RE: clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Leftus said:
Those would be hypothetical and take facts not in evidence so I see no point in answering those for you in keeping with you refusing to answer any of mine. I'm trying to explain how it is, not how it could have gone.

The characterization that this is a slow investigation, however, is based in ignorance around how fast the FBI moves as I have shown.
Click to expand...
Why am I not surprised?
 
Hillary and the State Department: Another Weekend Production

Avid readers of this thread know that the State Department delayed the production of the final tranche of Hillary emails, to the dismay of the Judge overseeing the litigation, Jason Leopold (the FOIA Terrorist who requested their production) and the American people.

The State Department proposes to dump another couple hundred e-mails this Holiday weekend:

Under the new proposal, the State Department would release 550 emails this weekend, out of the approximately 3,700 that remain.
Click to expand...

What is taking so long (other than the fact that Hillary had them stashed on a secret homebrew server that she alone controlled for years)?

The State Department has released about 85% of Clinton's official emails to date, but many of the most sensitive emails -- those that require additional review by the intelligence community and other government agencies -- are expected to be in the remaining tranche.
Click to expand...

Oh. Thanks Hillary, hope everything was convenient enough for you
 
16.5 said:
Here is the link to the State Department declaration filed in Leopold's lawsuit enforcing his FOIA rights:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2710399-Leopold-v-State-HRC-emails-Affidavit-State-Dept.html

Does not explain at all why the hell this wasn't done last month.

Note that Hillary's entire remaining emails are on a classified server at the State Department.

The server is called "FREEDOMS." Who says they don't have a sense of humor.
Click to expand...
I don't see in that link where the server is called "Freedoms" -- and even if it were, probably because they are being released via the Freedom of Info. Act lawsuits.

ETA: OK, just saw it now.

Did a Ctrl F for the word and it didn't show up.

BTW: Thank you for the link.
 
Last edited:
U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras instructed the State Department to post all the emails ready for release in four batches on Feb. 13, Feb. 19, Feb. 26 and Feb. 29. Three of those dates fall the day before important Democratic election days—injecting an element of uncertainty and political drama into the final releases of Mrs. Clinton’s email trove.

Mrs. Clinton is locked in a close primary battle with Sen. Bernie Sanders, who beat her by 22 points in the New Hampshire primary this week. Democratic voters in Nevada will caucus on Feb. 20, while South Carolina Democrats will vote in their state’s primary on Feb. 27. And on March 1, Democratic voters in more than a dozen states or territories will make their choice in the Democratic race.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/judge-o...d-of-democratic-primaries-caucuses-1455220933
 
Last edited:
"Looks like I'll finish with Homeland Security around 12:30. When is the transport scheduled?"

"You're leaving at 1330."

"What time will that get my back home?"
Click to expand...

Should I turn myself in? That's my SMS conversation with my wife, yesterday. Seems about as hush-hush sooper dooper classified as Hill asking her aide about when she gets back to the Hamptons, right?
 
Foolmewunz said:
Should I turn myself in? That's my SMS conversation with my wife, yesterday. Seems about as hush-hush sooper dooper classified as Hill asking her aide about when she gets back to the Hamptons, right?
Click to expand...
I think the proper answer involves a question: Is your last name Clinton? If yes, omg double secret probation top super secret! If no, :rolleyes:
 
wareyin said:
I think the proper answer involves a question: Is your last name Clinton? If yes, omg double secret probation top super secret! If no, :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
It should be a problem for anyone that does what she did is the point. Regardless of whether it boils down to her skipping FOIA, transmitting classified email or just plain conveying confidential state department materials iver a private or unauthorized server. Not that i dont get where you're coming from.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
It should be a problem for anyone that does what she did is the point. Regardless of whether it boils down to her skipping FOIA, transmitting classified email or just plain conveying confidential state department materials iver a private or unauthorized server. Not that i dont get where you're coming from.
Click to expand...

He's coming from Tu quoque fallacy.
 
16.5 said:
He's coming from Tu quoque fallacy.
Click to expand...

No...
A tu quoque relies on saying what Hillary did is legal or appropriate based on an appeal to precedent. He's saying that the degree of criticism is driven by and enlarge through partisanship and her name recognition, not that what she did is necessarily angelic. It has a grain of truth to it, however i would caution overreaching it as its not applicable to some of her actions. I would prefer to have a quick run down of how he views the actual concept of the email server as i think it would put the criticisms into context. I havent followed the thread enough to recall if he has already done so
 
Last edited:
Grizzly Bear said:
He's saying that the degree of criticism is driven by and enlarge through partisanship and her name recognition
Click to expand...

It's also driven in part by the fact that she's running for president. But that's a completely legitimate reason for enhanced scrutiny.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom