Ed clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

Status
Not open for further replies.
16.5 said:
Not yet, lots of plummeting poll numbers and a guy taking the Fifth, tho.

Hillary 2016, Not Indicted yet!

Inspirational.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I find this as inspirational as you do, but I'll probably vote for Clinton.

56655f321e55884f.jpg
 
wareyin said:
Some are certainly surly when you point out what they've fallen for!

How about you? Do you stand with 16.5 and davefoc on team Believe, or can you smell the stench of that website's pile from here?
Click to expand...

Lol

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Too funny.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
State dept. hasn't provided any evidence about thiers, either.
Click to expand...
Is your argument that in the absence of evidence, the most reasonable conclusion is that Clinton's personal server had equal or better security than the department of State?

IDK. I had a TS and I don't recall things being as you say.

You have a link so the state dept FAH/FAM where this is spelled out, right ?
Click to expand...

Check out http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/88405.pdf, 12 FAM 551.2.c .

A “security violation” is a security incident that, in the judgment of DS/ISP/APB, results in actual or possible compromise of the information. For example, if an employee transmits a classified document over an unclassified facsimile machine, the incident would be adjudicated as a violation, as the possibility for electronic interception and transcription of the classified document is real.
Click to expand...

Edit: I have failed to mention one important thing. I would concede that Clinton is almost certainly in the clear as far as the classified material mishandling could be a legal issue. She's a second order element of the problem. I still think her behavior was irresponsible, but not actionably so.
 
Last edited:
Beeyon said:
...

Edit: I have failed to mention one important thing. I would concede that Clinton is almost certainly in the clear as far as the classified material mishandling could be a legal issue. She's a second order element of the problem. I still think her behavior was irresponsible, but not actionably so.
Click to expand...

I think you may underestimate the possibility of some Clinton legal troubles over this. She sent and received material that was classified over her server. She doesn't seem to have notified any appropriate organization that she was sending and receiving sensitive information subject to classification if it wasn't already classified. And if she did receive TS information without notifying anybody and it might be inferred that a reasonable person would have recognized it as sensitive information that was probably classified then this scandal is going to rise to the level where it will be difficult for her to continue.

What a few people participating in this thread don't seem to get is that if she had used an official account the onus for securing her emails would have been somebody else's problem. As it is the security of her HCS is exactly her responsibility and we don't know that she made any extraordinary efforts to secure that server. Does she have a record of everybody that had access to that server either physically or through the internet? Does she know what kinds of software were on it to detect attempts to hack it? Does she know what the media for the backups was and where they were stored? She took it on herself to take this responsibility and there is no evidence that she took any extraordinary precautions to protect a server that would almost certainly be the target of foreign powers and just routine hackers to breach.

The standard claim here seems to be that people shouldn't send the secretary of state classified material on her unsecured email account. That sounds fair. So what did she do when that happened? Right now it seems like she did nothing, not only does it seem she did nothing, it seems like she was encouraging it by engaging in the same behavior herself. And then there is the issue that she allegedly received top secret information on her server. It is not going to go well for her if this is so and she did nothing about it.

But I agree with SkepticGinger and a few other people who have expressed the same notion, the only way we are really going to understand what went on here with transmission and reception of classified material issue to any degree is for an official report to be released on the situation and to see if an indictment follows. News leaks that are per force ambiguous on this kind of issue are not going to cut it if the goal is some kind of objective conclusion about the use of Clinton's server for the transfer of classified information.

I think it's pretty clear that for other reasons the use of an HCS was a really stupid idea. Clinton seems to agree that it wasn't a good idea. The Clinton defenders here haven't yet caught up to the new direction that the Clinton defense on this is moving.
 
Last edited:
Beeyon said:
Is your argument that in the absence of evidence, the most reasonable conclusion is that Clinton's personal server had equal or better security than the department of State?
Click to expand...
No, that would be silly.

Beeyon said:
Check out http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/88405.pdf, 12 FAM 551.2.c .
Click to expand...

Thanks !

Beeyon said:
Edit: I have failed to mention one important thing. I would concede that Clinton is almost certainly in the clear as far as the classified material mishandling could be a legal issue. She's a second order element of the problem. I still think her behavior was irresponsible, but not actionably so.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's an unreasonable position.
 
davefoc said:
I think you may underestimate the possibility of some Clinton legal troubles over this. She sent and received material that was classified over her server. She doesn't seem to have notified any appropriate organization that she was sending and receiving sensitive information subject to classification if it wasn't already classified. And if she did receive TS information without notifying anybody and it might be inferred that a reasonable person would have recognized it as sensitive information that was probably classified then this scandal is going to rise to the level where it will be difficult for her to continue.
Click to expand...

I agree with Beeyon that HRCs actions don't rise to a level high enough for legal trouble for her. Most of what has been declared "classified" is low level, and debatable.

Clearly her actions have caused political fallout, how much remains to be seen. Still too early too tell.

davefoc said:
What a few people participating in this thread don't seem to get is that if she had used an official account the onus for securing her emails would have been somebody else's problem. As it is the security of her HCS is exactly her responsibility and we don't know that she made any extraordinary efforts to secure that server. Does she have a record of everybody that had access to that server either physically or through the internet? Does she know what kinds of software were on it to detect attempts to hack it? Does she know what the media for the backups was and where they were stored? She took it on herself to take this responsibility and there is no evidence that she took any extraordinary precautions to protect a server that would almost certainly be the target of foreign powers and just routine hackers to breach.
Click to expand...

The problem you outlined in the first paragraph remains even on state dept networks, IMO.

davefoc said:
The standard claim here seems to be that people shouldn't send the secretary of state classified material on her unsecured email account. That sounds fair. So what did she do when that happened? Right now it seems like she did nothing, not only does it seem she did nothing, it seems like she was encouraging it by engaging in the same behavior herself. And then there is the issue that she allegedly received top secret information on her server. It is not going to go well for her if this is so and she did nothing about it.
Click to expand...

I don't think she lied about the classified material. I think she believed everything she sent or received was unclassified, because she was relying on those around her to be following the rules.

davefoc said:
But I agree with SkepticGinger and a few other people who have expressed the same notion, the only way we are really going to understand what went on here with transmission and reception of classified material issue to any degree is for an official report to be released on the situation and to see if an indictment follows. News leaks that are per force ambiguous on this kind of issue are not going to cut it if the goal is some kind of objective conclusion about the use of Clinton's server for the transfer of classified information.

I think it's pretty clear that for other reasons the use of an HCS was a really stupid idea. Clinton seems to agree that it wasn't a good idea. The Clinton defenders here haven't yet caught up to the new direction that the Clinton defense on this is moving.
Click to expand...

I don't think I have been arguing it was a good idea.

Just that it doesn't make her incompetent, and that from the benefit of being 5 years in the future from her actions, the only outcome that seems to worse is her presidential bid.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
I don't think she lied about the classified material. I think she believed everything she sent or received was unclassified, because she was relying on those around her to be following the rules.
Click to expand...

except the classified draft she told her aide to send to her via email right?

Oh yeah.... that......
 
TheL8Elvis said:
...

I don't think I have been arguing it was a good idea.

Just that it doesn't make her incompetent, and that from the benefit of being 5 years in the future from her actions, the only outcome that seems to worse is her presidential bid.
Click to expand...

I don't think she's incompetent. I think there is ample evidence with regard to the email servers that she acted in an incompetent and potentially corrupt way.

The corruption is that she may have set out to avoid the capture of her emails as required by using the HCS instead of her government email address. The evidence I put forth up thread points strongly to this possibility.

The incompetence comes from the fact that she attempted to get away with something in a simplistic way that was unlikely to work. Further the incompetence comes from the fact that she mixed various kinds of emails together in a way that was going to require a dodgy process potentially subject to public ridicule to separate the emails if she did get caught. Further her actions demonstrated incompetence because she seems to have been unaware of the potential for security problems on her HCS. Taken all together these actions suggest that she has done a poor job of selecting advisers or she has done a poor job of ensuring that she received candid advice from her advisers.

ETA: I also see her actions as demonstrating some world class arrogance. She expected the little people in the State Department to use their government email accounts but she and her buddies got to use an HCS. Even if nobody discussed the problems of archiving and security with the use of an HCS with her, it seems like somebody in her little circle might have mentioned that her actions made her look damn arrogant.
 
Last edited:
wareyin said:
Politifact takes a pretty sensible approach: Nothing is proven, withhold judgement.
Click to expand...

While many keep harping about classified, for and against. One of the main issues was, why someone who claims to want to be so transparent used the cowboy server. It is a valid question. Your article mentions it as well.
This is not to say Clinton’s email setup was allowed or appropriate -- for example, it skirted open records laws and presents challenges to archivists.
Click to expand...

Trust is a large issue with many voters. I think this will haunt her to the end. No matter what the end is!
 
If she was trying to use the government Lotus Notes email system at the same period of time that I was, I don't blame her...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom