RE: clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

[Fudbucker]

Obama will allow Hillary to survive politically (hence the NDAs agents are forced to sign in advance of throwing out the whole investigation a few months from now). But he's going to make it clear to Hillary that he knows she screwed up big-time and he's doing her a big favor by eventually deep-sixing the investigation. It must be very gratifying to have the Clintons at your mercy. Of course, there will be little reward in the end. The Clintons are not known for showing gratitude.

I'm not sure Obama has any kind of pull left. Imagine you're one of the ones investigating this (or deciding whether to take it to a grand jury). If you thought there was something criminal in all this, it would be a hell of a trial.

Perversely, Clinton's fame and position may hurt her on this. Suppose some prosecutor thinks this is an iffy case. Might they be tempted to indict anyway, just for the chance of taking down Hillary Clinton?

 

[Fudbucker]

Any charges yet?

No, didn't think so. But now we have more investigating of the Clinton Foundation as if accusations or investigations were evidence of guilt.

It's ridiculous.

Of course FBI investigations are ridiculous. The head of the executive branch of government is obviously engaging in a partisan witch-hunt in a last desperate attempt to bring down the long-suffering Clintons.

Just as we all suspected, there can be no mistake now that Obama is part of the "vast right-wing conspiracy".

 

[Dog Town]

Of course FBI investigations are ridiculous. The head of the executive branch of government is obviously engaging in a partisan witch-hunt in a last desperate attempt to bring down the long-suffering Clintons.

Just as we all suspected, there can be no mistake now that Obama is part of the "vast right-wing conspiracy".

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS!

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Of course FBI investigations are ridiculous. The head of the executive branch of government is obviously engaging in a partisan witch-hunt in a last desperate attempt to bring down the long-suffering Clintons.

Just as we all suspected, there can be no mistake now that Obama is part of the "vast right-wing conspiracy".

Translation: It's not going the way you want it to go.

 

[Dog Town]

Translation: It's not going the way you want it to go.

I see your translator is broken. That or you are projecting, again!

 

[shuize]

I'll be interested to hear how Clinton explains ordering one of her underlings to remove the "Confidential" warning from the heading of a confidential document and send it unsecure.

My guess is another typical Clinton word game/throwing the underling under the bus.

 

[Dog Town]

I'll be interested to hear how Clinton explains ordering one of her underlings to remove the "Confidential" warning from the heading of a confidential document and send it unsecure.

My guess is another typical Clinton word game/throwing the underling under the bus.

Nope, better!
Not Clinton mind you, but one of her followers!

What was that excerpt supposed to mean? That Clinton had trouble getting a confidential fax so she had someone redact a document before emailing it?


That's not evidence.


Keep up this wishful thinking if it floats your boats.

Redacted!

 

[shuize]

Nope, better!
Not Clinton mind you, but one of her followers!


Redacted!

Yes, I figured it'd be something like this.

Clinton: "I never sent anything marked 'classified' when I sent it. If I ordered someone to remove the 'classified' warning and send it unsecure, that means I didn't send it. If it turns out there was classified material in the document, it's his fault for not taking it out."

On a related subject, did we ever get an answer as to why Sec. State Clinton just had to have her own separate, unsecure email system in the first place?

 

[Dog Town]

On a related subject, did we ever get an answer as to why Sec. State Clinton just had to have her own separate, unsecure email system in the first place?

Even her followers know this answer, as do you.

 

[shuize]

Even her followers know this answer, as do you.

Well, I think it was all about avoiding disclosure requirements. That can't really be her stated reason ...

 

[Newtons Bit]

Yes, I figured it'd be something like this.

Clinton: "I never sent anything marked 'classified' when I sent it. If I ordered someone to remove the 'classified' warning and send it unsecure, that means I didn't send it. If it turns out there was classified material in the document, it's his fault for not taking it out."

On a related subject, did we ever get an answer as to why Sec. State Clinton just had to have her own separate, unsecure email system in the first place?

Yea, her claim is starting to ring just a little hollow now that she's been caught telling people to strip the markings and send things unsecured...

 

[Dog Town]

Yea, her claim is starting to ring just a little hollow now that she's been caught telling people to strip the markings and send things unsecured...

Not to her religious followers! Their critical thought is in the off position.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

What was "the heading"?

It's being assumed here the heading was simply an identifier that the fax was confidential. But couldn't the heading have included other identifying information that when removed made the memo benign?

It was a talking points memo. Talking points for whom/what meeting?

Let's hear the whole story before everyone starts drooling over themselves.

Clinton said of the memo:

“The important point here is that I had great confidence because I worked with Jake Sullivan for years,” Clinton said. “He is the most meticulous, careful person you could possibly do business with, and he knew exactly what was and wasn’t appropriate.”

Without knowing what was eventually sent or other circumstances about the incident, there is not enough information to really say what this was about.

 

[The Big Dog]

What was "the heading"?

It's being assumed here the heading was simply an identifier that the fax was confidential. But couldn't the heading have included other identifying information that when removed made the memo benign?

It was a talking points memo. Talking points for whom/what meeting?

Let's hear the whole story before everyone starts drooling over themselves.

Clinton said of the memo:

Without knowing what was eventually sent or other circumstances about the incident, there is not enough information to really say what this was about.

what nonsense. Sheer nonsense. Hey, this thing that Hillary did might have an innocent spin, so until they release classified information about it, we should give pathological liar Hillary a pass, 'k?

I did enjoy the part where she said that she trusts Jake Sullivan to disobey her improper orders.

Hey maybe Jake should run for President, huh?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Here's what's wrong with Jeb Bush saying Hillary Clinton is under FBI investigation

Actually, Clinton is not under FBI investigation. The inquiry to which Bush refers revolves around the private email server Clinton used while serving as secretary of state. And it is not a criminal investigation. ...

In July 2015, the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community sent what is called a security referral to members of the executive branch. A security referral is essentially a notification that classified information might exist in a location outside of the government’s possession. In this case, the location was Clinton’s private email server.

Soon after, the New York Times incorrectly reported that the inspectors general requested a criminal investigation into Clinton’s email use — as opposed to a security referral. But the newspaper later issued two corrections.

And regarding the accusation the investigation is now looking into the Clinton Foundation:

Earlier this month, Fox News reported that the FBI was broadening its investigation to look into whether any connection between the State Department under Clinton and the nonprofit Clinton Foundation violated public corruption laws. Clinton denied that FBI was pursuing this line of inquiry.

However, Fox bases its report on unnamed sources, so we cannot independently verify it, nor have any major media outlets.

 

[sunmaster14]

Here's what's wrong with Jeb Bush saying Hillary Clinton is under FBI investigation

More proof of Politifact's ridiculous bias. Hillary Clinton is not being investigated by the FBI, only her actions are? I guess it doesn't count as an investigation of Hillary Clinton personally unless and until they do a transvaginal ultrasound on her.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Right, despite the fact they spelled out the evidence, the NYT retraction, the fact only Fox has reported the investigation expanded into to the Clinton Foundation and that was based on an anonymous source none of the other news broadcast stations confirmed ... yep, the report isn't what you want to hear, it must be biased.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

More proof of Politifact's ridiculous bias. Hillary Clinton is not being investigated by the FBI, only her actions are? I guess it doesn't count as an investigation of Hillary Clinton personally unless and until they do a transvaginal ultrasound on her.

From SEPTEMBER ... YAWN....

[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/state-departments-account-of-e-mail-request-differs-from-clintons/2015/09/22/54cd66bc-5ed9-11e5-8e9e-dce8a2a2a679_story.html"]Throughout the controversy over her use of a private e-mail system while she was secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton has described her decision last year to turn over thousands of work-related e-mails as a response to a routine-sounding records request.

....

But State Department officials provided new information Tuesday that undercuts Clinton’s characterization. They said the request was not simply about general rec*ord-keeping but was prompted entirely by the discovery that Clinton had exclusively used a private e-mail system.

"You're telling me something I don't know," Clinton said.

And this joker wants to be president?

[/URL]

From the link:The FBI has been investigating the security of Clinton’s e-mail setup. Officials have said Clinton is not a target of the inquiry.

Keep trying, though. I am sure those un-biased un-named FOX news sources are right on top of .... something.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Notice that sunmaster14 changed the word "e-mails" used by the official wording to "Clinton's actions".

No, looking at emails to determine if any of them need to be addressed doe not mean one is looking for someone to blame for something. I said this way back at the beginning of the thread, there are FOIA requests to release the emails into the public sphere. Before that is done with any of these kinds of documents, they must be reviewed and either redacted or the request denied if need be.

Given that batches of emails are being released into the public sphere is evidence that is indeed what the FBI is doing and that most of what was in the emails was not considered confidential. That a small amount of it was, is something that would be found in any equally large batch of similar documents.

There is nothing to see here but Breitbart's wet dreams.

 

[The Big Dog]

Notice that sunmaster14 changed the word "e-mails" used by the official wording to "Clinton's actions".

No, looking at emails to determine if any of them need to be addressed doe not mean one is looking for someone to blame for something. I said this way back at the beginning of the thread, there are FOIA requests to release the emails into the public sphere. Before that is done with any of these kinds of documents, they must be reviewed and either redacted or the request denied if need be.

Given that batches of emails are being released into the public sphere is evidence that is indeed what the FBI is doing and that most of what was in the emails was not considered confidential. That a small amount of it was, is something that would be found in any equally large batch of similar documents.

There is nothing to see here but Breitbart's wet dreams.

You think the IG's made a national security intelligence referral to the FBI of documentsthat contained top secret information so that the FBI could review them for foia reasons?

That is utterly ridiculous, so much so that it seems like active disinformation designed to mislead people reading tbe thread.