• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Ed Clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
I caught the tail end of an interview with a congressman this morning. I didn't catch the beginning, so I don't know which congressman he was, but I found it priceless. He thought that Hillary Clinton should have been prosecuted. In describing why, he was emphasizing how important it was to protect classified data. To really drive the point home, he talked about congressional staffers who had mishandled classified data and "almost got fired".

Those aren't scare quote there. That's what he actually said. Yes, they mishandled classified data and "almost got fired", which proves that Hillary Clinton should be in jail.

The specific offense committed by the congressional aides was leaving classified documents on desks, instead of putting them back in the safe where they belong. That exposes documents to people without security clearances. From back in my day handling classified documents, the congressperson was correct. That's the kind of thing that could get you almost fired. In my company, it was a guaranteed written reprimand placed in your personnel file. Repeated offenses would result first in suspension, then termination. Of course, the company didn't issue security clearances, but the offenses were reported to the government's security officers and could result in revocation of security clearances, and if you didn't have a clearance, you were uselss to the company, so you would be fired.

Note, though, that there was no talk of prosecution, because that's not the sort of thing people get prosecuted for. Technically, it's a crime. Those regulations about handling of classified data are paired with criminal statutes. Any violation is, technically, something which could result in prosecution, although it never did unless there were some pretty extreme circumstance involved.

So here was the congressperson using a case of someone mishandling classified data, and receiving absolutely no consequence other than a stern talking to, but their case was being used in support of an argument that someone should go to jail. And there was no trace of irony in his voice.
 
Bottom line: Comey testifying Thoroughly Ignorant Hillary is too stupid to understand what she did, therefore he won't prosecute.

Well he is half right!
 
Comey: 1) Did not attend interview 2) Hillary not under oath 3) Hearing not recorded

That is freaking ridiculous.

The disclosure that Comey thinks Hillary is dumb as a box of nails does not justify this kid-glove handling.
 
Comey swears, under oath, that his decision was based only on the facts and not politics at all and that neither Hillary's campaign or the Obama Administration influenced him at all.

I guess that means he just perjured himself.
 
Comey just said that the FBI interviewed the hacker Guccifer about his claim he hacked Hillary's server. He admitted he lied about that.
 
How many posts here on ISF would be deemed classified using the same criteria as the emails on Hillary's server?

We routinely discuss things like the US drone assassination program which is still technically classified. Never mind that we are basing our posts on speculation and public sources of information.
 
Last edited:
Comey clearly concluded that the gross negligence standard would not suffice for a prosecution despite the plain language of the statute.

He also did not talk to all of the FBI agents who were at the interview with Hillary, which was not recorded because reasons.
 
It sounds like Comey is contradicting pretty much every single GOP accusation against her? Are you sure it's Comey and not Skeptic Ginger?
 
16.5 said:
Comey clearly concluded that the gross negligence standard would not suffice for a prosecution despite the plain language of the statute.

He also did not talk to all of the FBI agents who were at the interview with Hillary, which was not recorded because reasons.
Click to expand...
Let me guess, you think the Republican FBI Director is a corrupt liar in Hillary's pocket.

LOL.
 
Tony Stark said:
Comey just said that the FBI interviewed the hacker Guccifer about his claim he hacked Hillary's server. He admitted he lied about that.
Click to expand...

Haha man, 16.5 and zigg hung their hat on that claim, or maybe it was fud. They were convinced that a hacker would NEVER make that up because it wouldn't help them at all!!

ETA: I apologize, it was 16.5 and fud, and they didn't necessarily hang their hats on it. Just stated it was evidence that she could have been hacked and therefore she's up ****'s creek.
 
Last edited:
Kestrel said:
How many posts here on ISF would be deemed classified using the same criteria the emails on Hillary's server?

We routinely discuss things like the US drone assassination program which is still technically classified. Never mind that we are basing our posts on speculation and public sources of information.
Click to expand...

People without security clearances are mostly allowed to do whatever they want with classified information. It is the very fact of having a security clearance that places tight restrictions on your freedom of speech. It is certainly one of the reasons to give up your security clearance the moment you don't need it for work anymore.

Technically, I believe the Espionage Act allows for prosecution of regular civilians for conveying classified information to a hostile foreign power, but I think it has been used a total of two or three times in one hundred years to prosecute people who didn't have security clearances.
 
Tony Stark said:
Let me guess, you think the Republican FBI Director is a corrupt liar in Hillary's pocket.

LOL.
Click to expand...
He said the decision among the direct team (~20 people) was unanimous.

I thought the one Republican from Texas was going to explode because of Comey's steadfast adherence to logical thinking.
 
Is it your statement, then, before this committee that secretary Clinton should have known not to send classified material and yet she did?” Walberg asked.

“Certainly she should have known not to send classified information,” Comey responded. “As I said, that's the definition of negligent. I think she was extremely careless. I have think she was negligent. That I could establish. What we can't establish is that she acted with the necessary criminal intent.”

Hillary for President, I'm Too Damn Dumb to Get Indicted!
 
DavidJames said:
He said the decision among the direct team (~20 people) was unanimous.

I thought the one Republican from Texas was going to explode because of Comey's steadfast adherence to logical thinking.
Click to expand...
That just means the entire team is corrupt. Maybe Hillary paid them each a million dollars.
 
Tony Stark said:
Comey just said that one of his employees would not be prosecuted for this.
Click to expand...

If he really said that, then my respect for him just dropped an order of magnitude. It's clearly false. Hillary was not prosecuted because it is too disruptive to the political process, and he felt that it is better to put the information out there and let the voters decide (sort of like John Roberts' thinking with respect to the Obamacare mandate/"tax"). I think that's justifiable from a certain perspective. It sets a very bad precedent, however, and will make it much harder to protect classified information through use of the criminal statutes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom