Ed clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

[DavidJames]

I'll drop out until genuine new, independent, information comes out. As opposed to the daily drivel out of rehashed, hit piece nonsense like the Benghazi thread has become.

 

[wareyin]

Your Fallacy is Cherry picking

You appear to be reading in to what Issa says, as well as what I say.
Also, please note that one can agree with some things said by a person, while disagreeing with other things said by the same individual. That is not cherry picking.

 

[The Big Dog]

You appear to be reading in to what Issa says, as well as what I say.
Also, please note that one can agree with some things said by a person, while disagreeing with other things said by the same individual. That is not cherry picking.

In this case, it is. Amusingly so.

Thanks for posting.

 

[wareyin]

In this case, it is. Amusingly so.

Thanks for posting.

Your expertise in fallacies rivals that of your legal knowledge, as well as your computer expertise.

 

[The Big Dog]

Your expertise in fallacies rivals that of your legal knowledge, as well as your computer expertise.

Ok.

Thanks for posting.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Is it now your position that Hillary is not a liar?

I have no position one way or the other. What about my initial post led you to perceive differently?

 

[The Big Dog]

Grrrr.... can't watch press conference.

The gist seems to be that the server was indeed at her home, she used it for "convenience," she deleted 1000's of "personal" emails from her server, and that her server would remain "private."

well if "future president" Hillary Clinton decided that they were "personal" I guess we will have to take her word for it.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

How quickly do you think 55,000 pages can be scanned and OCR'ed (with the necessary corrections)? Sure, it will probably get done, but it's hardly what I would call "easy". And it sure as **** isn't going to be quick.

relevant:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-press-conference/

The State Department did offer details on how the emails would be released prior to Clinton's press conference. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said after the review of the 55,000 pages of documents Clinton turned over to State — which would take months — they would be posted on a publicly accessible website. The 300 emails pertaining to the request made by the congressional committee investigating the attacks in Benghazi, amounting to about 900 pages, will be released first.

Psaki said the review wouldn't cost taxpayers anymore than a review of emails sent entirely through an official State Department email would, as both are done with hard-copy printouts.

 

[mgidm86]

The hole deepens.

Apparently, it is impossible to have more than one email account on her "device". Silly me, all this time I thought I had 4 email accounts on mine.

"I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department, because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two," she said. "Looking back, it would have been better if I'd simply used a second email account and carried a second phone, but at the time, this didn't seem like an issue."

I said earlier that convenience was a non starter - there is nothing more convenient about running your own server except for the ability to control the emails themselves, as in which to delete and who has access to them.

She says she'd have to carry two phones to have two email addresses? This is getting good. Try again. So far she has given no good reason for the server.

"I trust the American people to make their decisions about political and public matters and I feel like I've taken unprecedented steps for these emails to be in the public domain," Clinton said. "I went above and beyond what I was requested to do."

She actually said this? She has taken unprecedented steps to do the exact opposite and has gone above and beyond anyone in keeping her emails out of reach. How ridiculous.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-press-conference/index.html

The other 30,000 — which included everything from wedding planning to yoga routines, Clinton said — she deleted.

This is exactly the point - she has total control of every email sent. Nobody knows who she sent them to if they don't exist on her end, so how can anyone easily find a "paper trail" on any other server?

This is okay with people here? It sure as heck isn't with me. Not even close. Does she think people are that stupid? Are you?

 

[12AX7]

I'll drop out until genuine new, independent, information comes out. As opposed to the daily drivel out of rehashed, hit piece nonsense like the Benghazi thread has become.

To be fair, it was that from the beginning.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

The hole deepens.

Apparently, it is impossible to have more than one email account on her "device". Silly me, all this time I thought I had 4 email accounts on mine.

I said earlier that convenience was a non starter - there is nothing more convenient about running your own server except for the ability to control the emails themselves, as in which to delete and who has access to them.

She says she'd have to carry two phones to have two email addresses? This is getting good. Try again. So far she has given no good reason for the server.

I think you are making unwarranted assumptions about the rules regarding govt email on private devices.

She actually said this? She has taken unprecedented steps to do the exact opposite and has gone above and beyond anyone in keeping her emails out of reach. How ridiculous.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-press-conference/index.html

This is exactly the point - she has total control of every email sent. Nobody knows who she sent them to if they don't exist on her end, so how can anyone easily find a "paper trail" on any other server?

Every recipient she sent the emails to ? Or are they all in on the cover-up too ?

This is okay with people here? It sure as heck isn't with me. Not even close. Does she think people are that stupid? Are you?

As I said on the first page of the thread:

*shrugs*
Sounds like she was using following the letter of the law, but not the spirit.

Still seems that way. I'm not thrilled with it, but it won't stop me from potentially voting for her is she runs for president.

 

[mgidm86]

I think you are making unwarranted assumptions about the rules regarding govt email on private devices.



Every recipient she sent the emails to ? Or are they all in on the cover-up too ?



As I said on the first page of the thread:


Still seems that way. I'm not thrilled with it, but it won't stop me from potentially voting for her is she runs for president.

Are there rules that you can only have one email address per device? Or that you can't mix gov email accounts with personal ones on any given device? If, so does mixing your personal emails with business on a single server circumvent this, or am I misunderstanding what you are trying to say? I may be.

Hey, I didn't start the thread and I don't follow the Benghazi stuff. But I can't look at this critically and not think that this is sleazy. I don't need a conspiracy to see that her excuses are silly.

I have enough reasons for not voting for her, or pretty much any other potential candidate, left or right. She definitely has a lot of baggage though.

But this thread is about a politician having her own email server which she controls the contents of, as she has admitted. This is not power I want politicians to have, any of them.

 

[Ziggurat]

This is exactly the point - she has total control of every email sent. Nobody knows who she sent them to if they don't exist on her end, so how can anyone easily find a "paper trail" on any other server?

This is okay with people here? It sure as heck isn't with me. Not even close. Does she think people are that stupid? Are you?

Forget it, Jake. It's Clintontown.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Are there rules that you can only have one email address per device? Or that you can't mix gov email accounts with personal ones on any given device? If, so does mixing your personal emails with business on a single server circumvent this, or am I misunderstanding what you are trying to say? I may be.

I am trying to say there may be rules regarding mixing work and personal mails on device, hence the 2 phones. Work and personal phone. It's certainly not out of the question. And 6 years ago, even less so.

Hey, I didn't start the thread and I don't follow the Benghazi stuff. But I can't look at this critically and not think that this is sleazy. I don't need a conspiracy to see that her excuses are silly.

I have enough reasons for not voting for her, or pretty much any other potential candidate, left or right. She definitely has a lot of baggage though.

But this thread is about a politician having her own email server which she controls the contents of, as she has admitted. This is not power I want politicians to have, any of them.

I think it was also very much about the legality of having her own email server which she controls the contents of.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Forget it, Jake. It's Clintontown.

So you agree it was all legal, whether you approved of the practice or not ?

 

[plague311]

Are there rules that you can only have one email address per device? Or that you can't mix gov email accounts with personal ones on any given device? If, so does mixing your personal emails with business on a single server circumvent this, or am I misunderstanding what you are trying to say? I may be.

I can't find anything to source what I am about to say, but I'm fairly positive that government email accounts require a government provided device. You can absolutely have more than one email address per cell phone on your everyday cell phone, but I'm not sure if that's the case with government devices. Again, I'm not positive, but I do remember android announcing their "government level security" upgrade when trying to fight with Blackberry to be government devices.

As far as the mixing of the emails on a personal server, as long as the server is secure then it shouldn't be a problem. I'm assuming that government employees get personal emails to their .gov accounts from time to time. As long as she has them straightened out when she handed them over to the government it shouldn't be a problem.

Hey, I didn't start the thread and I don't follow the Benghazi stuff. But I can't look at this critically and not think that this is sleazy. I don't need a conspiracy to see that her excuses are silly.

There will always be a sleazy feel in regards to something like this, but I don't think there's anything nefarious. I'm going to invoke Hanlon's Razor here. Her excuses might be silly, but she straight up said it was for convenience. If, as implied by others, she isn't particularly technically savvy than it could have just not occurred to her that she was being stupid. She paid someone to come in, setup the server, make sure it's secure and properly maintained. When she sent out the cable to her other employees she could have easily been in the mindset that her emails are being preserved as she's contacting government employees on their .gov accounts. The fact that she had 55,000 (whatever) pages, emails, or whatever, that means that she wasn't just deleting them constantly. She has those emails from that time frame, and people need to make up their mind. Is she technically savvy enough to go in and delete her own emails while managing her server, or is her server unsecure because has no idea what she's doing?

That's what smacks of "conspiracy theory" to me. Generally in these cases conspiracies require the culprit to be both extremely intelligent and ridiculously stupid at the same time.

I have enough reasons for not voting for her, or pretty much any other potential candidate, left or right. She definitely has a lot of baggage though.

Here I'm going to invoke the South Park "Douche and a Turd Sandwich" comparison It's true. There isn't a political party or candidate that represents all of my views, I just have to go with the one that's "pretty close".

But this thread is about a politician having her own email server which she controls the contents of, as she has admitted. This is not power I want politicians to have, any of them.

Which is why I don't believe you'll see it happening in the future. I'm positive they'll amend or pass a law that will require government employees to use .gov accounts from this point forward.

 

[The Big Dog]

It appears that Hillary's reason she sat on the emails for two years was that because she thought they would be archived by other employee emails.

Except, you know, the ones that weren't.

By the way, can't see my server, so vote for me in 2016!

I doubt that Rep. Gowdy is going just take Hillary's word for why she was running the State department out of her cowboy server at the Clinton Ranch.

 

[plague311]

It appears that Hillary's reason she sat on the emails for two years was that because she thought they would be archived by other employee emails.

Which is an understandable outlook considering that experts have said that this would be the case. I'm not all that surprised. At least she was smart enough to keep her emails from that time frame despite her thinking that they wouldn't be needed.

By the way, can't see my server, so vote for me in 2016!

You're not very good at campaign slogans.

I doubt that Rep. Gowdy is going just take Hillary's word for why she was running the State department out of her cowboy server at the Clinton Ranch.

She wasn't running the State department out of her cowboy server, the implication in and of itself is ridiculous. Not only is this a massive hyperbole, but it's a hyperbole of a misrepresentation.

 

[CORed]

<snip>

No, it's not standard archival procedure for emails.

Printing and filing emails used to be the standard archival procedure for emails for the government agency at which I work. After they changed email systems and got more available storage capacity, that was changed.

 

[The Big Dog]

Which is an understandable outlook considering that experts have said that this would be the case. I'm not all that surprised. At least she was smart enough to keep her emails from that time frame despite her thinking that they wouldn't be needed.



You're not very good at campaign slogans.



She wasn't running the State department out of her cowboy server, the implication in and of itself is ridiculous. Not only is this a massive hyperbole, but it's a hyperbole of a misrepresentation.

say, ya left something out of my post, let me put that right back:

Except, you know, the ones that weren't.
She was running the state department, and she was running her communications out of her cowboy/homebrew server. What am i missing here?