Ed Clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham Part 3

[Bob001]

Judicial Watch claims more evidence of classified info in Clinton emails

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/j...sified-info-in-clinton-emails/article/2621915

Judicial watch is continuing to battle for your right to know, and the results are not pretty for Hillary partisans.

Remember when Hillary lied and said she had turned over all of her emails and that the emails did not include classified data?

the voters certainly did.

You mean the 46% of voters for Trump, not the 54% who voted against him, right?

I think the evidence is pretty clear that Clinton and her close associates were so technologically inept that they didn't fully know what they were doing. We just learned that Abedin was forwarding emails to Weiner to print out so Abedin could deliver the paper to Clinton. Abedin couldn't print her own stuff? Clinton couldn't read her own emails on a screen? Clinton was offered a secure computer in her office, but she didn't want it because she didn't know how to use it and didn't want to learn. The whole idea of setting up one single email address to use for everything -- every State Dept. employee, her closest execs in State, Foundation execs, her family and friends, her yoga teacher -- is something most teenagers would see problems with. She made a big mistake out of ignorance, and apparently nobody around her could change her mind.

But the bottom line is that she only exchanged emails with people who worked for her and were entitled to see classified information. There is no evidence at all that any classified information was sent to or received by or intercepted by anybody else. And yet we're still chattering about it, while nobody seems to care that Trump's closest advisors were taking cash from the Russians during his campaign. Maybe a little bit of a double standard?

 

[The Big Dog]

You mean the 46% of voters for Trump, not the 54% who voted against him, right?

I think the evidence is pretty clear that Clinton and her close associates were so technologically inept that they didn't fully know what they were doing. We just learned that Abedin was forwarding emails to Weiner to print out so Abedin could deliver the paper to Clinton. Abedin couldn't print her own stuff? Clinton couldn't read her own emails on a screen? Clinton was offered a secure computer in her office, but she didn't want it because she didn't know how to use it and didn't want to learn. The whole idea of setting up one single email address to use for everything -- every State Dept. employee, her closest execs in State, Foundation execs, her family and friends, her yoga teacher -- is something most teenagers would see problems with. She made a big mistake out of ignorance, and apparently nobody around her could change her mind.

But the bottom line is that she only exchanged emails with people who worked for her and were entitled to see classified information. There is no evidence at all that any classified information was sent to or received by or intercepted by anybody else. And yet we're still chattering about it, while nobody seems to care that Trump's closest advisors were taking cash from the Russians during his campaign. Maybe a little bit of a double standard?

The reason we are talking about it is because Comey just confirmed that Anthony Weiner was getting classified emails.

This wasn't ignorance, this was a calculating intentional act on her part to run her communications off site so they would not be subject to FOIA.

Here's a whole thread on Trump and russia, Enjoy! .http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=317528

 

[Bob001]

The reason we are talking about it is because Comey just confirmed that Anthony Weiner was getting classified emails.

This wasn't ignorance, this was a calculating intentional act on her part to run her communications off site so they would not be subject to FOIA.
.....

I think that's probably true. It's still reflects basic technological ignorance that she didn't set up multiple accounts for her various activities. She could have used one private account or more for her non-State business that wouldn't have been subject to FOIA, a State.gov account for routine communications --- as most of hers were -- that would be subject to FOIA, and maybe another State or private account that she could defend as being for "sensitive" data. I think she could have accomplished the same end for the same reasons without the costly consequences that she's experienced.

And evading FOIA is sleazy and underhanded. It says a lot about her personality and mindset. But it's not criminal, and it's dishonest to claim it has anything to do with mishandling classified documents, and it doesn't approach the outright corruption that we see from the Trumps every day.

 

[The Big Dog]

Hillary Rehabilitation Tour Gets Derailed

As we all know, Hillary Clinton went on the shows to rehabilitate herself by blaming her loss on Comey and others.

Her timing was unfortunate as her conduct while in office continues to be exposed on virtually a daily basis.

For example, she tried to hide more relevant documents on her cowboy server relating to the benghazi fiasco, which attempt was shot down this morning by yet another Judge:

Judicial Watch today announced that U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson has ordered the U.S. Department of State to turn over to Judicial Watch "eight identical paragraphs" of previously redact material in two September 13, 2012, Hillary Clinton emails regarding phone calls made by President Barack Obama to Egyptian and Libyan leaders immediately following the terrorist attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi. Both emails had the subject line "Quick Summary of POTUS Calls to Presidents of Libya and Egypt" and were among the emails stored on Clinton's unofficial email server.

http://www.standardnewswire.com/news/5456112432.html

Thank god that Judicial watch is continuing to fight the good fight!

 

[Bob001]

.....

Thank god that Judicial watch is continuing to fight the good fight!

Did you note that the Trump State Dept. opposed the judge's action? You think that maybe there are legitimate reasons why conversations the President had with foreign leaders during a crisis should have remained confidential?

And did you note that the issue before the court was whether State had used the correct exemption designation from FOIA?

.....
STATE’s Near East Affairs Bureau and told them they could use a B(5) exemption on a upgraded email to protect it instead of the B(1) exemption. However, the use of the B(5) exemption, which is usually used for executive privilege-related information, was incorrect as the information actually was classified and related to national security, which would be a B(1) exemption.

This is all just silly. Clinton was not sending anything to anybody who wasn't entitled to get it. Benghazi has been investigated by at least eight different hostile bodies and Clinton was never shown to have done anything wrong. When will you guys give it up?

You have put a lunatic in the White House. Let's worry about that.

 

[The Big Dog]

Did you note that the Trump State Dept. opposed the judge's action? You think that maybe there are legitimate reasons why conversations the President had with foreign leaders during a crisis should have remained confidential?

And did you note that the issue before the court was whether State had used the correct exemption designation from FOIA?


This is all just silly. Clinton was not sending anything to anybody who wasn't entitled to get it. Benghazi has been investigated by at least eight different hostile bodies and Clinton was never shown to have done anything wrong. When will you guys give it up?

You have put a lunatic in the White House. Let's worry about that.

Clinton and her fans put Trump in the White House.

Hillary got on TV this week and blamed Comey for her loss. If Hillary wants to continue lying to the American people about stuff like that, I am going to continue educating people about the facts.

Plenty of Trump threads out there, please feel free to post all about Trump there. Here we are discussing Clinton's lunatic conduct.

 

[Ziggurat]

Did you note that the Trump State Dept. opposed the judge's action? You think that maybe there are legitimate reasons why conversations the President had with foreign leaders during a crisis should have remained confidential?

Maybe, but I wouldn't just assume that. The State Department will have institutional interests that transcend individual administrations, and which it will try to protect regardless of who becomes president. Do those institutional interests match the public interest? Sometimes, but not always.

This is all just silly. Clinton was not sending anything to anybody who wasn't entitled to get it.

You're right. She had Huma to do that for her.

Benghazi has been investigated by at least eight different hostile bodies and Clinton was never shown to have done anything wrong.

You're wrong about that. She did plenty that was wrong, just maybe not criminal.

You have put a lunatic in the White House. Let's worry about that.

Big Dog is right, we can thank Hillary for that.

 

[NoahFence]

Hillary got on TV this week and partially blamed Comey for her loss.

FTFY

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Obama, a black man, broke the record for total number of votes.
Clinton got less votes than Obama, even though the country has grown in the past 8 years.

Why should I think that some sort of -ism is to blame for Clinton's poor performance, when racism didn't make Obama lose, and not just the fact that she was a less inspiring candidate?

Huh?

Clinton lost by a few votes in a few states. That was easily the result of Comey's Oct surprise alone. The fact Clinton won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes shows it was not a lackluster campaign.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Again, why should I believe that sexism turned people off to Clinton but racism didn't turn people off to Obama?

Racism did and it also played a part in the constant opposition to anything Obama.

You seem to be looking for the one thing when many variables were involved. Clinton was very clear about there being many variables. It's only the Clinton haters trying change that narrative to Clinton blamed everyone but herself.

No, she didn't.

 

[The Big Dog]

The fact that Hillary is blaming anyone other than herself is all you need to know.

She could have, she should have put the email scandal to bed a year earlier, but she ********** it up.

The Democrats should have put her out of misery, but it was her "turn."

Donald Trump President.

 

[Ziggurat]

Huh?

Clinton lost by a few votes in a few states. That was easily the result of Comey's Oct surprise alone. The fact Clinton won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes shows it was not a lackluster campaign.

The popular vote is meaningless. And she lost, to Trump. TRUMP!

Of course it was a lackluster campaign. Even her logo was boring.

 

[Ziggurat]

You seem to be looking for the one thing when many variables were involved.

Tell that to Noah.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

538: The Comey Letter Probably Cost Clinton The Election
So why won’t the media admit as much?

Hillary Clinton would probably be president if FBI Director James Comey had not sent a letter to Congress on Oct. 28. The letter, which said the FBI had “learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation” into the private email server that Clinton used as secretary of state, upended the news cycle and soon halved Clinton’s lead in the polls, imperiling her position in the Electoral College....

The impact of Comey’s letter is comparatively easy to quantify, by contrast. At a maximum, it might have shifted the race by 3 or 4 percentage points toward Donald Trump, swinging Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida to him, perhaps along with North Carolina and Arizona. At a minimum, its impact might have been only a percentage point or so. Still, because Clinton lost Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by less than 1 point, the letter was probably enough to change the outcome of the Electoral College.

Makes me more than a little nauseous.

 

[applecorped]

*probably.....

 

[Giz]

The popular vote is meaningless. And she lost, to Trump. TRUMP!

Of course it was a lackluster campaign. Even her logo was boring.

Her slogans were worse. Even the great narcissist tried to make it sounds like his campaign was for America (MAGA etc). Hillary slogans were all about her and her career.

Narcissism isn't a good look for a campaign.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Even the great narcissist tried to make it sounds like his campaign was for America... Hillary slogans were all about her and her career.

Evidence?

List of 2106 presidential campaign slogans

"Make America Great Again!" – used by Donald Trump's campaign.[16]
"Can't Stump The Trump" - Donald Trump campaign chant
"I'm with You"
"Build The Wall!" - Donald Trump campaign chant
"Trump!" - Donald Trump campaign chant, commonly used in response of protesters
"Lock Her Up!" - Donald Trump campaign chant
"CNN Sucks!" - Donald Trump campaign chant, referring to the CNN television channel after Trump criticized the media portrayal of his campaign at one of his rallies[17]
...
"Forward Together" - used by Hillary Clinton's campaign, on the side of her bus.
"Fighting for us" – used by Hillary Clinton's campaign
"I'm With Her" - used by Hillary Clinton's campaign
"Stronger Together" - used by Hillary Clinton's campaign
"When they go low, we go high" - used by Michelle Obama and adopted by Hillary Clinton's campaign[18]
​

Looks like there was plenty to go around, if you think that any candidate who promotes their own name is being a narcissist. But of course with Hillary it was different - every time she talked about helping women and children it was actually about her - because she's a woman (and this observation isn't at all sexist...)

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

....

Narcissism isn't a good look for a campaign.

You can't be serious.

 

[varwoche]

*probably.....

So, you require 100% certainty before it troubles you?

If I misunderstood your post, well, learn to express yourself in complete sentences.

 

[The Big Dog]

So, you require 100% certainty before it troubles you?

If I misunderstood your post, well, learn to express yourself in complete sentences.

why would it trouble anyone? It was always Hillary's fault.

Although the Democrat Party could have avoided the problem by nominating someone not weighed down by her horrific baggage.

But they cleared the field and stuck us with Trump.