PDA

View Full Version : Washington Post Article blasts Hillary



okie52
3/3/2015, 12:43 PM
Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail address at State reinforces everything people don’t like about her

By Chris Cillizza March 3 at 10:33 AM

Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail address that she used while secretary of state reinforces everything people don’t like about her and is very dangerous to her presidential ambitions. (The Washington Post)

The New York Times' report Monday night that Hillary Clinton never used an official government e-mail address during her time as secretary of state, a possible violation of requirements for federal officials to archive their correspondence, is a perfect storm of political bad news for the soon-to-be presidential candidate.

Why? Because it reminds and reinforces for people many of the traits that they do not like in the Clintons while also suggesting a level of hubris that is very dangerous for someone who is the biggest non-incumbent frontrunner for a presidential nomination in modern political history.

Let's tackle -- point by point -- why this story is so bad for Clinton.

1. "They don't think the rules apply to them.": The idea that Clinton never had an official government e-mail address reeks of the idea that she believes that she is apart (and above) the rules that govern those serving in government. No, Clinton isn't the first person in government to use a private e-mail but, as the Times piece suggests, she may be the first person to exclusively use one.

2. "They are surrounded by enablers.": Maybe the most amazing part of this story -- at least to me -- is that NO ONE ever took Clinton aside during her four years at State and said something like "Look, I know you mostly use your private e-mail address. But why don't we just set up an official government one too." It's impossible to believe that everyone on the State staff thought that only using a private e-mail address was the right course of action for Clinton and that it had no possibility of backfiring on her.

3. "They're always hiding something.": It's, of course, possible that Clinton used a private e-mail account because she liked the user interface on it better than a clunkier government version or some other banal reason like that. But using an e-mail domain that is not subject to the same federal archiving rules -- yes, Clinton turned over 55,000 pages of e-mails, but who decided what e-mails to turn over and which not to? -- looks suspicious even to people who are not disinclined to take Clinton at her word. (And there are LOTS of people who are disinclined to do so.)

4. "They only think about politics.": The timing of the set-up of Clinton's private e-mail account, first reported by Philip Bump in this space Monday night, is very problematic for the "nothing to see here" argument being put forward by the Clinton types. It was established on the same day that Clinton began her confirmation hearings to be Secretary of State. The expiration on the domain is shortly after the 2016 election.

5. "They never own up to anything.": The Clinton camp response has been predictable -- and not so good. (In their defense, I'm not sure there exists a good way to respond to a story like this one.) “Both the letter and spirit of the rules permitted State Department officials to use non-government email, as long as appropriate records were preserved,” Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill told The Post. Of course, that depends on what the meaning of "appropriate" is -- and is just the sort of statement that makes people think that these people really don't get it.

Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton has come under fire for using a personal e-mail account for all of her work messages. (Reuters)

Does the existence of Clinton's private e-mail at State knock her down as the overwhelming frontrunner for the Democratic nomination? No. But the story -- and all of the reinforcing of negative opinions about Clinton it does -- damages her as she preps to formally announce her candidacy in the next month or so. It gives congressional Republicans more reason to push for full release of all of the e-mails she sent from that account at State. And it hands Republican prepping to take Clinton on in the 2016 general election a ready-made issue that they are already using to bash her.

I'm sure Hillary will have a good explanation for all of this.

Turd_Ferguson
3/3/2015, 01:05 PM
I'm sure Hillary will have a good explanation for all of this.

So will the lemming.

Sooner8th
3/3/2015, 01:08 PM
Incredibly stupid thing to do. Jesus, at least pretend like it is not going to be a cakewalk to the presidency. She has to stop shooting herself in the foot.

Turd_Ferguson
3/3/2015, 01:13 PM
Incredibly stupid thing to do. Jesus, at least pretend like it is not going to be a cakewalk to the presidency. She has to stop shooting herself in the foot.

Of course, only be concerned that it may hurt her campaign for POTUS. Typical lemming.

Sooner8th
3/3/2015, 01:20 PM
Of course, only be concerned that it may hurt her campaign for POTUS. Typical lemming.Sweet baby jesus...............at what grade level is your reading comprehension? I was responding to the article which was all about - wait for it................... her campaign for POTUS! Seriously - try to focus.......

hawaii 5-0
3/3/2015, 02:22 PM
Just saying........ Scott Walker was accused of the same thing 2 years ago. I imagine a lot of public officials do it.

Still doesn't make it right.

5-0

champions77
3/3/2015, 06:02 PM
I hope the American people will sit back and judge her for what we know about her, that she is a hateful, mean spirited leftist who will say, or do anything to ascend to the highest office. Why she is so revered by so many in this country is beyond comprehension. Ask one of her sycophants what in fact she has accomplished in all of her years of public office and they will be really challenged to give you some substantive accomplishments.
About 15 years ago she gave a speech and she gushed "if the Federal Government could acquire just 10% of the funds in Private Pension and Savings accounts, what wonderful things we could accomplish....for the greater good of course".
More of the left's thinking that your money...is really their money. I know that this has been tossed around by the current occupant of the White House. Tell me when this government collapses that the leftists will not try and take your money?
What do you think about it 8th? Would you be okay if the Feds got into your retirement savings? You good with that?

Sooner8th
3/3/2015, 07:11 PM
I hope the American people will sit back and judge her for what we know about her, that she is a hateful, mean spirited leftist who will say, or do anything to ascend to the highest office. Why she is so revered by so many in this country is beyond comprehension. Ask one of her sycophants what in fact she has accomplished in all of her years of public office and they will be really challenged to give you some substantive accomplishments. About 15 years ago she gave a speech and she gushed "if the Federal Government could acquire just 10% of the funds in Private Pension and Savings accounts, what wonderful things we could accomplish....for the greater good of course".More of the left's thinking that your money...is really their money. I know that this has been tossed around by the current occupant of the White House. Tell me when this government collapses that the leftists will not try and take your money? What do you think about it 8th? Would you be okay if the Feds got into your retirement savings? You good with that?leftists, leftists, LEFTISTS - grab your pitchforks and torchs! Head on out and jerk down those R levers! You are going to have to prove the part about "if the Federal Government could acquire just 10% of the funds in Private Pension and Savings accounts, what wonderful things we could accomplish....for the greater good of course". I have proved on another thread that obama's spending increase from taking office is substantially lower than any republicans increases.

FaninAma
3/3/2015, 09:35 PM
I think the most liberal/progressive wingof the Democratic party prefers the Demorcrat POTUS nominee to be more progressive/liberal than Hilliary. Because of that we will see the liberal Eastand West coast media more willing to run negative reports about her that wouldn't see the light of day if Obama was the subject.

Sooner8th
3/3/2015, 10:36 PM
I think the most liberal/progressive wingof the Democratic party prefers the Demorcrat POTUS nominee to be more progressive/liberal than Hilliary. Because of that we will see the liberal Eastand West coast media more willing to run negative reports about her that wouldn't see the light of day if Obama was the subject.So when the "liberal lamestream" media hammers a liberal dem, it's some plot? Just like obama, they just can't do anything right in your eyes can they?

ouwasp
3/3/2015, 10:40 PM
I calmly predict this will be declared No Big Deal within just a couple news cycles. I cannot under any circumstance imagine this derailing HRC. Therefore, it's no big deal.

champions77
3/4/2015, 03:53 PM
I think the most liberal/progressive wingof the Democratic party prefers the Demorcrat POTUS nominee to be more progressive/liberal than Hilliary. Because of that we will see the liberal Eastand West coast media more willing to run negative reports about her that wouldn't see the light of day if Obama was the subject.

You know I agree with you Fanin. To think that Hillary is not "liberal" enough for the Democratic Party is crazy huh?
What is laughable is these pinheads like Howard Dean criticize the GOP as moving to the far right is laughable. They've moved to the left, as evidenced by the Party backing numerous candidates that were running against Tea party candidates in the various primaries. Look at who they favored in the Presidential elections, Dole, Bush 41, W, McCain and Romney. Not exactly far right candidates. All moderates through and through. They've stood by and allowed this government to expand it's authority and reach in ways no one would have dreamed just a few years ago.
The party that has become radicalized is the Democratic Party. My gosh, they won't even let a rare "moderate" democratic speak anymore at their conventions. They promoted BHO right? Would any one judge him objectively to be anything other than a far left radical? Absolutely nothing that he has proposed would be considered main stream. The radicals own the Democratic Party. Hillary is not far enough left for them anymore. They've seen BHO, and they like it all.

REDREX
3/4/2015, 04:16 PM
People need to stop picking on Old Granny

SicEmBaylor
3/4/2015, 04:40 PM
This is a really really big deal -- more so than what most people probably realize. Depending on what the investigation uncovers, it has the potential to result in an indictment. Whether it will is certainly questionable, but more so than anything Hillary has done since leaving the White House with Bill.

Soonerjeepman
3/4/2015, 04:45 PM
This is a really really big deal -- more so than what most people probably realize. Depending on what the investigation uncovers, it has the potential to result in an indictment. Whether it will is certainly questionable, but more so than anything Hillary has done since leaving the White House with Bill.

no way it will ever happen.

SicEmBaylor
3/4/2015, 04:45 PM
no way it will ever happen.

I agree.