Ed Clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham Part 3

[The Big Dog]

By the hilited, you mean the FBIs own statement, not a "press release spin" as you so mis-characterize it.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/17/stat...-unclassify-clinton-emails-fbi-documents.html

For its part, the FBI also denied such a "quid pro quo," offering NBC News the following statement:

Super cool bolding! FBI released a "statement" did they? Huh, wonder who drafted that?

There was no quid pro quo because the FBI rejected State's incredibly improper offer.

State offered a bribe, the FBI refused, that does not let the mutts at State off the hook for offering it in the first place.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Super cool bolding! FBI released a "statement" did they? Huh, wonder who drafted that?

Why is who drafted it relevant? Are you claiming the FBI is covering up states "incredibly improper offer."

If so, where is your evidence ?

There was no quid pro quo because the FBI rejected State's incredibly improper offer.

Or because the State rejected FBI's incredibly improper offer.

State offered a bribe, the FBI refused, that does not let the mutts at State off the hook for offering it in the first place.

Or because theFBI asked for a bribe, State refused, that does not let the mutts at the FBI off the hook for offering it in the first place.

In fact, the FBI is now investigating the agent who asked for the quid-proq-quo !

 

[Meadmaker]

Super cool bolding! FBI released a "statement" did they? Huh, wonder who drafted that?

There was no quid pro quo because the FBI rejected State's incredibly improper offer.

State offered a bribe, the FBI refused, that does not let the mutts at State off the hook for offering it in the first place.

According to "the FBI" (quotes are in place because the statements by individuals might disagree with the most official recent statement), it was the FBI who made the offer, which was rejected by State.

ETA: Obviously, accounts differ. Clearly we need a congressional investigation to get to the bottom of this, and I do mean the bottom.

 

[Meadmaker]

Sorry, I am a bit reluctant to take a press release spin as worth very much at all, although it would appear that it is Mother's Milk to Hillary supporters.

Any port in a storm, I guess

Well, the question is whether there is any storm at all.

If the right wing narrative is accurate, this is very, very, bad. Nixon level bad.

But is it?

The narrative I am hearing is that the State Department wanted to declassify the material in order to cover up Hillary's mishandling of classified data. That makes no sense at all. There were 110 pieces of email that were unclassified at the time they were on her server, but which further review determined should have been classified. This email was one of them. Is there some critical difference between this one and the other 109, as far as handling of classified data goes? That portion of the narrative is illogical.

Well, then, maybe the contents were embarrassing, which made this email different. The problem with that theory is that it was the State Department who wanted it released.

So, by all means I encourage people to investigate and dig all the dirt they want, but so far, all there is is a little bit of a lead that hints that maybe there might be something bad. In other words, there are a few clouds on the horizon, but there's no storm, at least not yet.

 

[The Big Dog]

According to "the FBI" (quotes are in place because the statements by individuals might disagree with the most official recent statement), it was the FBI who made the offer, which was rejected by State.

ETA: Obviously, accounts differ. Clearly we need a congressional investigation to get to the bottom of this, and I do mean the bottom.

That is not accurate. Kennedy called the FBI to bitch about the classification of the email, the FBI guy said while I have you on the phone what about our request for more space for anti-terrorism agents, the contemporaneous notes indicate that Kennedy suggested a quid pro quo, the FBI refused to declassify the document.

By the way, the FBI's preexisting request was PROPER, Kennedy's request to declassify the document was not.

QED

 

[The Big Dog]

Well, the question is whether there is any storm at all.

If the right wing narrative is accurate, this is very, very, bad. Nixon level bad.

But is it?

The narrative I am hearing is that the State Department wanted to declassify the material in order to cover up Hillary's mishandling of classified data. That makes no sense at all. There were 110 pieces of email that were unclassified at the time they were on her server, but which further review determined should have been classified. This email was one of them. Is there some critical difference between this one and the other 109, as far as handling of classified data goes? That portion of the narrative is illogical.

Well, then, maybe the contents were embarrassing, which made this email different. The problem with that theory is that it was the State Department who wanted it released.

So, by all means I encourage people to investigate and dig all the dirt they want, but so far, all there is is a little bit of a lead that hints that maybe there might be something bad. In other words, there are a few clouds on the horizon, but there's no storm, at least not yet.

Ask UnderSecretary Kennedy, seems he spent a ton of time on it, didn't he?

 

[Meadmaker]

Ask UnderSecretary Kennedy, seems he spent a ton of time on it, didn't he?

I'm sure someone will. Perhaps he will explain why.


As is so often the case with breaking news, some of the early accounts are incomplete and inaccurate. We'll have to see what happens.

Either those clouds on the horizon will turn into a full fledged hurricane, or perhaps they will just dissipate and there will be bright sunshine. Too early to say right now.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

That is not accurate. Kennedy called the FBI to bitch about the classification of the email, the FBI guy said while I have you on the phone what about our request for more space for anti-terrorism agents, the contemporaneous notes indicate that Kennedy suggested a quid pro quo, the FBI refused to declassify the document.

By the way, the FBI's preexisting request was PROPER, Kennedy's request to declassify the document was not.

QED

Your synopsis is an adorable, steaming pile of ********

Yes, redacted FBI agent "A" claims he was called by redacted FBI agent "B" from Internal Operations Division (IOD), and FBI agent "B" claimed Kennedy pressured him.



So redacted FBI agent "A" has no direct knowledge of kennedy asking for quid-pro-quo.
It was hearsay from a different agent, and there is no claim that KENNEDY suggested it.

We then get the notes on the interview of redacted FBI agent "B" from Internal Operations Division (IOD):


VERBATIM the notes say <redacted FBI agent> "told KENNEDY he would look into the e-mail matter if KENNEDY would provide authority concerning the FBIs request to increase personnel in Iraq"
That hilited is the FBI offering quid-pro-quo, not kennedy.

In summary, in his interview, an FBI agent claims another agent told him there was a quid-pro-quo. In the interview of the agent who claimed there was a quid-pro-quo, that agent admits he offered it, not kennedy.

FBI docs:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/17/us/politics/document-Hillary-Clinton-FBI.html?_r=1
pps 26-28

 

[The Big Dog]

Your synopsis is an adorable, steaming pile of ********

Yes, redacted FBI agent "A" claims he was called by redacted FBI agent "B" from Internal Operations Division (IOD), and FBI agent "B" claimed Kennedy pressured him.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_5004458066a9805614.jpg[/qimg]

So redacted FBI agent "A" has no direct knowledge of kennedy asking for quid-pro-quo.
It was hearsay from a different agent, and there is no claim that KENNEDY suggested it.

We then get the notes on the interview of redacted FBI agent "B" from Internal Operations Division (IOD):
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_500445806629346880.jpg[/qimg]

VERBATIM the notes say <redacted FBI agent> "told KENNEDY he would look into the e-mail matter if KENNEDY would provide authority concerning the FBIs request to increase personnel in Iraq"
That hilited is the FBI offering quid-pro-quo, not kennedy.

In summary, in his interview, an FBI agent claims another agent told him there was a quid-pro-quo. In the interview of the agent who claimed there was a quid-pro-quo, that agent admits he offered it, not kennedy.

FBI docs:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/17/us/politics/document-Hillary-Clinton-FBI.html?_r=1
pps 26-28

archive it in the basement of the DoS "never to be seen again."

Lolz!

Nice of Kennedy to get back to the FBI about counterterrorism operations.... I mean burying a Clinton classified email never to be seen again.

That is your evidence? Lolz, That makes Kennedy LOOK WORSE!

Fantastic.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It certainly does rise to the level of scrutiny. Your arguement simply doesn't agree with what the laws require and suggests that the act of circumventing regulations is acceptable as long as nothing bad happens. Thats' simply an excuse for the bad behavior.... not a solution.

It was scrutinized, thoroughly. How long are you going to keep being outraged about it?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Latest FBI/State Department kerfuffle: It's been debunked, think CNN would report that? Nope, their breaking news is, "it raises questions."

 

[TheL8Elvis]

archive it in the basement of the DoS "never to be seen again."

Lolz!

Nice of Kennedy to get back to the FBI about counterterrorism operations.... I mean burying a Clinton classified email never to be seen again.

That is your evidence? Lolz, That makes Kennedy LOOK WORSE!

Fantastic.

No, that is the evidence.

That's why your claim here:

That is not accurate. Kennedy called the FBI to bitch about the classification of the email, the FBI guy said while I have you on the phone what about our request for more space for anti-terrorism agents, the contemporaneous notes indicate that Kennedy suggested a quid pro quo, the FBI refused to declassify the document.

By the way, the FBI's preexisting request was PROPER, Kennedy's request to declassify the document was not.

QED

Was, as you like to say, nuked from orbit.

 

[plague311]

No, that is the evidence.

That's why your claim here:



Was, as you like to say, nuked from orbit.

That was pretty devastating, the central premise of The Big Dog's argument was that Kennedy gave the good ol' wink, wink, nudge, nudge, and now that turns out to not have happened at all. In fact, it was the other way around, and somehow his claim is now that, with these new facts, it makes Kennedy look worse

 

[The Big Dog]

No, that is the evidence.

That's why your claim here:

Was, as you like to say, nuked from orbit.

wanna take another look? Every single thing I said in there was 100% correct.

Your email, says that Kennedy wanted to bury an email.

So as i like to say? WIN-WIN!

 

[Tero]

wanna take another look? Every single thing I said in there was 100% correct.

Your email, says that Kennedy wanted to bury an email.

So as i like to say? WIN-WIN!

And the FBI got more agents where they wanted? No. It's like the access to Hillary claims. They got access for the donation. And nothing else. They mostly got an advanced review of some claim. A visa for a soccer player in UK. Which was then denied by the proper personnel.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

wanna take another look? Every single thing I said in there was 100% correct.

Sure... Except for the premise that

A)Kennedy suggested a quid pro quo.

That is not accurate. Kennedy called the FBI to bitch about the classification of the email, the FBI guy said while I have you on the phone what about our request for more space for anti-terrorism agents, the contemporaneous notes indicate that Kennedy suggested a quid pro quo, the FBI refused to declassify the document.

It's not illegal to discuss the classification status of an email, which is the only thing the evidence says Kennedy did.

But keep on digging, it's funny !

 

[The Big Dog]

Sure... Except for the premise that

A)Kennedy suggested a quid pro quo.



It's not illegal to discuss the classification status of an email, which is the only thing the evidence says Kennedy did.

But keep on digging, it's funny !

Oh I see, you left out this:

the contemporaneous notes indicate that Kennedy suggested a quid pro quo

which they do indeed.

drops mic

 

[plague311]

Oh I see, you left out this:

the contemporaneous notes indicate that Kennedy suggested a quid pro quo

which they do indeed.

drops mic

Do you have a source for that? I'm not showing those words appearing next to each other in any other location than when you said them, and that post doesn't contain a link referencing those words.

I think you're making **** up. If you're going to drop the mic, quit being forced to walk back to it, pick it up, and explain where you pulled these things from.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Oh I see, you left out this:

the contemporaneous notes indicate that Kennedy suggested a quid pro quo

which they do indeed.

drops mic

I refer you back to post 2048 and now am finished with this topic, and leave you to your fantasies about what you think happened.

Fantastic !

 

[The Big Dog]

I refer you back to post 2048 and now am finished with this topic, and leave you to your fantasies about what you think happened.

Fantastic !

thanks, that top screen grab is what i was referring to

awesome@