Ed clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?
- Thread starter The Big Dog
- Start date
- Status
The Big Dog
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2007
- Messages
- 29,742
Lolz. Seriously, Bill Maher how stupid do you have to be to try to excuse Hillary's email fiasco because of an Iraq war fiasco that she voted for?
Was he not around in 2008?
Protip: don't mention the Iraq war in the same sentence with Hillary the carpetbagger Clinton, no matter how desperate you are to distract the nation from Hillary's email fiasco.
A: Pretty Freaken Stupid! He's a Shillary, so go figure! Not the brightest bunch!
davefoc
Philosopher
Clinton usually gets flack from the left because she voted for the war. I disagree. At the time, nobody realized that Cheney was leading a shadow government that had pulled the case for war out of their ass. I tend to think it is patriotic when a politician overcomes partisan proclivities and supports the president in these kind of situations.
Secondly, I think it's pretty reasonable to compare the massive disaster of the Iraq war with this little kerfuffle and think this is pretty small potatoes. The Bush administration not only got the country involved in a war under false pretenses, it proceeded to treat the occupation like some giant pork barrel project. While Iraq floundered with unemployed people the US embarked on contracting with giant crony corporations for massive blivets that Iraq didn't need constructed with highly paid Americans instead of the much cheaper local Iraqis who desperately needed jobs as part of the effort to stabilize the country.
This was corruption on the highest scale and the consequences of it will continue to cost Americans for generations to come.
The consequences of Clinton's email scandal are of the tiniest import compared to that.
Although, it would be nice to be able to dismiss the missteps by Clinton as much ado about nothing as many partisans do. Unfortunately the facts of the situation don't allow for such an easy dismissal of this scandal. The problem is that there are no explanations for the scandal that don't involve substantial arrogance, incompetence and perhaps corruption on the part of Clinton. And while the consequences of this scandal are tiny compared to the actions of the Bush administration with regard to the Iraq war it isn't clear to me that the arrogance, incompetence and corruption that Clinton displayed with regard to this scandal won't cause much worse problems if she actually becomes president. Something very bad went on inside the Clinton camp with regard to the decision making that led to the scandal and the decision making as the scandal unfolded and nobody on the inside is talking right now about how the decisions got made that led to this mess, but however it happened Clinton is the one that is ultimately responsible.
Secondly, I think it's pretty reasonable to compare the massive disaster of the Iraq war with this little kerfuffle and think this is pretty small potatoes. The Bush administration not only got the country involved in a war under false pretenses, it proceeded to treat the occupation like some giant pork barrel project. While Iraq floundered with unemployed people the US embarked on contracting with giant crony corporations for massive blivets that Iraq didn't need constructed with highly paid Americans instead of the much cheaper local Iraqis who desperately needed jobs as part of the effort to stabilize the country.
This was corruption on the highest scale and the consequences of it will continue to cost Americans for generations to come.
The consequences of Clinton's email scandal are of the tiniest import compared to that.
Although, it would be nice to be able to dismiss the missteps by Clinton as much ado about nothing as many partisans do. Unfortunately the facts of the situation don't allow for such an easy dismissal of this scandal. The problem is that there are no explanations for the scandal that don't involve substantial arrogance, incompetence and perhaps corruption on the part of Clinton. And while the consequences of this scandal are tiny compared to the actions of the Bush administration with regard to the Iraq war it isn't clear to me that the arrogance, incompetence and corruption that Clinton displayed with regard to this scandal won't cause much worse problems if she actually becomes president. Something very bad went on inside the Clinton camp with regard to the decision making that led to the scandal and the decision making as the scandal unfolded and nobody on the inside is talking right now about how the decisions got made that led to this mess, but however it happened Clinton is the one that is ultimately responsible.
This is a sincere question. Ignoring what future discoveries might be made, considering only what is known, how can anyone support Hillary ?
I'm not particularly anti-Hillary. To me she seems to be the "pick of the litter" on the Dem menu, ignoring this debacle. So could someone please explain how you can rationalize supporting Hillary considering this email issue ?
I wouldn't expect Hillary to understand computer security in detail given her age and background. Any rational person with her background would certainly understand that most State Dept communication requires secrecy & security, that there must certainly be procedures in place to address this, and that the creation of a private communication channel outside of the normal procedure creates a vast hazard to the interests of the US.
Why is Hillary a reasonable choice for president, given her willful disregard for the protection of US assets, investments & lives ?
I'm not particularly anti-Hillary. To me she seems to be the "pick of the litter" on the Dem menu, ignoring this debacle. So could someone please explain how you can rationalize supporting Hillary considering this email issue ?
I wouldn't expect Hillary to understand computer security in detail given her age and background. Any rational person with her background would certainly understand that most State Dept communication requires secrecy & security, that there must certainly be procedures in place to address this, and that the creation of a private communication channel outside of the normal procedure creates a vast hazard to the interests of the US.
Why is Hillary a reasonable choice for president, given her willful disregard for the protection of US assets, investments & lives ?
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 8,276
Since this is all so obvious, it should be easy to enumerate the real costs we paid in US assets, investments & lives directly attributed to having a private email server. So can you do that please ?
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 8,276
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 8,276
I think you should ask, rather, does the senate have some policy that causes all senate emails to be automatically archived ?
A legal problem for who ? For Hillary, probably, as she is not a senator any more.
That appears to be the scenario, yes.
No idea. Why is it relevant ?
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 8,276
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/11/9309983/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-explained
The most important thing to understand about the Clinton email controversy is that it shouldn't — and probably won't — force you to radically revise your own opinion of Clinton or whether she should be president.
Rather than telling us something new about her, the scandal reveals what Clinton obsessives — fans and foes alike — already knew. She plays aggressively when rules and risks get in the way of her larger goals; she'd prefer to ask for forgiveness than permission; she looks at the world more like a lawyer than a politician; and, after years of fending off investigations, she's pretty damn secretive.
For people who hate her policies, her personality, or her politics, the email controversy is new ammo for the annual Thanksgiving Day family fight. It's not like they were going to vote for her anyway. For Clinton's steadfast defenders, it's another all-out attempt by Republicans to smear her so that she can't win the presidency. No matter what she did, they'll defend it. For everyone in between, it's a mud storm of confusion, broken occasionally by screaming headlines bearing terms like "classified," "Top Secret," "subpoenaed," and "takes the Fifth."
The Big Dog
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2007
- Messages
- 29,742
Snerk! If it is, why don't you start with the costs associated with the dozens of lawsuits that were filed due to Hillary's cowboy server, and the costs associated with hundreds of FOIA requests that were answered falsely due to her connivance.
Further, how the hell does one put a price on Hillary's lies?
Hillary Clinton is a congenital liar, the same is true today as it was the "last century" when it was first written.
wareyin
Penultimate Amazing
Snerk, indeed.
'Your legal actions caused me to file a frivolous lawsuit! You should pay for that!'
The Big Dog
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2007
- Messages
- 29,742
Evidence that they were "frivolous lawsuits."
protip: Gawker, the AP and a host of other entities have filed FOIA lawsuits and Courts have entered orders granting relief including the rolling production of emails that avid readers of this thread are very familiar with.
I understand that you are a big, big fan of Hillary but please try not to give out bad information.
Last edited:
sunmaster14
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2014
- Messages
- 10,017
Without evidence to the contrary, I think the US intelligence services have to assume that Hillary's server was compromised and that her email traffic was read by foreign intelligence services during her time as Secretary of State. That would be the prudent thing to do. Also, without a good record of what information existed on her server during that time, the US would have to assume that all of the information reasonably seen or created by Hillary during her tenure, has been compromised. This could include classified communications protocols and the identities of people working undercover in foreign countries, as well as facilities being used for covert purposes overseas (or even here in the US). It is possible that a cost-benefit analysis would conclude that protocols needed to be changed, undercover agents pulled, and covert facilities abandoned. The cost could run into the billions of dollars quite easily. We will probably not know for decades how much it really cost, if ever, but it could be exorbitant.
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 61,774
Again you confuse a priori with a posteriori. Repetition won't make the error (yours or Hillary's) go away.
bwahahaha are you for real?
"No honey, I'm beating you up because I LOVE you. I'm PROTECTING you don'tcha know."
get outta here with that carville ******** spin
Last edited:
plague311
Great minds think...
Yes, thank you for acknowledging the fact that the larger majority of people in the United States don't know **** about how the internet, email, and policies work, so they get spooked at "scary words" as mentioned previously.
Isn't there a fallacy name for this? Something about herd mentality and how stupid is contagious?
What does Cartmen say in South Park?
"Kyle, one in four people think 9/11 was a conspiracy. Are you saying one in four people are retared?"
"Yes, at least one in four."
Good on you for pointing that out. Well done, sir.
ETA: There it is!
Last edited:
Not really.
Blasting Hillary is not the same as the cheap shots people are directing at each other in this thread. Perhaps I wasn't clear earlier.
Davefoc accused me of being a hypocrite (for suggesting people tone down the cheap shots) but I don't think I've dipped even close to some of the more regular posters in this thread. Again maybe I wasn't clear earlier.
And, no, I'm not new to politics (I'm not multiquoting the people I'm responding to), but this thread is a little too ugly in comparison to most. Come to think of it, I probably should take a break from this, you may have a point.
I did not accuse anyone, it was just a friendly request. Fuhgettaboutit - carry on.
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 8,276
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/
Federal law enforcement, intelligence and congressional officials briefed on the investigation say the hack of the State email system is the "worst ever" cyberattack intrusion against a federal agency. The attackers who breached State are also believed to be behind hacks on the White House's email system, and against several other federal agencies, the officials say.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/26/u...s-unclassified-emails-officials-say.html?_r=0
WASHINGTON — Some of President Obama’s email correspondence was swept up by Russian hackers last year in a breach of the White House’s unclassified computer system that was far more intrusive and worrisome than has been publicly acknowledged, according to senior American officials briefed on the investigation.
But yeah, let's pretend it was Hillary who potentially cost us billions of dollars
Last edited:
- Status