Ed Clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham Part 3

[wareyin]

"Director Comey said my answers were truthful". Everyone knows this quote by now. And everyone also knows that it's a lie. Why you persist in this bizarre defense of Hillary baffles me.

Congratulations, you have finally made a correct claim about what Clinton said! I knew you could do it! Too bad that is a different sentiment than the one you've been ascribing to her.

It is when the subject isn't about that choice. Once again, we have an entire subforum about that choice. This thread is not in that subforum, and the argument I presented here isn't about that choice. It may be the only thing you're capable of thinking about, but not all of us suffer from such limitations.

You may think it a limitation to understand the actual choice in front of me, but I don't. From my perspective, being unable to see what my real choice is is a limitation. I guess some of us are concerned with actual events, and some are more interested in naval gazing about how every event occurs in a vacuum, never affecting or being affected by anything else.

 

[plague311]

Zigg has not used ANY misleading language! Clinton did!
Please pay SOME attention. Stop arguing for the sake of arguing. It doesn't look good! Nor is it making ANY sense!

Just because something doesn't make sense to you, does not mean it makes no sense to other people. Don't project your lack of comprehension on others.

 

[Ziggurat]

Congratulations, you have finally made a correct claim about what Clinton said! I knew you could do it! Too bad that is a different sentiment than the one you've been ascribing to her.

You keep saying that, and yet, you can never say why. I'm left to conclude that your objection is a mere mental tic.

 

[wareyin]

You keep saying that, and yet, you can never say why. I'm left to conclude that your objection is a mere mental tic.

Truthful and exonerate are 2 different words, with vastly different meanings. One was used by Clinton, the other was used by you. Are you certain that you can't tell the difference?

 

[Ziggurat]

Truthful and exonerate are 2 different words, with vastly different meanings.

No ****, Sherlock. One's an adjective, one's a verb.

One was used by Clinton, the other was used by you. Are you certain that you can't tell the difference?

You say that like these words exist in isolation. They do not. They are used in a sentence, and the sentences have a context. It's not the meaning of single words which needs comparing here.

But I'm amused that this is the full extent of your argument. It's hilariously weak.

 

[wareyin]

No ****, Sherlock. One's an adjective, one's a verb.



You say that like these words exist in isolation. They do not. They are used in a sentence, and the sentences have a context. It's not the meaning of single words which needs comparing here.

But I'm amused that this is the full extent of your argument. It's hilariously weak.

That's nice. I'm still waiting for you to actually support your argument that they are the same. I mean, we all know they aren't, but I'm curious how you're going to try.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It must be very hard for some people who were certain Clinton would be indicted and then she wasn't, and they were/are so sure this will be her downfall, but then it isn't.

I think most people have moved on judging by the polls and given how hard the news media is still trying to replay their worn out Clinton scandal card. Bet you Cotton's latest charge goes nowhere.

 

[wareyin]

It must be very hard for some people who were certain Clinton would be indicted and then she wasn't, and they were/are so sure this will be her downfall, but then it isn't.

I think most people have moved on judging by the polls and given how hard the news media is still trying to replay their worn out Clinton scandal card. Bet you Cotton's latest charge goes nowhere.

I agree. This is a last, desperate attempt to find something bad here, not an argument.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You'd have a lot more cred, Zig, if you hadn't used the opposite, but equally distorted claim of what Comey said.

 

[Ziggurat]

You'd have a lot more cred, Zig, if you hadn't used the opposite, but equally distorted claim of what Comey said.

Comey said her public statements were false. And I said that previously. That directly contradicts Hillary's claim about what she said. She claimed the opposite of what he said. I didn't.

And you're lying just as much as Hillary at this point.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Comey said her public statements were false. And I said that previously. That directly contradicts Hillary's claim about what she said. She claimed the opposite of what he said. I didn't.

And you're lying just as much as Hillary at this point.

Here's your problem, he said some information in the statements was incorrect. He did not say she made false statements. He went out of his way to not be trapped into that leading question.

You are distorting what was said, trying to turn 'mistaken' into 'lie'. That's no different from Clinton saying, "He said I told the truth" when what he actually said was, "He didn't find that she lied". If anything Clinton's version is closer to what Comey said than your version of what you claim he said.

 

[Ziggurat]

Here's your problem, he said some information in the statements was incorrect. He did not say she made false statements. He went out of his way to not be trapped into that leading question.

Incorrect is the same as false. What he stepped around is whether or not she lied, but his statement explicitly means hers were false. Your attempt to draw a nonexistent distinction here is pathetic.

But it's doubly ironic because Comey didn't use the word "incorrect", and you're stuck on individual words and not total meaning. Comey said her statements were "not true". Which, again, is the same thing as false.

And it's triply ironic because you're contradicting your own source. You have relied upon Politifact to try to minimize the significance of Hillary's email lies, but this is a case where Politifact calls "pants on fire".

 

[The Big Dog]

You are distorting what was said, trying to turn 'mistaken' into 'lie'. That's no different from Clinton saying, "He said I told the truth" when what he actually said was, "He didn't find that she lied". If anything Clinton's version is closer to what Comey said than your version of what you claim he said.

mistaken? she lied often and avidly, and gets away with it because her supporters do not *********** care.

lolz.

btw? next time try that in English

 

[Tony Stark]

Republicans were so sure this would be the silver bullet that would finally slay the Hildebeast.

Republicans are always wrong.

LOL.

 

[Tony Stark]

mistaken? she lied often and avidly, and gets away with it because her supporters do not *********** care.

lolz.

btw? next time try that in English

Speaking of mistakes, remember when you were saying that you would be shocked if she even ran and that Obama would have to pardon her to keep her out of prison.

LOL

 

[wareyin]

Logging on with tapatalk, I see the last picture posted in this thread as the link to open it. In this case, the picture is one I believe TheL8Elvis posted, which says "Sour grapes make the best whine." The sentiment is still quite appropriate.

 

[The Big Dog]

Speaking of mistakes, remember when you were saying that you would be shocked if she even ran and that Obama would have to pardon her to keep her out of prison.

LOL

I sure do, but I forgot the maxim that you can fool the American public all the time.

Heck, here we have "skeptics" who constantly excuse her bald faced lies, despite the fact that she and her husband are epic level scum bags.

"Director Comey said my answers were truthful". Hell, she does not even think her supporters are stupid anymore, she is banking on it.

 

[The Big Dog]

FBI probe of Clinton's emails prompted by espionage fears, secret letters say

https://news.vice.com/article/hillary-clinton-emails-fbi-investigation-section-811

Thanks Hillary! Hope that was "convenient" enough for you.

 

[Tony Stark]

https://news.vice.com/article/hillary-clinton-emails-fbi-investigation-section-811

Thanks Hillary! Hope that was "convenient" enough for you.

Your link is broken. Here is a fixed one:

https://news.vice.com/article/hillary-clinton-emails-fbi-investigation-section-811

ETA: mine doesn't work either, delete the quote at the end of the url after clicking it and refresh.

And of course, we now know that there is no evidence that her emails were hacked. While we know for a fact that State has been hacked.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

https://news.vice.com/article/hillary-clinton-emails-fbi-investigation-section-811

Thanks Hillary! Hope that was "convenient" enough for you.

Hey look, I was right (again) - it was a security investigation !!

Thanks for the confirmation link, Big Dog !

Two secret letters the FBI sent to the State Department have revealed for the first time that the bureau's investigation into Hillary Clinton's private email server, and the classified emails sent through it, stemmed from a so-called "Section 811" referral from the Intelligence Community's Inspector General (ICIG). The ICIG determined that classified, national security information in Clinton's emails may have been "compromised" and shared with "a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power."

Section 811 of the Intelligence Authorization Act of 1995 "is the statutory authority that governs the coordination of counterespionage investigations between Executive Branch departments or agencies and the FBI." A Section 811 referral is a report to the FBI about any unauthorized information that may have been disclosed to a foreign power

A Section 811 referral "arises whenever there is a compromise of classified information — for whatever reason," said Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists. "It could include espionage, but it could also include negligence, inadvertence, or something else.... Section 811 does not assert a violation of criminal law."

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/ag/legacy/2008/10/03/guidelines.pdf

<>
I think the above document clearly spells out that the FBI conducts multiple types of investigations, including criminal investigations and security investigations.

The fact that this for this matter the IC IG did not make a criminal referral- it was a security referral made for counterintelligence purposes. , and the fact that Comey would not acknowledge to a specific question that it was a criminal investigation:

Catherine: So it’s a criminal investigation?
Director Comey: We’re conducting an investigation. That’s the bureau’s business. That’s what we do. That’s probably all I can say about it.​

might lead someone being skeptical to hesitate to say it's clearly a criminal investigation.

YMMV