Ed clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

Status
Not open for further replies.
16.5 said:
Remember when she said that used a single email address for convenience?

she hired her former campaign IT guy at the top rate paid by the government
She paid the same guy under the table to work at her home
She set up her own domain
She set up her own private sever
She assigned email addresses to at least one of her staff as State.

But she did not think about it. She actually said that on national TV.
Click to expand...

So you think she actually did all that ? :rolleyes:

I think she just said "set me up my own email" and all of that stuff happened, because uttered that sentence. Sounds pretty convenient.

16.5 said:
It isn't that she is a liar, it is that she is so *********** bad at it.

Biden would be a fool not to run at this point.

Prediction? Hillary withdraws from the race for "health" reasons. Obama pardons her on his last day in office.
Click to expand...

Noted.
 
davefoc said:
If you are some poor teenager and you get caught stealing hubcaps you probably go to jail and you have a criminal record that might follow you the rest of your life.

If you are a wealthy guy with connections and influence and you sell the use of your connections and influence by taking massive speaking fees where do you stack up ethically with the teenager stealing hubcaps?

Regardless about how you might feel about it, the wealthy guy will get away with it completely and will get to spend the money he gets from the people trying to buy his favor. That is the way of the world. How much did Hillary Clinton partake in the world of influence peddling and corruption? I don't know.

Wareyin's view is probably something along the line that Clinton was above petty influence peddling and any accusations along that line are just made up partisan crap. And I think it is a fair guess that 16.5's view would be different than that.
Click to expand...

Hey, HEY.... this is the politics section. People who try to see views from realistic angles aren't welcome.... How dare you sully this place with your... common sense... GTFO!!! :runaway

:D

j/k It's refreshing to see some posters go that route.
 
Last edited:
TheL8Elvis said:
So you think she actually did all that ? :rolleyes:

I think she just said "set me up my own email" and all of that stuff happened, because uttered that sentence. Sounds pretty convenient.

Noted.
Click to expand...

I don't think she can get her own iced tea. She is like the Don of a mafia crime family, or Jabba the Hutt, she orders her minions to do what she wants and distributes the funds.

She wants to be President and she will god damned if something like the Freedom of Information Act stand in her way
 
Grizzly Bear said:
If she used the foundation for anything it would have been for her personal political ambitions, and perhaps favors or connections. But indications at present are that's the extent of it, unless more comes up as with the email scandal.

Selling government secrets would amount to treason.... and even with her idiotic decisions on the email server I don't personally think she was that stupid to do something that would have legitimately brought on bipartisan charges of corruption. Maybe my expectations could be wrong but past history seems to indicated that partisan ship goes only so far for most when something serious enough hits the fan
Click to expand...

I agree with this analysis. Clinton is not stupid or evil enough to peddle secrets for money or influence. She is, however, conniving enough to erase anything that might come back to haunt her. Maybe she really didn't want to heighten security at the embassies around 9/11 for fear of upsetting Muslims, and maybe there's an email where she admits this. Who knows?

As someone always points out: it's not the crime that gets you, it's the cover-up. If she had been straight-up to begin with, she might have ridden this out, but I doubt it. Erasing all those emails crossed the line.
 
Ziggurat said:
Secrets are not the only thing she had to sell. She also had influence. Look up Uranium One.
Click to expand...

I know, it looks bad. I just have a really hard time believing Hillary could be that evil or stupid or greedy. It's certainly possible. Who knows where this is all headed? The biggest red flag for me so far is the guy they paid to set up the server pleading the fifth. What is it he thinks might incriminate him? Enquiring minds want to know...
 
Fudbucker said:
I know, it looks bad. I just have a really hard time believing Hillary could be that evil or stupid or greedy. It's certainly possible. Who knows where this is all headed? The biggest red flag for me so far is the guy they paid to set up the server pleading the fifth. What is it he thinks might incriminate him? Enquiring minds want to know...
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised at all how stupid and far a politician will go to grease his/her palms, hell, we have so many examples it couldn't all be printed. Don't forget if she's dumb enough to put in this private server knowing it's illegal, she's certainly capable of even more dumber things.
 
logger said:
I'm not surprised at all how stupid and far a politician will go to grease his/her palms, hell, we have so many examples it couldn't all be printed. Don't forget if she's dumb enough to put in this private server knowing it's illegal, she's certainly capable of even more dumber things.
Click to expand...

I'm reminded of a quote from the old movie "Wall Street" (1980's old, lol):

"The main thing about money, Bud, is that it makes you do things you don't want to do."
 
logger said:
I'm not surprised at all how stupid and far a politician will go to grease his/her palms, hell, we have so many examples it couldn't all be printed. Don't forget if she's dumb enough to put in this private server knowing it's illegal, she's certainly capable of even more dumber things.
Click to expand...

First off, the Clintons are riiiiich! Second, the server itself was not illegal!
 
Most politicians willing to grease their hands on something for gains generally - if they're reasoned enough - are able to draw a line where their risk/return ratio stops being beneficial. Clinton would have to pull a Snowden if she wants to sell anything excessive, though selling influence seems closer to reality without going to the absolute extremes
 
Grizzly Bear said:
Clinton would have to pull a Snowden if she wants to sell anything excessive, though selling influence seems closer to reality without going to the absolute extremes
Click to expand...

I've never thought she sold secrets, its always been influence. All of you know and remember who this couple is correct? Remember triangulation, these two invented it and are still using it. Its all about influence and power to ultimately gain What? MONEY!

Simple stuff folks.

Not directed at you Grizz, I'm not interested in poking the bear, just want everyone to be reminded who these two lowlifes are. :)
 
Alright. I have never had a job requiring a classified designation, but I have have a job where patient information has to be kept confidential. I have to take mandatory in-services for computer security and am bombarded with e-mail updates and reminders.

I would imagine Hillary and government workers are too .

I am pretty sure this whole "it wasn't classified when I received it" line is bull crap. I am pretty sure again that would be covered in electronic communication briefings and classes for any high level government employees.

Hillary is full of crap.
 
davefoc said:
I'm not so sure. I don't think Biden has widespread appeal. It is hard to make your mark as a vice president and mostly the mark that Biden has made is to say the wrong thing at the wrong time.
Click to expand...

But that applied to Biden before all his presidential runs, so why would that make a difference now?

He's indicated he might not run because of family issues (and I actually believe him on that score, strangely enough), but he's got a very inflated opinion of himself, and a lack of general appeal is never going to be what stops him from running.
 
Wolrab said:
Alright. I have never had a job requiring a classified designation, but I have have a job where patient information has to be kept confidential. I have to take mandatory in-services for computer security and am bombarded with e-mail updates and reminders.

I would imagine Hillary and government workers are too .

I am pretty sure this whole "it wasn't classified when I received it" line is bull crap. I am pretty sure again that would be covered in electronic communication briefings and classes for any high level government employees.

Hillary is full of crap.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are correct on all counts. Each Dept of every Govt organization has a "Work Group Manager" who is NOT a member of the IT Department, but who is responsible for updates, training, and security, etc within their Department. In a small organization that would be an additional duty, but in a larger organization it would be a full time dedicated position with no other duties. This position is IN ADDITION to the functions performed by the IT Department, but not officially a member of that Department.

The BS line of "it wasn't classified when I received it" is simply Hillery's and her minions effort to divert attention and misconstrue the issue to potential voters and her base supporters. It's working here and it might work in general, but it won't work with the FBI or anyone else who knows better if they do an unbiased proper investigation without interference from above...
 
CIA NGIA confirm that Top[ Secret data was on Hillary's Server

Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and the State Department disputed the inspector general’s finding last month and questioned whether the emails had been overclassified by an arbitrary process. But the special review — by the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency — concluded that the emails were “Top Secret,” the highest classification of government intelligence, when they were sent to Mrs. Clinton in 2009 and 2011.

Top Secret when they were sent to Hillary in 2009 and 2011.

Stunningly, sleazy hypocrite/Clinton Campaign shyster Nick Merrill claims that calling the data from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency "top secret" is the result of "bureaucratic infighting,' which is so ludicrous I can hardly believe it.

Fortunately neither State nor Hillary's campaign gets to make that call, by Executive Order that call is CIA/NGIA's to make, and State cannot strip off Top Secret markings just because Hillary finds it "convenient."
 
16.5 said:
Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and the State Department disputed the inspector general’s finding last month and questioned whether the emails had been overclassified by an arbitrary process. But the special review — by the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency — concluded that the emails were “Top Secret,” the highest classification of government intelligence, when they were sent to Mrs. Clinton in 2009 and 2011.

Top Secret when they were sent to Hillary in 2009 and 2011.

Stunningly, sleazy hypocrite/Clinton Campaign shyster Nick Merrill claims that calling the data from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency "top secret" is the result of "bureaucratic infighting,' which is so ludicrous I can hardly believe it.
Click to expand...

So an ad hom followed by an argument from incredultiy. Well, I'm convinced ... :rolleyes:

16.5 said:
Fortunately neither State nor Hillary's campaign gets to make that call, by Executive Order that call is CIA/NGIA's to make, and State cannot strip off Top Secret markings just because Hillary finds it "convenient."
Click to expand...

Well, the article you linked doesn't back up that assertion. Have anything else ?
 
TheL8Elvis said:
So an ad hom followed by an argument from incredultiy. Well, I'm convinced ... :rolleyes:



Well, the article you linked doesn't back up that assertion. Have anything else ?
Click to expand...

And people still continue to ignore the evidence that this "Top Secret" information had been broadcast on CNN before it was ever forwarded to Clinton. I understand that information can still be classified even after it is widely disseminated, but having in your possession a forwarded email containing info that has been nationally broadcast is not a criminal offense.
 
wareyin said:
And people still continue to ignore the evidence that this "Top Secret" information had been broadcast on CNN before it was ever forwarded to Clinton. I understand that information can still be classified even after it is widely disseminated, but having in your possession a forwarded email containing info that has been nationally broadcast is not a criminal offense.
Click to expand...

face palm. CNN broadcast top secret data from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency regarding North Korea's nuclear program?

Of course not, again you prove that your arguments are meritless.
 
16.5 said:
face palm. CNN broadcast top secret data from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency regarding North Korea's nuclear program?

Of course not, again you prove that your arguments are meritless.
Click to expand...
Had you read the CNN link I've posted 2 or 3 times already, you might have seen the error in your post. Had you read the article you linked to and used simple arithmetic (2-1=1), you might have seen the error in your post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom