RE: clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

[Skeptic Ginger]

More than one person.

Criminal Law and Procedure

"Some observers claim ..." Never investigated or invoked. If naked assertions are now fact you might want to review what you've been saying to others about this whole email thing.

Rather than vague concepts or naked assertions, lets take a look at an actual case http://openjurist.org/49/f3d/1162/united-states-v-brown

When testimony is elicited before a grand jury that is "attempting to obtain useful information in furtherance of its investigation", United States v. Devitt, 499 F.2d 135, 140 (7th Cir.1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 975, 95 S.Ct. 1974, 44 L.Ed.2d 466 (1975), or "conducting a legitimate investigation into crimes which had in fact taken place within its jurisdiction", United States v. Chevoor, 526 F.2d 178, 185 (1st Cir.1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 935, 96 S.Ct. 1665, 48 L.Ed.2d 176 (1976), the perjury trap doctrine is, by definition, inapplicable.

Asking questions about sex with people who work for him in a sexual harassment investigation is 100% on point.

In http://openjurist.org/440/f2d/304

In short, while a public employee may not be put to the Hobson's Choice of self-incrimination or unemployment, he is not privileged to resort to the third alternative, i.e., lying. The Supreme Court has squarely so held. United States v. Knox, 396 U.S. 77, 82 (1969).2 Judge Motley properly rejected appellant's testimonial compulsion claim.

Your claims have no merit.

Don't you look at your posts to see if they need major editing before (or soon after) you post them? Sheesh.

I'm not going to argue this bull crap with you or anyone else. You're making naked assertions yourself. Starr had no reason to inject Clinton's affair with Lewinsky into the Jones case. It was not relevant. Clinton didn't force himself on Lewinsky. There was no pattern that made it relevant to Jones' accusations.

Period.

I posted an opinion held by many that it was entrapment and made the case for it. You can rebut all you want. I'm not going to change my mind and neither are you.

No sense wasting time on a decades old, long since ended debate. You Clinton haters don't give a rip, you see evil where you want to see it.

 

[The Big Dog]

You left out the key words, "under oath". And yes, leaving out key words makes your argument a straw man.

They didn't force him to lie, he did that on his own, they forced him to lie under oath
Hee hee!

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Interesting that like Starr not finding anything in Whitewater so he dug into an unrelated sexual matter with Bill, and Issa/Gowdy not finding anything in Benghazi so they dug into Clinton's emails, now we have nothing coming out of the emails so let's switch to Bill's philandering from 30+ years ago. Always a safe bet for trashing someone's reputation.

 

[cmikes]

Interesting that like Starr not finding anything in Whitewater so he dug into an unrelated sexual matter with Bill, and Issa/Gowdy not finding anything in Benghazi so they dug into Clinton's emails, now we have nothing coming out of the emails so let's switch to Bill's philandering from 30+ years ago. Always a safe bet for trashing someone's reputation.

Really? An investigation that led to the conviction of fifteen people, including the sitting governor of Arkansas as well a bunch of Bill and Hillary Clinton's business and law partners is "not finding anything"? indeed.

The only reason that Bill escaped impeachment charges was because people like Jim Tucker, David Hale and Jim and Susan McDougal refused to testify against him and the only reason that Hillary escaped charges is because the Rose Law firm billing records somehow mysteriously disappeared when subpoenaed until after the investigation, whereupon they were found in the White House residency. But it's OK, they're democrats.

Also, Starr recommended that a new independent counsel be appointed to investigate Clinton's perjury in the Jones civil suit, it was Janet Reno that refused his recommendation, so you can thank her for Starr continuing the perjury investigation.

 

[logger]

Interesting that like Starr not finding anything in Whitewater so he dug into an unrelated sexual matter with Bill, and Issa/Gowdy not finding anything in Benghazi so they dug into Clinton's emails, now we have nothing coming out of the emails so let's switch to Bill's philandering from 30+ years ago. Always a safe bet for trashing someone's reputation.

It might be brought up because Bill still has democrat women under his spell.

 

[shuize]

You left out the key words, "under oath". And yes, leaving out key words makes your argument a straw man.

Is it your argument that lying under oath makes it better?

Clinton True Believer: "We can't expect Clinton to tell the truth about what he did. And we really can't expect Clinton to tell the truth under oath."

Funny.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Is it your argument that lying under oath makes it better?

Clinton True Believer: "We can't expect Clinton to tell the truth about what he did. And we really can't expect Clinton to tell the truth under oath."

Funny.

If you want to address my actual argument, feel free. If you want to play with straw men, you're on your own.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Really? An investigation that led to the conviction of fifteen people, including the sitting governor of Arkansas as well a bunch of Bill and Hillary Clinton's business and law partners is "not finding anything"? indeed.

The only reason that Bill escaped impeachment charges was because people like Jim Tucker, David Hale and Jim and Susan McDougal refused to testify against him and the only reason that Hillary escaped charges is because the Rose Law firm billing records somehow mysteriously disappeared when subpoenaed until after the investigation, whereupon they were found in the White House residency. But it's OK, they're democrats.

Also, Starr recommended that a new independent counsel be appointed to investigate Clinton's perjury in the Jones civil suit, it was Janet Reno that refused his recommendation, so you can thank her for Starr continuing the perjury investigation.

Some people never got over Clinton not losing his office, I suppose that includes you?

If you don't see Starr in the same light as Issa and Gowdy, well, whatever. Anyone who isn't partisan against the Clintons can see it.

Oh such horrid crimes, my god, thank goodness Starr routed out that den of iniquity.

 

[shuize]

If you want to address my actual argument, feel free. If you want to play with straw men, you're on your own.

Your argument that Bill Clinton lying under oath wasn't really perjury because asking the subject of a sexual harassment lawsuit if he'd had sexual contact with other employees was, like, totally unfair?

Yeah. I can see how my laughing at the "They forced ol' Bill to lie by asking him what he did" spin is completely unwarranted ....

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Your argument that Bill Clinton lying under oath wasn't really perjury because asking the subject of a sexual harassment lawsuit if he'd had sexual contact with other employees was, like, totally unfair?

Yeah. I can see how my laughing at the "They forced ol' Bill to lie by asking him what he did" spin is completely unwarranted ....

Try again, that's not my argument. Apparently you only want to build straw men to debate.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

....as much as I enjoy spectating the discussion about whether or not Bill Clinton lied about a blow job affair... it somehow rings as unrelated to making the case that his wife took inappropriate action over either the handling of classified information or whether it was appropriate for her to choose her own standards in how to conduct her work...

 

[sunmaster14]

....as much as I enjoy spectating the discussion about whether or not Bill Clinton lied about a blow job affair... it somehow rings as unrelated to making the case that his wife took inappropriate action over either the handling of classified information or whether it was appropriate for her to choose her own standards in how to conduct her work...

There's a connection. Both topics involve a private server, the exposure of sensitive data, and a failed attempt to wipe a hard drive.

 

[Leftus]

Don't you look at your posts to see if they need major editing before (or soon after) you post them? Sheesh.

I'm not going to argue this bull crap with you or anyone else. You're making naked assertions yourself. Starr had no reason to inject Clinton's affair with Lewinsky into the Jones case. It was not relevant. Clinton didn't force himself on Lewinsky. There was no pattern that made it relevant to Jones' accusations.

Period.

I posted an opinion held by many that it was entrapment and made the case for it. You can rebut all you want. I'm not going to change my mind and neither are you.

No sense wasting time on a decades old, long since ended debate. You Clinton haters don't give a rip, you see evil where you want to see it.

What naked assertion did I make? Also, if it's not too much trouble could you go back and answer the questions I put to you when you asserted it wasn't Hillary Clinton's fault that she didn't turn over her emails.

Sure, it's your opinion. But the facts behind that are dubious at best. At least you are being honest about being closed minded. I'm willing to change my mind about it. Provide some facts rather than naked assertions. I've done nothing but point to the laws, actual case law and the facts as we know them.

In the case of perjury entrapment, show me where Bill Clinton evoked it in his civil defense to keep his law license and save the fine. It's not like he didn't know a few well schooled lawyers. Show me where the law allows lying under oath. I've pointed to a few cases, one including public figures, that specifically disallow it. Yeah, you've got your opinion. I've pointed you to facts.

 

[The Big Dog]

State offers Hillary Two Blackberries, Huma says no

Stephen Mull offered to give Hillary Clinton two Blackberries, one of which would include “an operating State Department email account.”

His offer was met with resistance from Hillary's right hand woman, Huma Abedin in a later email.

“Let’s discuss the state blackberry, doesn’t make a whole lot of sense,” she wrote.[/QUOTE]

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense that Huma said no, despite the fact that Hillary's Cowboy server kept crashing. Furthermore, the State Blackberry would have enhanced security and would mask her identity.

Why in the hell would they have said it does not make a "whole lot of sense"??

"would also be subject to FOIA requests.”

Ohhhhhhhhh.....

Hillary is "Silly" that way.

https://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/2...llow_share=true&escape=false&view_mode=scroll

 

[Dog Town]

IG: Some emails on Clinton's server were beyond top secret

This is going to get interesting!
IG: Some emails on Clinton's server were beyond top secret

Some of the classified emails found on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's home server were more sensitive than top secret, according to an inspector general for the intelligence community.

Inspector General Charles I. McCullough sent a letter to lawmakers last Friday saying that several dozen additional classified emails have been found, including ones containing information from so-called "special access programs," which have a classification higher than top secret.

http://news.yahoo.com/ig-emails-clintons-server-were-beyond-top-secret-194624394--politics.html

 

[The Big Dog]

This is going to get interesting!
IG: Some emails on Clinton's server were beyond top secret

http://news.yahoo.com/ig-emails-clintons-server-were-beyond-top-secret-194624394--politics.html

here is the link to the original article with a link to the actual letter.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/19/inspector-general-clinton-emails-had-intel-from-most-secretive-classified-programs.html

"These declarations cover several dozen emails containing classified information determined by the IC element to be at the confidential, secret, and top secret/sap levels."

Several dozen e-mails containing Intelligence Community Data classified as high as the Special Action, which involves:

The programs are created when "the vulnerability of, or threat to, specific information is exceptional,” and “the number of persons who ordinarily will have access will be reasonably small and commensurate with the objective of providing enhanced protection for the information involved," it states.

I wonder how much of that was transmitted after the State Department offered her a separate Blackberry.

 

[Newtons Bit]

Well, if it wasn't marked classified when she wrote it and sent it to someone, then clearly she's not doing anything wrong.

 

[sunmaster14]

The Fox scoop came out over 4 hours ago. A Google search shows nothing from the mainstream media yet, except for an AP blurb at ABCnews.com. I guess it takes time to coordinate spin with the Clinton campaign.

 

[Dog Town]

Well, if it wasn't marked classified when she wrote it and sent it to someone, then clearly she's not doing anything wrong.

Covered.

“There is absolutely no way that one could not recognize SAP material,” a former senior law enforcement with decades of experience investigating violations of SAP procedures told Fox News. “It is the most sensitive of the sensitive.”

Executive Order 13526 -- called "Classified National Security Information" and signed Dec. 29, 2009 -- sets out the legal framework for establishing special access programs. The order says the programs can only be authorized by the president, "the Secretaries of State, Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence, or the principal deputy of each."

The programs are created when "the vulnerability of, or threat to, specific information is exceptional,” and “the number of persons who ordinarily will have access will be reasonably small and commensurate with the objective of providing enhanced protection for the information involved," it states.

According to court documents, former CIA Director David Petraeus was prosecuted for sharing intelligence from special access programs with his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. At the heart of his prosecution was a non-disclosure agreement where Petraeus agreed to protect these closely held government programs, with the understanding “unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention or negligent handling … could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation.” Clinton signed an identical non-disclosure agreement Jan. 22, 2009.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-from-most-secretive-classified-programs.html

 

[DavidJames]

The Fox scoop came out over 4 hours ago. A Google search shows nothing from the mainstream media yet, except for an AP blurb at ABCnews.com. I guess it takes time to coordinate spin with the Clinton campaign.

Once again you've confused the politics forum with the conspiracy theory forum. Or did you have evidence? HAHAHA