RE: clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

[The Big Dog]

Says you.

Your argument , such as it is, is laughable.

Make a case that is more than HDS.

Curious, you utterly ignored the discussion of the Mull email.

Curious....

/by the way, Hillary Derangement Syndrome is something that afflicts her fanatical supporters who, for example, believe her utterly insipid lie about "convenience" and think that laws regarding governmental transparency are "are outdated, unjust, incorrectly administered/enforced or just plain stupid" and should not apply to people demi-gods like Hillary.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Curious, you utterly ignored the discussion of the Mull email.

Curious....

Since it wasn't relevant, no, not "curious".

/by the way, Hillary Derangement Syndrome is something that afflicts her fanatical supporters who, for example, believe her utterly insipid lie about "convenience" and think that laws regarding governmental transparency are "are outdated, unjust, incorrectly administered/enforced or just plain stupid" and should not apply to people demi-gods like Hillary.

Has it not already been explained to you that you don't get to simple re-define terms at your convenience ?

 

[The Big Dog]

Since it wasn't relevant, no, not "curious".

The Mull email to Huma offering Hillary a blackberry with an official state department email which is subject to FOIA is not "relevant" to Hillary's email use while at the state department?

lolz, 'k.

"relevant": Has it not already been explained to you that you don't get to simple re-define terms at your convenience?

 

[Dog Town]

Has it not already been explained to you that you don't get to simple re-define terms at your convenience ?

Some one with HDS tried, and failed, to argue it could not be used that way. The problem is, there is no clinical definition. It is a made up term, by one group to try, and degrade another group. The words are being used with proper meaning, by saying HRC minions have HDS! Meaning a specific group is so deranged anything she does is acceptable.
FACT!

 

[TheL8Elvis]

The Mull email to Huma offering Hillary a blackberry with an official state department email which is subject to FOIA is not "relevant" to Hillary's email use while at the state department?

lolz, 'k.

"relevant": Has it not already been explained to you that you don't get to simple re-define terms at your convenience?

It's not relevant to the topic of why she used her own mail server prior to that email, where her correspondence was still subject to FOIA, no.

Why don't you make an argument for why it's relevant , since you claim it is ??

ETA: Something better than argumentum emoticonum:

 

[The Big Dog]

It's not relevant to the topic of why she used her own mail server prior to that email, where her correspondence was still subject to FOIA, no.

Why don't you make an argument for why it's relevant , since you claim it is ??

Mull made that offer in August of 2011. Hillary resigned as Secretary of State February 1, 2013. That is 18 months worth of relevance right there.

Except, Huma said "that doesn't make a lot of sense." Seems pretty clear that the reason they rejected it and the reason that they put the whole cowboy server scheme into place was right there in Mull's email: they would be subject to FOIA.

Of course, you think that laws about governmental transparency might be "outdated, unjust, incorrectly administered/enforced or just plain stupid"

 

[applecorped]

this is like watching a slow motion car crash

 

[Steve]

this is like watching a slow motion car crash

Currently more like a slow motion skid, and waiting to see if there is a crash at the end.

 

[theprestige]

Currently more like a slow motion skid, and waiting to see if there is a crash at the end.

And arguing about whether the skid itself cells into question the ability of the driver, or if we have to wait and see how bad it gets before we commit to saying that skidding is a problem.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

In the time between being pulled over and the time you are handed the ticket, were you breaking the law?

If I miss a meeting at work because I forgot to check my calendar, or I don't get some paperwork done when it's time to go home so I never do it, should I go to jail?

There's some serious confusion regarding this matter about what actually constitutes a crime and what is simply not following a work policy. If it was automatically a crime that Clinton used a private email server for government business, they wouldn't need to look at the emails to have made charges.

If the point is just that email records are preserved for prosperity and FOIA requests, Clinton complied with that when she turned the server over.

The truth of the matter here is the Pubbies like Gowdy want to go over everything Clinton in the hopes of finding wrongdoing. I would imagine any member of any Presidential administration would have something wrong if one looked at their every movement for errors or other issues. Hell, Cheney and Bush outright broke the law using the Dept of Justice to try to influence election outcomes and they purposefully hid those actions by using the RNC email server to cover their tracks. That's who should have been prosecuted.

This is a witch hunt and hopefully there are enough non-partisan heads in the FBI that will look at the situation without political motive of keeping Clinton out of the White House.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Mull made that offer in August of 2011. Hillary resigned as Secretary of State February 1, 2013. That is 18 months worth of relevance right there.

It doesn't address why she initially used her own mail server ... you know, the relevant question at hand.

Except, Huma said "that doesn't make a lot of sense." Seems pretty clear that the reason they rejected it and the reason that they put the whole cowboy server scheme into place was right there in Mull's email: they would be subject to FOIA.

No, it's not clear to me at all that's the reason.

Are you claiming her work emails as SOS were not already subject to FOIA ?

Of course, you think that laws about governmental transparency might be "outdated, unjust, incorrectly administered/enforced or just plain stupid"

We all know why you didn't actually quote me, in context ....

 

[The Big Dog]

If I miss a meeting at work because I forgot to check my calendar, or I don't get some paperwork done when it's time to go home so I never do it, should I go to jail?

There's some serious confusion regarding this matter about what actually constitutes a crime and what is simply not following a work policy. If it was automatically a crime that Clinton used a private email server for government business, they wouldn't need to look at the emails to have made charges.

Jesus... if the paperwork you were dealing with was Top Secret/SAP and you forgot to secure it, hell yes you could lose your security clearance, your job and in fact go to jail.

they are looking at the emails to determine as a result of the IC IG's counterintelligence referral indicating there is a compromise of classified national security information in the Executive Branch.

Of course, I am replying to a post that uses a puerile term like "pubbies," so I am not sure why I bother explaining basic facts....

 

[The Big Dog]

Are you claiming her work emails as SOS were not already subject to FOIA ?

No I am claiming that Hillary thought her emails stored on her cowboy server were immune from FOIA, and there is no doubt that she solicited a legal opinion from her lawyers that said just that.

She and her lawyers were wrong, of course.

 

[The Big Dog]

Clinton’s Emails: A Criminal Charge Is Justified
Hillary’s explanations look increasingly contrived as evidence of malfeasance mounts day by day.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/clintons-emails-a-criminal-charge-is-justified-1453419158

A well written, closely argued analysis by a former AG.

A Bush appointee, and so, post your ad hominem fallacies below in 3, 2, 1....

 

[Leftus]

Perhaps being SOS is more nuanced than a binary yes/no ?

She kept 100% of the documents. She found 0% of it to be classified. There is no nuance in this matter. It's quite binary.

 

[Leftus]

If I miss a meeting at work because I forgot to check my calendar, or I don't get some paperwork done when it's time to go home so I never do it, should I go to jail?

There's some serious confusion regarding this matter about what actually constitutes a crime and what is simply not following a work policy. If it was automatically a crime that Clinton used a private email server for government business, they wouldn't need to look at the emails to have made charges.

If the point is just that email records are preserved for prosperity and FOIA requests, Clinton complied with that when she turned the server over.

The truth of the matter here is the Pubbies like Gowdy want to go over everything Clinton in the hopes of finding wrongdoing. I would imagine any member of any Presidential administration would have something wrong if one looked at their every movement for errors or other issues. Hell, Cheney and Bush outright broke the law using the Dept of Justice to try to influence election outcomes and they purposefully hid those actions by using the RNC email server to cover their tracks. That's who should have been prosecuted.

This is a witch hunt and hopefully there are enough non-partisan heads in the FBI that will look at the situation without political motive of keeping Clinton out of the White House.

That is not an answer to the question.

If you are going to use the lack of an indictment as proof that Clinton has done no wrong, you can't turn around and state that Bush and Cheney broke the law because they also have not been indicted and be logically coherent.

I would have no issue with an investigation into the Bush Cheney abuse of email. I have no problem stating they broke the FOIA laws because it is apparent that they have done so. But to claim that they shouldn't investigate one because they didn't investigate another is specious.

The FBI is non-partisan. The investigation is expanding.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

That is not an answer to the question.

If you are going to use the lack of an indictment as proof that Clinton has done no wrong, you can't turn around and state that Bush and Cheney broke the law because they also have not been indicted and be logically coherent.

I would have no issue with an investigation into the Bush Cheney abuse of email. I have no problem stating they broke the FOIA laws because it is apparent that they have done so. But to claim that they shouldn't investigate one because they didn't investigate another is specious.

The FBI is non-partisan. The investigation is expanding.

Another failed analogy.

You seem to think outcome is irrelevant. A technical issue doesn't equate to actual corruption.

 

[Dog Town]

Another failed analogy.

The only failed "analogy", if it even was one, is the one in your "argument"!

 

[The Big Dog]

Another failed analogy.

You seem to think outcome is irrelevant. A technical issue doesn't equate to actual corruption.

"Another failed analogy." well considering that it was her analogy, I thought, hey we are making progress! And then I read the next sentence and realized that she has no clue what we are talking about.

Hillary only technically violated the law! Lets make her President.

Oh dear....

 

[The Big Dog]

State tries to delay Clinton email release, blaming snowstorm

They want a whole extra month. Yeah, because nothing takes place in February in a Presidential Election Year....

By the way, classification aficionados? They also used this excuse:

The department spokesman added that remaining undisclosed emails are “the most complex to process” because they contain “a large amount of material” that needs to be approved by other agencies.

Uh oh Hillary, sounds like classification issues, now don't it?

http://thehill.com/policy/national-...delay-clinton-email-release-blaming-snowstorm