an unprovable request.
 
wareyin said:
16.5, would you mind fleshing out how Clinton can prove that she wasn't hacked? As far as I know, it's impossible to prove a negative, so this appears to be an unprovable request.
Click to expand...

There are any number of diagnostic and forensic tools that one can use to evaluate a server, unfortunately, Hillary's delay in making the server available for independent inspection has likely compromised the utility of those tools.
 
16.5 said:
There are any number of diagnostic and forensic tools that one can use to evaluate a server, unfortunately, Hillary's delay in making the server available for independent inspection has likely compromised the utility of those tools.
Click to expand...

None of those tools makes it possible to prove a negative, though.

eta: The tools you mention might say that no evidence of a hack has been found, but they will not be able to definitively say that no hack had occurred.
 
Last edited:
wareyin said:
None of those tools makes it possible to prove a negative, though.
Click to expand...

Sure, but they at least can say that an examination produced no evidence of a compromise, which is at least suggestive, even if not proof.

But of course, no such effort was made. It appears that Hillary didn't care if her server was compromised, so long as it wasn't public knowledge. In fact, it's clear that if it had been compromised, she would prefer that nobody know it was compromised rather than let the FBI find out and be able to use that information in its counter-intelligence efforts.
 
Ziggurat said:
Sure, but they at least can say that an examination produced no evidence of a compromise, which is at least suggestive, even if not proof.

But of course, no such effort was made. It appears that Hillary didn't care if her server was compromised, so long as it wasn't public knowledge. In fact, it's clear that if it had been compromised, she would prefer that nobody know it was compromised rather than let the FBI find out and be able to use that information in its counter-intelligence efforts.
Click to expand...

You are basing these assumptions on your extensive knowledge of Clinton's server protocols, I take it?
 
16.5 (via the other thread)

Oh man! You are so close to a breakthrough.

No it would not be silly to ask Hillary to prove she wasn't hacked, because basic damage controls dictate treating an uncontrolled server as compromised unless shown otherwise. Further, she had exclusive control over the server and we know she took steps to modify/delete the data on it.

Sorry if you don't think that is "fair" but Hillary could have avoided this whole situation if she had just decided not to indulge her rank paranoia, and put her selfish interests ahead of the Nation.
Click to expand...

Where does that highlighted come from? Is that in an IT security handbook?
 
wareyin said:
You are basing these assumptions on your extensive knowledge of Clinton's server protocols, I take it?
Click to expand...

I don't need extensive knowledge of Clinton's server protocols. I can base this on the fact that she didn't hand it over to the FBI immediately upon learning that there might be classified information in those emails. And that's being generous in assuming that she didn't know there was classified information in the emails until that was made public.
 
The way I think this is going to go:
1. The FBI concludes their investigation with a report
2. Clinton is not indicted
3. The report criticizes Clinton for the routine sending and receiving of material that should have been judged confidential whether it was marked so or not. Possibly this is couched in a way that is critical in general of the State Department on this and Clinton is portrayed as just another bad actor with regard to this.
4. Clinton is criticized for the presence of top secret material that she should have reported to the appropriate authorities on her server.
5. The report discusses the physical security of the server and the backup media if it exists.
6. The report discusses what is knowable from the logs about legitimate and illegitimate access to the server and what is not knowable.
7. Eric Hoteham is identified along with other people that were involved with setting up and maintaining the server.
8. Clinton's recovered private business and personal emails are not made public. No smoking gun is found of other criminal activity in her private business emails.

I think this is close to a best case scenario for Clinton. There are many ways that things could go a whole lot worse for her. Even assuming it goes this well for Clinton, the report is going to lead to widespread criticism of Clinton from non-partisan sources and she may not be able to win the key swing states.
 
Last edited:
davefoc said:
... the report is going to lead to widespread criticism of Clinton ...
Click to expand...
no matter what it says.

History is clear, attacking Clinton for any and everything is the GOP plan to defeat her.

And as for the Biden honeymoon, just wait. If he enters the race the Biden Gaffes will reemerge. It's the only way the GOP knows how to campaign.
Aug. 23, 1987

"I started thinking as I was coming over here, Why is it that Joe Biden is the first in his family ever to go to a university?"

— Joe Biden, during his first presidential run, lifting passages and even gestures from a speech by Neil Kinnock without giving credit to the leader of the British Labour Party.

Biden's problems continued when C-SPAN footage surfaced two weeks later showing Biden inflating his academic record at law school. (His claims included one that he finished in the top half of his class at Syracuse Law School; he graduated 76th of 85.) Though he later called the accusations of plagiarism "much ado about nothing," he dropped out of the race on Sept. 23.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
no matter what it says.

History is clear, attacking Clinton for any and everything is the GOP plan to defeat her.

And as for the Biden honeymoon, just wait. If he enters the race the Biden Gaffes will reemerge. It's the only way the GOP knows how to campaign.
Click to expand...

Hillary is the architect of her own problems, she set up the cowboy server for her own selfish reasons and now has to face the repercussions.

I did get a huge laugh how you accuse the "GOP" of going to attack Biden while going ahead and attacking Biden.*:D

*Par for the course for Hillary and her fans: See, Obama, Barack and Sid Blumenthal's release of the Rev. Wright tape....
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
no matter what it says.

History is clear, attacking Clinton for any and everything is the GOP plan to defeat her.

And as for the Biden honeymoon, just wait. If he enters the race the Biden Gaffes will reemerge. It's the only way the GOP knows how to campaign.
Click to expand...

I don't know about "no matter what it says". My prediction here is that the variety of problems with the handling of classified material, particularly on a home brew personal server will rightly be criticized by the non-partisan mainstream media.

There are many ways I might be wrong with my prediction. The FBI may not issue a report. If it does issue a report it may not be critical of Clinton. Yes, Clinton will be routinely blasted on Hannity and Company no matter what happens, but I said mainstream media and I think actual facts will be required before the Clinton bashing begins there.

I don't know about Biden. Both Gore and Kerry were stronger candidates and they lost so I wasn't claiming Biden as the panacea but the Republican process looks like it is going to produce a candidate that will not win a single blue state and thry would have struggled mightily in the swing states. This election was Clinton's to lose and with this email scandal she just might have lost it. It would be helpful if she could just take all the grief and bad press all at once, but the way this is going this scandal is going to last for a long time as new information gradually trickles out and the Republicans exploit it with the Benghazi hearing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom