RE: clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

Status
Not open for further replies.
shuize said:
But Ziggurat, he was only an IT guy there for four years. How can you expect him to have any email during such a short period of time?
Click to expand...

So instead of taking the opportunity to answer either of the questions I asked Zig, and providing your thoughts on why it might be an interesting issue, you instead chose content-free snark.

:cool:
 
TheL8Elvis said:
That's mildly interesting.

Do you think there are any interesting conclusions to draw from this information, or potential consequences ?
Click to expand...

We can conclude that Bryan was acting very badly, and we can conclude that Clinton acted badly in using him as her personal IT guy. We can also conclude that there's a lot of very relevant information that the public does not yet have, but should.

As for consequences, who knows? Sometimes people get away with doing very bad things.
 
Ziggurat said:
We can conclude that Bryan was acting very badly, and we can conclude that Clinton acted badly in using him as her personal IT guy. We can also conclude that there's a lot of very relevant information that the public does not yet have, but should.

As for consequences, who knows? Sometimes people get away with doing very bad things.
Click to expand...

The only email we have from him is one from his personal account to Hillary's Clintonemails account.

No wonder he took the Fifth.
 
Ziggurat said:
We can conclude that Bryan was acting very badly, and we can conclude that Clinton acted badly in using him as her personal IT guy. We can also conclude that there's a lot of very relevant information that the public does not yet have, but should.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Now could you support those conclusions with ... something ?

Clearly you don't have any evidence other than a lack of emails, but I don't follow how that leads to your conclusions.
 
Here are the emails showing Hillary pushing through her IT guy as a "political appointee" reporting to Under Secretary Patrick Kennedy and the incredulous reactions from long time IT employees.

Of course, the only reason she went through all this bizarre conduct was to further shield her sneering contempt for governmental transparency from prying eyes.

Yeah, she did it for "convenience." Damn, she is one of the sleaziest people on Earth.

Read these knowing that he was actively running Hillary's cowboy server throughout this entire period, and all his emails are missing.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/jw-v-state-april-29-email-production-01441/
 
TheL8Elvis said:
Hmm. Now could you support those conclusions with ... something ?

Clearly you don't have any evidence other than a lack of emails, but I don't follow how that leads to your conclusions.
Click to expand...


Exactly. There's nothing suspicious about this at all. Just like when the government computers under subpoena all crash at the same time. These sort of things happen. How anyone could possibly suggest an IT guy who worked at State for four years without any email to show for it (and immediately took the Fifth when questioned) could have anything to do with a scandal involving missing and improperly handled email is just beyond me.
 
Quite awhile ago I suggested that public awareness of this scandal had peaked and that it would gradually fade into the background noise of the campaign. Ziggurat disagreed and predicted that the scandal hadn't peaked and it would perk along for quite awhile longer.

Alas, I was wrong and Ziggurat was right. I was wrong for two reasons:
1. I completely underestimated the ability of the right wing press to continuously pump this scandal even when there is nothing new to say about it.
2. Actual new information does occasionally surface.

The revelation that Pagliano's email file can't be found certainly qualifies as new information. It is bizarre for multiple reasons:
1. How in the world is this just now becoming public? Are the Democrats working with the Republicans to keep this scandal perking along?
2. Doesn't anybody at the State Department comply with the rules about archiving their emails? Theoretically Pagliano would have been required to sign the employment exit statement where he had to agree that his emails were archived. (Clinton didn't sign it, but I thought that was because she saw herself as above the stuff that the rif raf was supposed to do.)
3. Really? Out of all the State Department email accounts, only Pagliano's are lost? Was there some sort of general erase policy in effect and Pagliano's email were caught up in that?
4. What happened to backups of the email servers? Does the State Department have an IT department? What is it that they do?
5. If the FBI really is investigating something didn't they notice that the email of one of the principle players in this little drama was missing?

ETA: Here's a thought: Pagliano was using his own email server.

It is strange the way the State Department has handled this. If davefoc was a partisan Democrat and I was in charge of this mess. I would have gotten the information about the lost emails out as soon as possible, and I would have followed it up with the fact that most of his State Department emails had been recovered from other people's accounts and some information about what was being done to figure out why his email files were missing. As it is, after taking vastly too long to release the information, the State Department issues a statement with little information that they immediately release another statement to correct. The State Department has ensured a new supply of fodder to keep the scandal bouncing along. Whose side is this State Department on. It seems like incompetence is their most important characteristic right now and whatever side they're on isn't that important.

ETA2: I didn't mean to imply that miscellaneous conspiracy theories regarding malfeasance on the part of Pagliano aren't possible. Right now I don't think there are sufficient facts available to rule out or rule in much along these lines, but I look forward to reading theories about Pagliano malfeasance.
 
Last edited:
16.5 said:
Here are the emails showing Hillary pushing through her IT guy as a "political appointee" reporting to Under Secretary Patrick Kennedy and the incredulous reactions from long time IT employees.
Click to expand...

All I see is an innocuous email chain with some confusion regarding govt acronyms and hierarchy.

Please quote these "incredulous" reactions and what you believe they are "incredulous" about.

16.5 said:
Of course, the only reason she went through all this bizarre conduct was to further shield her sneering contempt for governmental transparency from prying eyes.
Click to expand...

Which bizarre conduct are you referring to ?

16.5 said:
Yeah, she did it for "convenience." Damn, she is one of the sleaziest people on Earth.

Read these knowing that he was actively running Hillary's cowboy server throughout this entire period, and all his emails are missing.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/jw-v-state-april-29-email-production-01441/
Click to expand...

What do you think he's done wrong ? What is he hiding ?
 
16.5 said:
Yeah, who indeed knows. after all, Clinton's political appointee's entire email file is missing.

And to think, he was a political appointee too. Hillary's server monkey was a political appointee. Just more convenient that way, I reckon.
Click to expand...

Nice ad hom. I thought you were against logical fallacies like that ?

Isn't there a whole process that allows for political appointments ? What exactly is the problem with being a political appointee ?
 
Ziggurat said:
Not really. It's a takeoff of code monkey.
Click to expand...

It is also clearly not an "ad hominem fallacy" which is the type of grossly inaccurate misrepresentations designed only to derail discussions, and which to me now exist only in quoted form.

Hillary had no business making her server wrangler a political appointment, and the reason she did is absolutely clear: so she could control her email communication outside of the State Department apparatus and she thought out of the reach of FOIA. See Judge Sullivan's order in Judicial Watch v. State.

By the way, of course, State can't find Hillary's political appointment's emails from his entire tenure. But the is not what is important, what is important is that 16.5 wrote "server monkey." Poor Hillary Clinton Political Appointee. Sniff
 
Last edited:
16.5 said:
It is also clearly not an "ad hominem fallacy" which is the type of grossly inaccurate misrepresentations designed only to derail discussions, and which to me now exist only in quoted form.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that's easier than actually addressing my arguments. :cool:

16.5 said:
Hillary had no business making her server wrangler a political appointment,
Click to expand...

Evidence ?

16.5 said:
and the reason she did is absolutely clear: so she could control her email communication outside of the State Department apparatus
Click to expand...

Evidence ?

16.5 said:
and she thought out of the reach of FOIA. See Judge Sullivan's order in Judicial Watch v. State.
Click to expand...

It doesn't say what you claim.

16.5 said:
By the way, of course, State can't find Hillary's political appointment's emails from his entire tenure. But the is not what is important, what is important is that 16.5 wrote "server monkey." Poor Hillary Clinton Political Appointee. Sniff
Click to expand...

Nobody has explained why it's important, just "trust us, it is"
 
Ziggurat said:
Not really. It's a takeoff of code monkey.
Click to expand...

So it's not an ad hom if it's slang to degrade people that also work with software? That's the *********** strangest rationalization for it NOT being an ad hom I've ever heard.

It's a derogatory term, and the majority of programmers despise being called by it.
 
Did Blumenthal Talk to the FBI?

Hillary Clinton’s longtime friend and off-the-books intel provider Sidney Blumenthal claimed in an interview on Monday that he is all in favor of transparency, but refused to say if he has been interviewed by the FBI as part of its ongoing investigation into the former secretary of state’s private email server.
Click to expand...

The smart money suggests, oh hell yeah they did, questions like:

Just how easy to guess was you AOL password on the email account that you used to funnel classified information to Hillary on Libya?
Man, Obama really hates you guts, doesn't he?
By the way, where did you get that classified info you sent to Hillary?
Did you really think telling Hillary to take credit for the fiasco in Libya was a good idea?
Serious, where did you get the classified info?
 
16.5 said:
The smart money suggests, oh hell yeah they did, questions like:

Just how easy to guess was you AOL password on the email account that you used to funnel classified information to Hillary on Libya?
Man, Obama really hates you guts, doesn't he?
By the way, where did you get that classified info you sent to Hillary?
Did you really think telling Hillary to take credit for the fiasco in Libya was a good idea?
Serious, where did you get the classified info?
Click to expand...

More 16.5 speculation based on the amazing mind reading capabilities. "The smart money suggests". Does it? Is that what it suggests or could the smart money suggest anything else?
 
Schedule C employees, who help presidential appointees and agency heads make policy, can only report to people appointed by the U.S. president or other senior executive officials. But no one like that worked in the IT office, so Kennedy ended up being Pagliano's designated supervisor.
Click to expand...

There were no Schedule C employees in IT other than Pagliano, the guy who Hillary was paying to run her cowboy server.

And she got up there and claimed it was for "convenience."

eta: My favorite emails was this one from Susan Swart to Charlie Wisecarver:

I don't know what a pas is. PFK specifically said we didn't need to be pol apptees but it sure sounds like we do. I'm going to ask him.
What a bunch a
Click to expand...

"what a bunch a ...." Say, what word do you think Susan left off there?

Hillary Clinton stuck here cowboy server wrangler in the IT Department reporting outside the IT Department to another Political Appointee. And now we can't find his emails.

How marvelous. Just looking out for Number One, huh, Hillary?

What a bunch a ****.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom