Here’s what I’m talking about:
Hillary Clinton has broken a month’s media silence with a brief, but testy, exchange of questions with reporters that saw her demand the swift release of her personal emails and defend money received by her family.
The former secretary of state called on the department to “expedite” the release of the records from her time in office after news that it might take until January to publish the cache recently turned over by her office….
Now, before you scoff, let me say that I take her at her word. When I read that the State Department was planning on dragging its feet until at least January, my very first thought was that this was very bad news for Hillary.
Think about it: If you’re she, would you rather have it all come out now, when there’s time to explain and then let people forget, or right as the primaries are starting?
So I believe her.
Related Posts
Does your blog header look different or what?
She handed over 55,000 pages of paper copies of emails to the State Department!
Her mess, the State Department’s clean-up. Sure sounds like she is getting her just deserts. And also that the time needed to review all of these messages in their paper form is not unreasonable.
Guess what? She should have done things the right way the first time. Life is always like that. I like that they will be released with just enough time for reporters to dig into them ahead of the primaries. The only down-side is that she, too, will start blaming the Obama administration – which will play well for her if she can figure it out. From her testy questioning, she hasn’t.
She hides her email on a secret server. Then, she produces some of it and deletes some of it without letting anyone see what she deleted.
Then, she asks for the State Dept. to hurry up and produce the sanitized e-mail documents.
Be fair, Bryan — if she let people see what she deleted, what would be the point in deleting it?
I don’t always delete e-mails while under investigation.
But when I do, they’re the exculpatory ones.
“Out, damn’d emails! out, I say!—One; two: why, then
’tis time to do’t.—Hell is murky.—Fie, my lord, fie, a soldier, and
afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our
pow’r to accompt?”
http://www.enotes.com/shakespeare-quotes/damned-spot
Forget party affiliation or ideology. Considering the baggage Clinton brings with her – enough for a fleet of Antonov An-225’s, the worlds largest cargo plane – is this the person anyone would want to sit in the Oval Office?
On the other hand, at least the voters would already know her background, foibles, and faults beforehand. Sometimes the old adage about the crook we already know could be appropos in this instance but considering the office she is seeking, is it worth the chance?
She may be the one with the most “experience” dealing with the ways of the government inside the beltway but is this what the voters want? If her support is based primarily on gender with the reasoning that it is time for a woman to occupy the White House, then the voters who use gender as a reason are in fact no different than the voters who vote for a candidate because he or she opposes abortion. A vote for the leader of the US and is based on a single issue or reason is IMHO irresponsible whether one is liberal, conservative, moderate, or anything in between.
“…enough for a fleet of Antonov An-225’s, the worlds largest cargo plane…”
What? The Russkies have the largest aircraft? This is unacceptable! Without researching it, I would have thought the ol’ USA’s C-5 Galaxy was the biggest.
Mr. President! We must not allow a large plane gap!
Now, now… no fighting in the War Room…
I’m right there with you. We cannot allow them Russkies to outdo us in anything. Well, maybe in the presidential muscle man photo contest, will have to give Putin the edge but Obama can wear a bike helmet better than Putin I betcha!