Ed clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

Status
Not open for further replies.
16.5 said:
This is such a spectacularly cynical argument, because it amounts to: The AP, Gawker, various Congressional Committees and just about every single person who issued a FOIA request to the State Department from 2009 until March of 2015 screwed up in believing representations from the State Department and Hillary Clinton that they had reviewed and produced all documents responsive to the requests and subpoenas.

Hey, they screwed up, they trusted Hillary Clinton!
Click to expand...

Are you now claiming that personal and private, not official government, communication by a person holding government office can be obtained by a FOI request?
 
16.5 said:
Intel Experts: Hillary Clinton’s Cowboy/Homebrew Server ‘A Counterintelligence Disaster of Truly Epic Proportions’

I assume that we can all agree that the FBI should seize the server and conduct a forensic analysis to determine the extent of foreign penetration. That analysis would be part of what is called a damage assessment, which is routine after any suspected security breach.
Click to expand...

Except that there is no actual evidence whatsoever of any security breach and the only "suspicions" are in the fevered imaginations of Tea Party whackjobs like Cruz and Gowdy.
 
wareyin said:
Are you now claiming that personal and private, not official government, communication by a person holding government office can be obtained by a FOI request?
Click to expand...

Are you now claiming that all that was on Hillary's server was personal and private, and not official government communication that can be obtained by a FOI request?

/do people really believe Hillary's claim that all she destroyed was personal and private?
 
jhunter1163 said:
Except that there is no actual evidence whatsoever of any security breach and the only "suspicions" are in the fevered imaginations of Tea Party whackjobs like Cruz and Gowdy.
Click to expand...
Well said. Republicans recall fondly how the Starr witch hunt uncovered the Lewinsky mess, they keeping JAQing off hoping to uncover the Lewinsky moment in Hillary's closet.
 
jhunter1163 said:
Except that there is no actual evidence whatsoever of any security breach and the only "suspicions" are in the fevered imaginations of Tea Party whackjobs like Cruz and Gowdy.
Click to expand...

Well, lets break that down. The evidence is on the server, which Hillary is refusing to allow to be inspected, and she admitted she intentionally deleted data from.

Well lands sake, I guess we'll just have to take her word for it, and being skeptical of that is "in the fevered imaginations of Tea Party whackjobs."

International Skeptics* Forum.

*not applicable to the presumptive Democratic Candidate for President of the United States of America.
 
16.5 said:
Well, lets break that down. The evidence is on the server, which Hillary is refusing to allow to be inspected, and she admitted she intentionally deleted data from.

Well lands sake, I guess we'll just have to take her word for it, and being skeptical of that is "in the fevered imaginations of Tea Party whackjobs."

International Skeptics* Forum.

*not applicable to the presumptive Democratic Candidate for President of the United States of America.
Click to expand...

If any of her e-mails turned up on Wikileaks, or anywhere else for that matter, you'd have a better case. Right now, there is no evidence whatsoever that her server was compromised. In fact, the evidence supports the conclusion that her server was actually more secure than the State Department's; State's servers are known to have been hacked at least twice.
 
jhunter1163 said:
If any of her e-mails turned up on Wikileaks, or anywhere else for that matter, you'd have a better case. Right now, there is no evidence whatsoever that her server was compromised. In fact, the evidence supports the conclusion that her server was actually more secure than the State Department's; State's servers are known to have been hacked at least twice.
Click to expand...

According to the article I posted, the folks that would be most interested in hacking Hillary's homebrew server (Russia, China, etc) are not the types to go around advertising it.

The most likely place to look for evidence of compromise is on the server itself.

Hell, Hillary might not even know she was hacked, given what a slipshod job she did putting that homebrew server together. state's servers are "known" to be hacked because they have rigorous security that allows detection and damage control.

I am baffled that people are objecting to an impartial third party forensic examination of her server. Utterly bizarre.

Hey, she set up her own server that she used exclusively while Secretary of State and now wants to be President, give the woman some "privacy."
 
16.5 said:
This is such a spectacularly cynical argument, because it amounts to: The AP, Gawker, various Congressional Committees and just about every single person who issued a FOIA request to the State Department from 2009 until March of 2015 screwed up in believing representations from the State Department and Hillary Clinton that they had reviewed and produced all documents responsive to the requests and subpoenas.

Hey, they screwed up, they trusted Hillary Clinton!
Click to expand...

That argument implies that when the "expert" said "The name Clinton right on the email handle meant this was not a difficult find," Schindler said. " he was wrong. Agreed ?

Also, as already pointed out in previous posts, the state dept. cannot produce what they don't have responsibility for.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
That argument implies that when the "expert" said "The name Clinton right on the email handle meant this was not a difficult find," Schindler said. " he was wrong. Agreed ?

Also, as already pointed out in previous posts, the state dept. cannot produce what they don't have responsibility for.
Click to expand...

Difficult to find for...? For? C'mon, it is right in the article. Foreign Spies! Foreign cyber-hackers. Criminals. Not people issuing FOIA requests. C'mon man....

Wait, the State Department did not have responsibility for documents in possession of its employees? Do you have a lawyer available? Go tell him that you are not going to produce documents in response to a subpoena because the president of your company keeps them at home. after he is done laughing, ask him whether you should take a toothbrush with you to the contempt of court hearing.
 
16.5 said:
Difficult to find for...? For? C'mon, it is right in the article. Foreign Spies! Foreign cyber-hackers. Criminals. Not people issuing FOIA requests. C'mon man....

Wait, the State Department did not have responsibility for documents in possession of its employees? Do you have a lawyer available? Go tell him that you are not going to produce documents in response to a subpoena because the president of your company keeps them at home. after he is done laughing, ask him whether you should take a toothbrush with you to the contempt of court hearing.
Click to expand...

Sorry, not "responsibility" , "possession and control", as already covered before:

TheL8Elvis said:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpoli...heck-hillary-clinton-those-emails-and-the-law
<>
FOIA
Clinton was the filter for what was relevant to work and what was not. Of course, before electronic communication, federal records were routinely filtered by individuals, who sorted their papers before handing over boxes to archivists. And, many federal workers, Capitol Hill staff, etc., use personal email accounts — in addition to their official accounts — and choose what, if anything, is turned over from those.
Nonetheless, Dan Metcalfe, who was the head of the Justice Department's Office of Information and Privacy from 1981 to 2007, blasted Clinton in an op-ed in Politico....But was it "probably ... a violation of law," as Grassley charged?
The Justice Department weighed in, calling it "sheer speculation" that "Clinton withheld any work-related emails from those provided to the Department of State." What's more, Justice wrote, "FOIA creates no obligation for an agency to search for and produce records that it does not possess and control."...
Click to expand...
 
16.5 said:
It isn't distorted, the fact is that Obama and Clinton have refused to come clean, and are actively, intentionally obstructing the various investigations.
Click to expand...
I agree with you there. It's just not criminal, or proven to be. She scooted through a loop hole and likely will never get charged because by all accounts although it may be highly disingenuous of her to have done so, it's not illegal by the books. The same thing for her little money scandal from foreign interests. It will however speak for her trustworthiness as I've said many, many times. I wasn't planning to vote for her to begin with, and honestly at this point I'll vote third party if I have to before I give her my vote.

The over-excitement and over the top chasing encourages people to stop taking these issues seriously. The Benghazi scandal for all it speaks about the State Department reached that stage. And it's happening with the Clinton email-gate. Both have gotten so extravagantly PR'd that it's succeeding more in polarizing partisans that it is in driving informed voter decisions.

If it's to be illegal, policy needs to be ratified... in the absence of that option... they need to be elected out. Some of the issues related to this scandal are rooted in current policy to begin with.
 
Last edited:
Grizzly Bear said:
I agree with you there. It's just not criminal, or proven to be. She scooted through a loop hole and likely will never get charged because by all accounts although it may be highly disingenuous of her to have done so, it's not illegal by the books.
Click to expand...

I've actually argued in detail that Hillary has broken the law in many ways. Of course her crimes have not been proven, since she would actually have to be indicted first, and Obama's politicized Department of Justice won't go that route (it recently decided not to prosecute Lois Lerner for contempt of Congress on the basis of a deliberate misreading of the case law concerning waiver of 5th Amendment protections). But it is wrong to imply that she scooted through a legal loophole. She has only managed to scoot through a political loophole created by the corruption of our justice system, which provides for, in effect, one set of rules for hoi polloi and another set for the political elite (particularly of the Democratic variety). If a drone from sector 7G had done what Hillary did, he would have earned himself a nice long vacation in a federal penitentiary.
 
sunmaster14 said:
I've actually argued in detail that Hillary has broken the law in many ways. Of course her crimes have not been proven, since she would actually have to be indicted first, and Obama's politicized Department of Justice won't go that route (it recently decided not to prosecute Lois Lerner for contempt of Congress on the basis of a deliberate misreading of the case law concerning waiver of 5th Amendment protections). But it is wrong to imply that she scooted through a legal loophole. She has only managed to scoot through a political loophole created by the corruption of our justice system, which provides for, in effect, one set of rules for hoi polloi and another set for the political elite (particularly of the Democratic variety). If a drone from sector 7G had done what Hillary did, he would have earned himself a nice long vacation in a federal penitentiary.
Click to expand...

All of this, of course, pure speculation spoken by a true partisan. Republicans do nothing wrong, and Democrats, of course, do nothing right. Nevermind the fact that the previous Republican Secretary of State did, pretty much, the exact same thing and has faced absolutely no consequences. The previous SoS having absolutely no emails to turn over at all, not even a few, but yet it is the Democratic variety that skate on through. :rolleyes:
 
16.5 said:
Democrat Hillary Clinton has slipped against leading 2016 Republican candidates in Colorado, Iowa and Virginia, according to a poll released on Thursday that cited damage from the furor over the former secretary of state's emails.

Good opportunity for a candidate like Marty O'Malley
Click to expand...

To quote you ... LOLOLOL!!!!!

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/...ionally-although-down-from-february.html#more

When it comes to the Democratic primary, Clinton's position is unchanged from February- she was at 54% then and she's at 54% now. Elizabeth Warren at 14%, Joe Biden at 7%, Bernie Sanders at 6%, Martin O'Malley at 3%, and Jim Webb at 2% round out the field.
 
16.5 said:
Democrat Hillary Clinton has slipped against leading 2016 Republican candidates in Colorado, Iowa and Virginia, according to a poll released on Thursday that cited damage from the furor over the former secretary of state's emails.

Good opportunity for a candidate like Marty O'Malley
Click to expand...

Breaking Selective News.... Breaking Selective News.... Breaking Selective News....

How many polls has Quinnipiac conducted in VA and IA? One in each, this current poll. So what can they compare it to so that you can say that Cinton has slipped? Some other company's polls? That's no way to judge these early polls. You have to see how the candidates are trending with the pollsters' call lists.

So let's look at the one state where they've been running polls for over a year. Colorado. Here's the headline

"Paul Slips in Past Year to Clinton!!! Lambs Lie Down With Lions!!"

Quinnipiac had Paul polling ahead of Clinton by +5 a year ago. Now it's +3, just after he announced.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/co/colorado_paul_vs_clinton-3852.html

Have fun storming the castle.
 
Was Clinton Family Foundation Business "personal"

In 2011, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton publicly lauded a Colombian free trade agreement—the same deal she'd condemned as being bad for labor rights back in 2008. So why the change of heart? According to a report from the International business Times, it could be because the country's largest oil company was dumping millions of dollars straight into the Clinton Foundation.

the question for the thread is whether Hillary destroyed emails relating to her dealings with the Clinton Family Foundation, which no doubt would be a major concern where the evidence is pretty clear that she was flip flopping on major issues like this one.

Other than her characteristic flippant comment regarding "yoga" emails she has not deemed to tell the little people just what it was she destroyed.

/Hillary reminds me more and more every day of Putin, doesn't she?
 
16.5 said:
In 2011, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton publicly lauded a Colombian free trade agreement—the same deal she'd condemned as being bad for labor rights back in 2008. So why the change of heart? According to a report from the International business Times, it could be because the country's largest oil company was dumping millions of dollars straight into the Clinton Foundation.

the question for the thread is whether Hillary destroyed emails relating to her dealings with the Clinton Family Foundation, which no doubt would be a major concern where the evidence is pretty clear that she was flip flopping on major issues like this one.

Other than her characteristic flippant comment regarding "yoga" emails she has not deemed to tell the little people just what it was she destroyed.

/Hillary reminds me more and more every day of Putin, doesn't she?
Click to expand...

Wow.

You've discovered a politician selling out and getting in bed with a money donor.

Top-notch reporting. I'm glad you're here to keep us abreast of these breaking stories.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom