Ed clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shalamar said:
He's got an 'R' next to his name? That means he can be trusted! No worries. It'll happen! No skepticism or partisanship needed!
Click to expand...

Notably that you didn't comment on whether Hillary will release her server.

Gowdy said he would, Hillary said she won't and is fighting it.

Conclusion? Gowdy is the bad guy.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
16.5 said:
You don't negotiate with terrorists, and you don't let the perp dictate public opinion by releasing only what the suspect wants you to release, while otherwise refusing to cooperate.

Gowdy is a hell of an experienced prosecutor. Perfect guy for the job.
Click to expand...

jhunter1163 said:
You may have missed this question, 16.5. I'll just repost it for you.
Click to expand...

No actually, jhunter1163, I did not miss the question, I answered it.

There is absolutely no reason to repost a question, nor in fact any obligation for me to answer it in any event.
 
Last edited:
Some more bickering and overly personalised posts have had to go to AAH. Address the arguments, do not attack the arguer, and above all be civil.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Agatha
 
Not sure what Kevin McCarthy is thinking here

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, defended Republicans' demands that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hand over the server she used to run her private email account while heading up the State Department, but claims:

"I think it's clear and it's fair. Because first, I think the American people have a right to know the truth. And I think Secretary Clinton has a responsibility to tell it," McCarthy said on CBS' "Face the Nation." "We're not interested in her private emails. We're not even interested in her emails regarding Russia and the reset or Syria and Assad and the chemical weapons, only those pertaining to Benghazi."

While everyone is certainly interested in Benghazi (discussed elsewhere) Hillary has a lot to explain about BAE Systems, Huma's outside employment, and her decision to set up the cowboy server in the first place.

What a goof
 
16.5 said:
No actually, jhunter1163, I did not miss the question, I answered it.

There is absolutely no reason to repost a question, nor in fact any obligation for me to answer it in any event.
Click to expand...

That's not an answer. Right now the only evidence we have that there are gaps in the e-mail record at all is Gowdy's word. Why doesn't he release what he has and demonstrate the existence of these gaps?
 
jhunter1163 said:
That's not an answer. Right now the only evidence we have that there are gaps in the e-mail record at all is Gowdy's word. Why doesn't he release what he has and demonstrate the existence of these gaps?
Click to expand...

1.I do not believe it is proper to dictate to me what constitutes an answer.

2. I have stated that Gowdy should release them (and in fact, I have a post awaiting approval in the moderated thread regarding leaked emails that shows that she is indeed worried more about her own reputation than the facts).

3. You ask me what he is thinking? I think that Gowdy doesn't trust Hillary and is not going to allow her to dictate to him and Congress what they should do, while she is refusing to cooperate on the server.

You want the emails produced so bad? Tell Hillary to turn over the server and the emails she destroyed.

Thanks for following up a third time tho.
 
plague311 said:
How does one turn over something that was destroyed?
Click to expand...

How would you locate evidence of electronic files after someone told you they were deleted?

I'd hire a computer forensic expert.

/well actually, I would not destroy them in the first place, but I'm not the presumptive Democratic Candidate for President who plays by her own playbook
 
16.5 said:
How would you locate evidence of electronic files after someone told you they were deleted?

I'd hire a computer forensic expert.

/well actually, I would not destroy them in the first place, but I'm not the presumptive Democratic Candidate for President who plays by her own playbook
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, it was more meant as sarcasm. Do you hang on to every email you get in case it will be needed to defend yourself against something, someday? Just curious.
 
plague311 said:
Do you hang on to every email you get in case it will be needed to defend yourself against something, someday? Just curious.
Click to expand...

If I were a government official, then depending on my alignment I would either hang on to all my emails using official resources, in order to maintain the transparency and accountability appropriate to government officials, or I would make sure to manage my emails using unofficial resources and destroy them as necessary to avoid transparency and accountability in my official actions.

YMMV.
 
theprestige said:
If I were a government official, then depending on my alignment I would either hang on to all my emails using official resources, in order to maintain the transparency and accountability appropriate to government officials, or I would make sure to manage my emails using unofficial resources and destroy them as necessary to avoid transparency and accountability in my official actions.

YMMV.
Click to expand...
Of course, there really are only those two options. :rolleyes:
 
theprestige said:
If I were a government official, then depending on my alignment I would either hang on to all my emails using official resources, in order to maintain the transparency and accountability appropriate to government officials, or I would make sure to manage my emails using unofficial resources and destroy them as necessary to avoid transparency and accountability in my official actions.

YMMV.
Click to expand...

DavidJames said:
Of course, there really are only those two options. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Pretty much. I feel like it needs to be stated again, for about the hundredth time, that Hillary was under the impression that her emails were being captured. At least the emails that were relevant to government work as she was under the impression that by emailing people on their .gov accounts that those emails would be retained via the government servers. The previous SoS was under the same impression as I have clearly stated above. I am not sure how it would be, but if that is not clear then ask anything that would help clarify it.

Hillary went one step beyond what her predecessor did and held on to all of her communications should this come up. Now, granted, she isn't turning over every email because she used the server for personal stuff as well. In an age where both parties preach privacy I think it's a bit intrusive to ask for her server as, again something that I've stated before, it's not just her information on that server. Her husband has his information on there, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that her children do as well. Given that this is the *********** umpteenth investigation into Benghazi, I do not believe at all that there is anything nefarious on this server that wouldn't have shown up previously. Why should she have her personal life trampled when there is no evidence anything has been withheld? Especially considering how inept, borderline mentally challenged, the previous investigations have shown to be.
 
plague311 said:
At least the emails that were relevant to government work as she was under the impression that by emailing people on their .gov accounts that those emails would be retained via the government servers.
Click to expand...

Putting aside that she knew that Huma had a clintonemails.com address, the leaked emails show that Hillary was communicating with her senior staff on their own private emails from her "private" email account.

So basically what Hills claimed is pure ********.

eta: "Especially considering how inept, borderline mentally challenged, the previous investigations have shown to be...." Oh for cripes sake, how ridiculous can you get, that is what I get for not reading an entire post.
 
Last edited:
16.5 said:
Putting aside that she knew that Huma had a clintonemails.com address, the leaked emails show that Hillary was communicating with her senior staff on their own private emails from her "private" email account.

So basically what Hills claimed is pure ********.
Click to expand...

Ok, do the leaked emails show that she was communicating about government related information? Got some evidence?
 
plague311 said:
Ok, do the leaked emails show that she was communicating about government related information? Got some evidence?
Click to expand...

Wait, I assume you know.

You were just posting with a high degree of confidence about what Hillary was thinking, and how she went above and beyond and "mentally challenged" and blah blah blah... yet you don't know what the New York Times published today?

Huh.

Keep your eyes peeled on the Benghazi thread then.
 
16.5 said:
1.I do not believe it is proper to dictate to me what constitutes an answer.
Click to expand...

If someone believes a poster dodged a question, or didn't actually answer what was asked, why wouldn't it be 'proper' to tell them that ?

16.5 said:
2. I have stated that Gowdy should release them (and in fact, I have a post awaiting approval in the moderated thread regarding leaked emails that shows that she is indeed worried more about her own reputation than the facts).

3. You ask me what he is thinking? I think that Gowdy doesn't trust Hillary and is not going to allow her to dictate to him and Congress what they should do, while she is refusing to cooperate on the server.
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/23/u...hazi-a-rare-glimpse-at-her-concerns.html?_r=0
Elijah E. Cummings, the Maryland Democrat and ranking member on the committee, said in a statement that “instead of having emails leaked piecemeal — and mischaracterized,” the committee’s chairman, Mr. Gowdy, “should release all of them — as Secretary Clinton has asked — so the American people can read them for themselves

So I don't think your belief that Gowdy isn't allowing Hillary to dictate anything holds water, as it's Gowdys peers.

I'm not aware of any reason for him to not back up his claims, other than he hasn't been completely honest in his claims.

16.5 said:
You want the emails produced so bad? Tell Hillary to turn over the server and the emails she destroyed.

Thanks for following up a third time tho.
Click to expand...

Hillary is pretty clearly making a calculated political move by not turning over the email server. And that's fine, I don't see any legal reason she needs to turn it over. If they can legally compel her, let them. And she can deal with the political ramifications, if any, to her election chances.

And if you want to criticize her for doing it, at least admit Gowdy is doing the same thing.
 
jhunter1163 said:
That's not an answer. Right now the only evidence we have that there are gaps in the e-mail record at all is Gowdy's word. Why doesn't he release what he has and demonstrate the existence of these gaps?
Click to expand...


Disclosure laws. Someone has to go through all the emails and redact any classified material. Gowdy may have security access that the common folk aren't allowed to see.

However, if you believe Hillary when she stated that she never sent anything classified via email, then she and she alone should bear the burden of disclosing everything. If her claim is true that there was nothing classified then she can't get in trouble for tossing it all on wikileaks, right?
 
Leftus said:
Disclosure laws. Someone has to go through all the emails and redact any classified material. Gowdy may have security access that the common folk aren't allowed to see.

However, if you believe Hillary when she stated that she never sent anything classified via email, then she and she alone should bear the burden of disclosing everything. If her claim is true that there was nothing classified then she can't get in trouble for tossing it all on wikileaks, right?
Click to expand...

If there's classified material in there, then Clinton is in a world of hurt. It's more likely to be filled with "sensitive but unclassified" information, which still cannot be released to the public.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom