Ed Clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham Part 3

[davefoc]

It's over. My guess is the email scandal was enough to provide the margin of victory for Trump. This scandal remains a mystery to me in that it is beyond belief to me that a person that seems to be as smart as Clinton could have behaved in such a stupid manner on this. She not only acted stupidly when she took this risk with so little to gain if she got away with it, she acted stupidly when she made no plans for dealing with it if she were caught. At a minimum using a separate email address for her personal emails would have eliminated about half of the problems this scandal caused her.

But then after she was caught she had time to implement a recovery plan that could have been well under way by the time she was forced to provide her state department emails. Instead she waited until the last minute, instituted an obviously self serving process for separating out her private emails and finally she acted like a petulant child when she turned over only paper copies of the emails. Her decision to try to destroy all traces of the emails she didn't hand over seems to have been particularly poorly thought out. It was a near certainty that many of the emails that were destroyed would be recovered in various ways and all she accomplished was to waste vast amounts of government worker time working to get the emails she tried to destroy while she provided ready ammunition for her political opponents that she was hiding something.

I am not sure Clinton will ever tell the truth about what went on here, but the truth might be simple. She made a terrible decision based on her own lack of understanding of the issues abetted by sycophants that were afraid to confront her, and her sense that she was above government regulations that applied to lower level people.

 

[shuize]

Double.

 

[shuize]

It's over. My guess is the email scandal was enough to provide the margin of victory for Trump. This scandal remains a mystery to me in that it is beyond belief to me that a person that seems to be as smart as Clinton could have behaved in such a stupid manner on this. She not only acted stupidly when she took this risk with so little to gain if she got away with it, she acted stupidly when she made no plans for dealing with it if she were caught. At a minimum using a separate email address for her personal emails would have eliminated about half of the problems this scandal caused her.

But then after she was caught she had time to implement a recovery plan that could have been well under way by the time she was forced to provide her state department emails. Instead she waited until the last minute, instituted an obviously self serving process for separating out her private emails and finally she acted like a petulant child when she turned over only paper copies of the emails. Her decision to try to destroy all traces of the emails she didn't hand over seems to have been particularly poorly thought out. It was a near certainty that many of the emails that were destroyed would be recovered in various ways and all she accomplished was to waste vast amounts of government worker time working to get the emails she tried to destroy while she provided ready ammunition for her political opponents that she was hiding something.

I am not sure Clinton will ever tell the truth about what went on here, but the truth might be simple. She made a terrible decision based on her own lack of understanding of the issues abetted by sycophants that were afraid to confront her, and her sense that she was above government regulations that applied to lower level people.

I agree with this. Especially the bolded section.

 

[applecorped]

Hillary 2016, Not Indicted Ever !

or elected!!!!

 

[shuize]

Following up on davefoc's post above, is anyone else willing to admit that Clinton's use of a private, unapproved email server probably cost her the election?

Also, looking back, how many think an earlier recommendation by Comey to file charges might have given Democrats time to replace Clinton with a better candidate?

 

[wareyin]

Following up on davefoc's post above, is anyone else willing to admit that Clinton's use of a private, unapproved email server probably cost her the election?

Also, looking back, how many think an earlier recommendation by Comey to file charges might have given Democrats time to replace Clinton with a better candidate?

Wow, you guys really live in a different reality than I do. An earlier recommendation to file charges? You do know that he recommended to not file charges, right?

In the real world, where Comey couldn't find anything to charge Clinton for, how much effect do you think his sudden "Hey, guys, new emails, Clinton is not off the hook yet!" announcement had 11 days before the election? I think it had a lot more effect than the "...nevermind" one did 2 days before the election.

 

[shuize]

Wow, you guys really live in a different reality than I do. An earlier recommendation to file charges? You do know that he recommended to not file charges, right?

In the real world, where Comey couldn't find anything to charge Clinton for, how much effect do you think his sudden "Hey, guys, new emails, Clinton is not off the hook yet!" announcement had 11 days before the election? I think it had a lot more effect than the "...nevermind" one did 2 days before the election.

I shall rephrase. Does anyone think Comey's decision not to recommed charges against Clinton earlier in the election* may have actually hurt Democrats by not allowing them the opportunity to replace Clinton with a better candidate?


* Which he clearly could have done given Comey's own long list of Clinton's acts of "extreme carelessness" in the handling of classified material had he not decided to read a nonexistent "intent" element into 18 U.S.C. 793 (f).

 

[wareyin]

I shall rephrase. Does anyone think Comey's decision not to recommed charges against Clinton earlier in the election* may have actually hurt Democrats by not allowing them the opportunity to replace Clinton with a better candidate?


* Which he clearly could have done given Comey's own long list of Clinton's acts of "extreme carelessness" in the handling of classified material had he not decided to read a nonexistent "intent" element into 18 U.S.C. 793 (f).

And I shall repeat:

In the real world, where Comey couldn't find anything to charge Clinton for, how much effect do you think his sudden "Hey, guys, new emails, Clinton is not off the hook yet!" announcement had 11 days before the election? I think it had a lot more effect than the "...nevermind" one did 2 days before the election.

 

[Lithrael]

It's over. My guess is the email scandal was enough to provide the margin of victory for Trump. This scandal remains a mystery to me in that it is beyond belief to me that a person that seems to be as smart as Clinton could have behaved in such a stupid manner on this. She not only acted stupidly when she took this risk with so little to gain if she got away with it, she acted stupidly when she made no plans for dealing with it if she were caught. At a minimum using a separate email address for her personal emails would have eliminated about half of the problems this scandal caused her.

But then after she was caught she had time to implement a recovery plan that could have been well under way by the time she was forced to provide her state department emails. Instead she waited until the last minute, instituted an obviously self serving process for separating out her private emails and finally she acted like a petulant child when she turned over only paper copies of the emails. Her decision to try to destroy all traces of the emails she didn't hand over seems to have been particularly poorly thought out. It was a near certainty that many of the emails that were destroyed would be recovered in various ways and all she accomplished was to waste vast amounts of government worker time working to get the emails she tried to destroy while she provided ready ammunition for her political opponents that she was hiding something.

I am not sure Clinton will ever tell the truth about what went on here, but the truth might be simple. She made a terrible decision based on her own lack of understanding of the issues abetted by sycophants that were afraid to confront her, and her sense that she was above government regulations that applied to lower level people.

Yeah, this, more or less.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Clinton would have won, easily, 8 years ago.
Being rejected by her own party back then and in 2012 is what made her unappealing this year: she was the heir apparent that no one really wanted but could not prevent.

Thanks Obama!

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Following up on davefoc's post above, is anyone else willing to admit that Clinton's use of a private, unapproved email server probably cost her the election?

Hard to say. Maybe it pushed people over the edge ?

She was already pretty well hated by many prior to this.

Also, looking back, how many think an earlier recommendation by Comey to file charges might have given Democrats time to replace Clinton with a better candidate?

Meh, already addressed.

 

[The Big Dog]

Would Obama consider pardoning Clinton?

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/would-obama-pardon-clinton-231120

 

[davefoc]

And I shall repeat:

In the real world, where Comey couldn't find anything to charge Clinton for, how much effect do you think his sudden "Hey, guys, new emails, Clinton is not off the hook yet!" announcement had 11 days before the election? I think it had a lot more effect than the "...nevermind" one did 2 days before the election.

This is a mischaracterization of the situation. There was absolutely stuff that Clinton could have been charged with. Comey, rightly I suspect, believed that her conduct related to the mishandling of classified material did not warrant prosecution. But there was enough there that it appears that she might have been charged. There was certainly enough for him to castigate her severely for her actions with regard to this. Clinton, probably knowingly, violated rules with regard to the handling of classified material when she provided her hard disk to her lawyer. At that point in time it was established that the server contained classified material and any sort of ignorance defense was out the window. Clinton did bad stuff for reasons that remain unknown but today we have Trump as president elect probably because of it.

And reasonably enough as the Secretary of State there was a strong possibility that she was going to receive highly sensitive material and apparently she did. She mixed in her SoS emails with her personal emails which led to many non-authorized individuals handling that information during the sorting process and even without that many people that operated her email server had access to materials that they weren't authorized to have access to.

There has been many posts like yours throughout this thread that have attempted to minimize the problematic nature of Clinton's actions on this issue. I don't think any of the people that have done it would have been as charitable with their judgment if the same actions had been carried out by Republicans.

In addition, dodging an indictment over the classified material issue doesn't mean that Clinton wasn't subject to penalties over her violation of rules with regard to the archiving of her emails. She got a pass on this stuff, possibly because there wasn't anybody around with the will to pursue it and the Republicans were happy pretty much with the mishandling of classified issue that they used to beat Clinton up with relentlessly.

 

[wareyin]

This is a mischaracterization of the situation. There was absolutely stuff that Clinton could have been charged with. Comey, rightly I suspect, believed that her conduct related to the mishandling of classified material did not warrant prosecution. But there was enough there that it appears that she might have been charged. There was certainly enough for him to castigate her severely for her actions with regard to this. Clinton, probably knowingly, violated rules with regard to the handling of classified material when she provided her hard disk to her lawyer. At that point in time it was established that the server contained classified material and any sort of ignorance defense was out the window. Clinton did bad stuff for reasons that remain unknown but today we have Trump as president elect probably because of it.

And reasonably enough as the Secretary of State there was a strong possibility that she was going to receive highly sensitive material and apparently she did. She mixed in her SoS emails with her personal emails which led to many non-authorized individuals handling that information during the sorting process and even without that many people that operated her email server had access to materials that they weren't authorized to have access to.

There has been many posts like yours throughout this thread that have attempted to minimize the problematic nature of Clinton's actions on this issue. I don't think any of the people that have done it would have been as charitable with their judgment if the same actions had been carried out by Republicans.

In addition, dodging an indictment over the classified material issue doesn't mean that Clinton wasn't subject to penalties over her violation of rules with regard to the archiving of her emails. She got a pass on this stuff, possibly because there wasn't anybody around with the will to pursue it and the Republicans were happy pretty much with the mishandling of classified issue that they used to beat Clinton up with relentlessly.

I appreciate that you preface your post with a description of what will follow. Comey broke protocol to castigate Clinton, despite not finding anything to charge her with. Despite the endless howling from the right, private emails have been common among Secretaries of State and many other politicians (including Bush). The only reason this was an issue was because Clinton did it. No one has ever been charged for similar actions, and the FBI almost always recommends charges but didn't this time. It's up to the prosecutors to decide if the investigators' recommendation to charge has merit. The fact that Comey knew his case had no merit weakens your claim of "stuff" Clinton could have been charged with.

 

[shuize]

Clinton would have won, easily, 8 years ago.
Being rejected by her own party back then and in 2012 is what made her unappealing this year: she was the heir apparent that no one really wanted but could not prevent.

Thanks Obama!

Always the bridesmaid, never the bride.

 

[davefoc]

I appreciate that you preface your post with a description of what will follow. Comey broke protocol to castigate Clinton, despite not finding anything to charge her with. Despite the endless howling from the right, private emails have been common among Secretaries of State and many other politicians (including Bush). The only reason this was an issue was because Clinton did it. No one has ever been charged for similar actions, and the FBI almost always recommends charges but didn't this time. It's up to the prosecutors to decide if the investigators' recommendation to charge has merit. The fact that Comey knew his case had no merit weakens your claim of "stuff" Clinton could have been charged with.

This issue has been argued to death in this thread. You think what she did wasn't that bad and attempt to minimize it by bringing up the lesser bad acts of others. I think her actions were reckless, hypocritical, illegal, and stupid. One thing to keep in mind when you attempt to minimize the problems with her actions is that she was one of the main critics of the Republican use of private email about a year before she took office as Secretary of State.

How do you know Comey thought the case had no merit? He very well could have done as I suspect. Weighed the evidence and the probable bad actions of Clinton and thought they weren't at the level of something he felt should be prosecuted. That doesn't mean the call wasn't a close one and another prosecutor might have felt differently. Almost certainly, a low level individual that did what Clinton did would have been fired from the State Department and it is conceivable that he would have received sanctions beyond that. Clinton did some bad stuff here and partisan white washing doesn't fix that.

Even if you've convinced yourself that this was just some minor thing on Clinton's part it was still brain dead stupid. When it was discovered it served as a platform to bash Clinton from for years leading up to the election. And it's not like Clinton couldn't figure out that it could serve as something to bash her for because she had bashed the Republicans for doing the same thing.

Perhaps off topic, but I am in mourning today over the election of Trump. Trump is a racist jerk. Trump repeatedly engaged in fraudulent business practices. Trump's incompetence led to the failure of numerous businesses. Trump has promoted miscellaneous stupid conspiracy theories most notably the racist birther crap and the Chinese created global warming nonsense. Trump's vice president is significantly anti-gay and that scares me with regard to my gay family members and friends.

Many of the policies Trump advocated are brain dead stupid and if he really pursues them the US is in for some hard times. We have just lived through a horrible recession and if Trump really pursues some of his nonsense I think the US will find itself in horrible recession that will make the last one look like child's play.

Trump is president today most probably directly because of Clinton's actions with regard to the emails and the conflicts of interest with her foundation. Clinton's critics have often lost touch with reality, but there is enough real stuff there that even moderates have pretty good reasons to not be happy with her.

 

[wareyin]

This issue has been argued to death in this thread. You think what she did wasn't that bad and attempt to minimize it by bringing up the lesser bad acts of others. I think her actions were reckless, hypocritical, illegal, and stupid. One thing to keep in mind when you attempt to minimize the problems with her actions is that she was one of the main critics of the Republican use of private email about a year before she took office as Secretary of State.

How do you know Comey thought the case had no merit? He very well could have done as I suspect. Weighed the evidence and the probable bad actions of Clinton and thought they weren't at the level of something he felt should be prosecuted. That doesn't mean the call wasn't a close one and another prosecutor might have felt differently. Almost certainly, a low level individual that did what Clinton did would have been fired from the State Department and it is conceivable that he would have received sanctions beyond that. Clinton did some bad stuff here and partisan white washing doesn't fix that.

Even if you've convinced yourself that this was just some minor thing on Clinton's part it was still brain dead stupid. When it was discovered it served as a platform to bash Clinton from for years leading up to the election. And it's not like Clinton couldn't figure out that it could serve as something to bash her for because she had bashed the Republicans for doing the same thing.

How do I know Comey thought the case had no merit? Because, as I said earlier, investigators who have spent years of effort on a case almost always push for it to be prosecuted.

Perhaps off topic, but I am in mourning today over the election of Trump. Trump is a racist jerk. Trump repeatedly engaged in fraudulent business practices. Trump's incompetence led to the failure of numerous businesses. Trump has promoted miscellaneous stupid conspiracy theories most notably the racist birther crap and the Chinese created global warming nonsense. Trump's vice president is significantly anti-gay and that scares me with regard to my gay family members and friends.

Many of the policies Trump advocated are brain dead stupid and if he really pursues them the US is in for some hard times. We have just lived through a horrible recession and if Trump really pursues some of his nonsense I think the US will find itself in horrible recession that will make the last one look like child's play.

Trump is president today most probably directly because of Clinton's actions with regard to the emails and the conflicts of interest with her foundation. Clinton's critics have often lost touch with reality, but there is enough real stuff there that even moderates have pretty good reasons to not be happy with her.

I'm in mourning, as well, but I'm also pretty disgusted with those who didn't want Trump to win who were more than happy to make a mountain out of this molehill, to constantly harp on and on about how terrible Clinton was for doing a common and routine thing. What did they think would happen, with their constant attempts to drag Clinton down? There were only 2 people who could have won, and Clinton had to dodge friendly fire from sanctimonious progressives as well as fight off Putin/wikileaks, an FBI director who breaks protocol to castigate her, that same FBI director breaking protocol as well as his superior's desires to remind everyone of the email issue, and still won more of the popular vote than Trump.

 

[shuize]

In the real world, where Comey couldn't find anything to charge Clinton for, how much effect do you think his sudden "Hey, guys, new emails, Clinton is not off the hook yet!" announcement had 11 days before the election? I think it had a lot more effect than the "...nevermind" one did 2 days before the election.

In the real world, 18 U.S.C. 793 (f) does not have an "intent" element. Other parts of 18 U.S.C. 793 do requires some kind of intentional act, but not 793 (f), the section related to mishandling or losing classified information. It is satisfied through "gross negligence." Comey's reading an intent requirement into 793 (f) makes no sense. His statement that "no reasonable prosecutor" would have charged her also makes no sense. As davefoc correctly noted above, Clinton absolutely could have been charged. The fact that she was not was purely discretionary on the part of Comey.

 

[Ziggurat]

I wonder if Trump regrets telling people how they can change their vote if they had already done it.

The answer to that question is pretty clear now.

 

[wareyin]

In the real world, 18 U.S.C. 793 (f) does not have an "intent" element. Other parts of 18 U.S.C. 793 do requires some kind of intentional act, but not 793 (f), the section related to mishandling or losing classified information. It is satisfied through "gross negligence." Comey's reading an intent requirement into 793 (f) makes no sense. His statement that "no reasonable prosecutor" would have charged her also makes no sense. As davefoc correctly noted above, Clinton absolutely could have been charged. The fact that she was not was purely discretionary on the part of Comey.

The simple fact that nobody has ever been charged for similar actions despite their mundane and routine nature kind of kills your point.