Hillary's E-Mail (Breaking News: Smoking Gun Officially Announced)

Yeah, I know. The counterpoint is who really gives a shit about it? Nobody did in 1974, her career was not impacted. Nobody did in 2008 when it was alleged (the recommendation story is all based on Zeifman's book--profit motive, you know.) He wrote a book about candidate Hillary and this was the biggest dirt he could find? Conveniently one that only he could attest to?

Look, I left a job once and did not get a recommendation. Maybe it was because I was ineffective, dishonest, and fucked up every day for 18 months. Perhaps it was because my boss was a one-watt bulb with 30 years in and he resented the kid that came in, fixed everything, and got a lot of praise for it. Or maybe because when I quit, I told him he was an immoral opportunist, a pathologic liar, and a helpless, hopeless paranoid with delusions of grandeur. I knew his recommendation was worth nothing and I didn't need it. I got another job in 4 days. The point being . . . 36 years later, one can put my entire successful career up against a job recommendation I didn't get when I was 23 and what does it say? Jack Shit.

Compré?

Not really. One involves an allegedly bad job of compiling a report. The other involves the distinction between personal and private documents.

Meow . . .

Is the double standard not apparent here? Every single government employee is permitted to decide what correspondence is private and what is official and must be preserved. We trust them to do this. Why is Hillary singled out? She preserved the official documents and they are available. Her predecessor Colin Powell, apparently did not preserve a single email during his entire term. Both are out of office, why no scandalous outcry about those?

We both know why. Because Hillary is a candidate for President and Powell is not. The political motivation to make this story into a scandal is high for a certain political party, you know this. Even though she preserved the documents and made them available the spin is that she must be hiding something and she must be lying and she must be guilty of Benghazi misbehavior because she wrote no emails about it a year before it happened. Clearly she must let her opponents and every nut job in the world read her private email so that we all can decide which is private and which is public because Hillary, alone among federal employees, can't be trusted. Because her boss didn't like her three decades ago.

Maybe. Maybe doing research. Maybe playing Angry Birds. Maybe receiving emails. Maybe making private emails. Maybe too damned busy on a jam-packed trip to be making official emails on business could attend to when she got back. Maybe she uses her laptop for writing emails instead of the awkward tiny keys on a Blackberry. I know I don't type more than a cryptic response on my phone.

Why pick her Benghazi trip among the 112 countries that she visited as Secretary of State? Just like to get that name in there, eh? How many official emails does she make while traveling? How does that compare with her Benghazi trip? What makes you cry "bullshit" that she might not have made an official email on this day or that day? It is entirely possible.

You just don't know, so you must make allegations without substantiation. That's fine, but I must point them out.

 

Simple debates are for simpletons. Brief enough for you?

 

That does not make her private email public information, are you sure you know the difference or do you just want to read her mail?

What is ludicrous is to think that anybody else could handle her private emails. If somebody else gets to make a choice, then they have already violated her privacy.

No one can assume that she did the wrong thing either. Every government employee controls access to their own data in some fashion. Look, I agree that she would have been smarter to have two addresses, even if she used the same server. She would have been smarter to use the SoS server. What I disagree with is that we have the right to see her private email. The law says she has to preserve her public email, not her private email.

And you wonder why Hillary was concerned about internal leaks? I have no doubt that Valerie Jerret and other far-left liberals think the progressive Clintons are left-of-center but not truly liberal. However most democrats are to the right of Jerret. I will bet you a case of Mexican beer that Obama actively campaigns for Hillary. Bill and Hillary campaigned for him twice, she joined his cabinet to help bring her supporters to Obama's side. There was a deal made and Obama has his end of it to uphold.

How many times do I have to say that she was careless and left herself open to criticism. That is not what I'm arguing. We just can't assume her to be guilty of deleting official emails because she was careless. If she did, it will come out. Somebody received those emails, if they exist.

You are dreaming, Winston. Who do you imagine the "arbiters" are? Obama is a lame duck and his people can't control the party in 2016. Who do Democrats have who can do better?

Hillary is the only arbiter on whether she runs or not. At her age, it would not be shocking if she didn't want to go through another rugged campaign and then endure 8 years of Republican obstruction, diplomatic interference, and hyperpartisanship.

 

You can keep repeating this, but it is not the case. What law surrenders her privacy or gives anybody the right to a personally owned server? Only her public documents are covered by the law. She is a lawyer, you know. Political opponents are demanding her email, but she has surrendered no privacy rights whatsoever.