Ed Clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham Part 3

[The Big Dog]

And who ran the state department?

Excellent concession that he was wrong

Kerry.

Good show.

 

[NoahFence]

Excellent concession that he was wrong

Kerry.

Good show.

You sure are an endless source of chuckles.

Obsession! Did she rebuff your advancements?

 

[The Big Dog]

You sure are an endless source of chuckles.

The fact that Hillary Clinton was using a cowboy server first came to light when Kerry was SoS.

Chuckle is you will, but facts are facts

 

[The Great Zaganza]

The fact that Hillary Clinton was using a cowboy server first came to light when Kerry was SoS.

Chuckle is you will, but facts are facts

It is also a fact that a commission has found that running such a server (as Bush&Cheney have done) is not a criminal offense.

 

[The Big Dog]

It is also a fact that a commission has found that running such a server (OFF TOPIC DERAIL SNIPPED) is not a criminal offense.

A "commission"?

well a couple of points, one, have we really set the bar so low that "not being a criminal offense" is the standard to which we are aiming?

two, I am not certain that a "commission" found that it was "not a criminal offense." Comey said that:

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

Therefore, he did not say there was no offense, but rather that a reasonable prosecutor would not bring the charge. He was wrong, of course.

 

[NoahFence]

A "commission"?

well a couple of points, one, have we really set the bar so low that "not being a criminal offense" is the standard to which we are aiming?

Yes. "not being considered a criminal offense" is the correct standard to use when asking if a criminal offense occurred. What other standard are you hoping for?

two, I am not certain that a "commission" found that it was "not a criminal offense." Comey said that:



Therefore, he did not say there was no offense, but rather that a reasonable prosecutor would not bring the charge. He was wrong, of course.

Oh. So a prosecutor did bring charges? When did that happen?

 

[The Big Dog]

Yes. "not being considered a criminal offense" is the correct standard to use when asking if a criminal offense occurred. What other standard are you hoping for?


Oh. So a prosecutor did bring charges? When did that happen?

Oh a standard like not intentionally violating FOIA based on a sneering disdain for governmental transparency. Something higher than not actually getting indicted?

Cool Rule of So, tho.

A reasonable prosecutor could bring the charges, of course, because intent is not an element of the charges. That is what Comey got wrong.

They won't bring charges, of course, because Hillary is a broken husk, and her erstwhile supporters are left to howling angrily in the wind.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Oh a standard like not intentionally violating FOIA based on a sneering disdain for governmental transparency. Something higher than not actually getting indicted?

Cool Rule of So, tho.

A reasonable prosecutor could bring the charges, of course, because intent is not an element of the charges. That is what Comey got wrong.

They won't bring charges, of course, because Hillary is a broken husk, and her erstwhile supporters are left to howling angrily in the wind.

Of course.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever to support your claim of why they didn't charge her ?

Of course you don't.

 

[NoahFence]

Oh a standard like not intentionally violating FOIA based on a sneering disdain for governmental transparency. Something higher than not actually getting indicted?

Anyone see them there goalposts? Where'd they go?

 

[The Big Dog]

Yes. "not being considered a criminal offense" is the correct standard to use when asking if a criminal offense occurred. What other standard are you hoping for?

Oh a standard like not intentionally violating FOIA based on a sneering disdain for governmental transparency. Something higher than not actually getting indicted?

Anyone see them there goalposts? Where'd they go?

Oh dear, did you not understand my answer to your question?

 

[The Big Dog]

Of course.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever to support your claim of why they didn't charge her ?

Of course you don't.

I said they won't charge her now, because she is a broken husk, which is prospective and speculative. I certainly can easily be convinced that trump would charge her, go ahead and make your case.

 

[NoahFence]

Did a criminal offense occur?
No.

Period.

That was what you people have been whining about since day 1. Always looking for something to nail her on and always failing.

 

[NoahFence]

I said they won't charge her now, because she is a broken husk, which is prospective and speculative. I certainly can easily be convinced that trump would charge her, go ahead and make your case.

Weren't you already convinced and duped like 60 million or so others?

LOCK HER UP!
LOCK HER UP!

 

[The Big Dog]

Did a criminal offense occur?
No.

Period.

That was what you people have been whining about since day 1. Always looking for something to nail her on and always failing.

Did a criminal offense occur?

YES.

Was it prosecuted?

NO.

Those are two different things, but perhaps a bit subtle, to be sure. Let me know if you need me to explain it further, always happy to explain things.

 

[The Big Dog]

Weren't you already convinced and duped like 60 million or so others?

LOCK HER UP!
LOCK HER UP!

the laughing dog "analysis."

That is pretty clearly a white flag.

 

[NoahFence]

Did a criminal offense occur?

YES.

Was it prosecuted?

NO.

Those are two different things, but perhaps a bit subtle, to be sure. Let me know if you need me to explain it further, always happy to explain things.

And you wonder why I pull out the laughing dog so much.

Why wasn't it prosecuted? There will never be a better time. Republitard president, Senate and House.

Its it AT ALL possible that it won't be prosecuted because it doesn't rise to a standard higher than "stupid workplace error"??

That's not possible AT ALL?

 

[snoop_doxie]

Did a criminal offense occur?

YES.

Was it prosecuted?

NO.

Those are two different things, but perhaps a bit subtle, to be sure. Let me know if you need me to explain it further, always happy to explain things.

What criminal offense occurred?

If a criminal offense occurred then why wasn't is prosecuted?

Never mind. The answer will be a non-answer with an emoji for emphasis.

 

[The Big Dog]

What criminal offense occurred?

If a criminal offense occurred then why wasn't is prosecuted?

Never mind. The answer will be a non-answer with an emoji for emphasis.

I'll simply note the hilarious irony of calling me out for using an "emoji" after your fellow travelers have used them so profligately.

I have indeed already answered the question in this thread, she has violated 18 U.S. Code § 793, which requires only gross negligence, not intent. Thus Comey was wrong. Comey gave his reasons, but they were of course wrong, and certainly do not prevent the bringing of charges in the future.

I do believe that is unlikely, as I have already said

 

[wareyin]

What criminal offense occurred?

If a criminal offense occurred then why wasn't is prosecuted?

Never mind. The answer will be a non-answer with an emoji for emphasis.

Obviously, to folks like Judicial Watch and TBD, the "criminal offense" was being a Clinton.

When Trump, Bush, Powell, and who knows how many others perform an act and the response is 'ho-hum, who cares', yet Clinton doing the same thing gets a response of talk like "sneering disdain for governmental transparency", it's pretty obvious that the issue is not what was done, but that she had the temerity, nay the absolute gall to have the last name of Clinton!

 

[The Big Dog]

Obviously, to folks like Judicial Watch and TBD, the "criminal offense" was being a Clinton.

When Trump, Bush, Powell, and who knows how many others perform an act and the response is 'ho-hum, who cares', yet Clinton doing the same thing gets a response of talk like "sneering disdain for governmental transparency", it's pretty obvious that the issue is not what was done, but that she had the temerity, nay the absolute gall to have the last name of Clinton!

actually, she violated 18 U.S. Code § 793.

I will note your fabulous B-b-bu TRUMPBUSHPOWELL attempted derail, tho.

I am of course on record for putting Powell in the jail cell right next to Clinton.