I must say I’m taken aback by at least the timing, if not the content of the recent State Department announcement about Hillary Clinton’s emails:
The State Department acknowledged for the first time Friday that “top secret” information has been found in emails that passed through the private email server Hillary Clinton used while leading the agency, elevating the issue in the presidential campaign three days before the hotly contested Iowa caucuses.
The information was contained in 22 emails, across seven email chains, that were sent or received by Clinton, according to a State Department spokesman. The emails will not be disclosed as part of an ongoing release of Clinton’s email correspondence from her years as secretary of state, even in highly redacted form.
The timing of this announcement, just days before the Iowa caucuses, catches my attention — surely the
political fallout is not unexpected. Is there a chance that there are some Hillary Clinton detractors in the State Department who are playing politics?
In any case, this creates an interesting scenario … What if this blows up, and makes Ms. Clinton unelectable?
Is Bernie Sanders the beneficiary of this?
What is the likelihood that:
1. Martin O’Malley surges, as a more mainstream alternative for Hillary Clinton supporters unable to get behind Mr. Sanders?
2. Somebody new steps in, because the heavyweights who have been funding the Clinton campaign find themselves unwilling to fund Mr. Sanders?
3. Bernie Sanders is the nominee, with only lukewarm support from Democratic Party stalwarts?
4. Democrats across the US rally behind Bernie Sanders as a mortally-wounded Hillary Clinton falls by the wayside?
5. None of the above (I invite your speculation)
Perhaps this all this just blows over, again — at least until the general election.
The GOP will try to make something of it, but Sanders famously believes “the American people are sick and tired of hearing about [her] damn emails”. I wouldn’t imagine she has many detractors at State, but my understanding is that they are just now classifying them as Top Secret so this fails the what she knew and when she knew it test.
The GOP spent so much time trying to make something out of nothing with these emails, that most people won’t believe that there is something there, even if there is.
Hillary has been running for president for 12 years. This is her last chance, and she is not going to leave this race for any reason. She will go down with the ship.
January 29 was a scheduled release date for State Department emails. There are more to come as the State Dept had to delay some disclosures because of the snow.
I don’t think anyone was playing politics inside State, and to the extent they might have been, it likely involved releasing the news on Friday afternoon so that media attention would be minimal the weekend before the caucuses.
This email fiasco is just one of the many reasons I do not support Clinton in the primary and am worried about her in the general, and this news doesn’t allay those fears.
Not supporting Clinton over this email tempest in a teapot sounds like you’re just looking for any excuse.
You’re being ridiculous.
I’ve mentioned lots of reasons why I am not supporting Clinton here over the past months. The email issue has never been the main reason, but it does make the list – it is absolutely an issue that raises questions of trust. Her positions on war and peace (which I know you disagree with me on, but they are overwhelming reasons for me not to support her), government secrecy, and her ties to Wall Street are much more important.
The email issue is actually serious, even though you refuse to admit that. And it’s serious for both what she did and also for her ability to get elected and govern effectively. This news will continue to damage her through the primary and general and it’s the type of stuff that Republicans will be using to go for impeachment as soon as she is elected.
Strongly disagree with the second. Your last clause especially is the last reason to withhold support as it lets the GOP hold our system and our choices hostage.
And I think your second paragraph is more right than wrong.
The only thing in there with which I do not agree is that affects her ability to be elected and govern, and that is because I think the GOP shot their wad on this last summer. At this point, it will be a big issue on Fox News but ignored by everyone else. As for governing- no Democrat will get any cooperation at all from the Congress, and any Dem will get whatever BS hearings they can invent.
Have You Heard About The Top Secret Drone Program?
Kevin Drum applied some common sense to this overly dramatic non-scandal. You should read his brief but enlightening post.
Basically, there are things that are “Top Secret” but lots of news stories have been written about them. Like the U.S. Drone program. So if people at State send around emails with news stories about the drones, then people at the CIA can say “there’s top secret info in those emails.”
One bureaucracy gets to clash with another, and yet no new secrets have been exposed.
Does the government need to work on its email security? Sure.
But the American people are sick and tired of hearing about Hillary’s emails. We need to be talking about how to strengthen Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the EPA, and making sure corporations follow the law.
We don’t know what is in those emails – and secrecy rules ensure pretty much that we’ll never know. Even if Hillary is indicted, nobody will release the emails in question.
Sorry, but a couple things about this email situation bother me….
Using a private server that contains classified info, maintained by people that may or may not have clearance.
Her team determines what emails are “work related”. Can you imagine the head of GS telling the SEC that he used a personal email address and is determining which of his emails are work related and only turning them over to a congressional inquiry?
Would I like to believe that all she did is innocent? Sure, but what she did certainly looks and smells bad. And as a technologist, I know it was unsafe. How would I have reacted if Dick Cheney had a private server in his house with all the same excuses and information? I would want him impeached.
…but I would be likely to react to your examples the way I’m reacting to this rather than react to this the way you would react to those examples.
…the level of trust I already have for the parties involved would logically be a factor in the judgement.
You ask “Can you imagine the head of GS telling the SEC that he used a personal email address and is determining which of his emails are work related and only turning them over to a congressional inquiry?”
Sadly, indeed yes I can imagine just that. Ms. Warren has just released persuasive evidence that in fact there is very little ANY well-connected executive can do that will result in anything more than some public tut-tutting from our current government — regardless of which party controls the White House, the Capital, or both.
There were a multitude of better reasons to impeach Dick Cheney while he was in office, never mind investigate and prosecute him for war crimes after he left office. We did neither. I’m not defending this negligent handling of sensitive communications, I’m just saying that I think that whatever has been done has been done.
In my view, we’ve already explored whatever there is to explore. We know that Ms. Clinton mishandled her electronic communications while she was Secretary of State. We know that she was not the only official to do so.
If we are enumerating and prioritizing, based on their harm to America and American interests, past offenses by government officials for investigation and prosecution, then I think Ms. Clinton and her emails are buried in the mud. The harm done by the illegal 2003 Iraq invasion and by the documented war crimes of the prior administration are orders of magnitude more egregious and remain uninvestigated and unprosecuted.
If we are seeking guidance about who will be the best person to be our next President, all this strikes me as irrelevant. At worst, this raises questions about her judgement, values, and priorities — questions that I think she has satisfactorily answered multiple times. I think it’s time to move on.
The unanswered question, though, is whether the rest of America shares that opinion, and what political consequences unwind from that unanswered question.
but if you say:
you are saying that you agree she mishandled classified documents… If that is the case, she should be indicted. I do not care that other people did it or if they did worse. Being tired of hearing about it is not a reason to ignore it.
And saying that the sins of past administration justify ignoring hers is not a valid argument.
I guess will will just have to disagree on this one.
“[M]ishandled her electronic communications” does not automatically equal “mishandled classified documents”, especially coming from SomervilleTom. Classification came later so trying to hang that part around her neck sounds like trying to enact an ex post facto law. Tom, I believe, approaches this from an electronic security (not to be confused with national security) angle at least in part because he is in this line of work himself. Previous exchanges will also note that Tom feels very strongly about transparency regarding communications between and among government officials, but that too is different than an accusation of mishandling state secrets. Tom can of course speak for himself and correct me if I’m misinterpreting his comments.
I think I’m saying that whatever circumstances might result in Ms. Clinton being indictable also result in a relatively long list of current and former officials also being indictable, together with an even longer list of high-ranking executives in the private sector.
Unless we have infinite resources to direct towards prosecution (which in my view we do not), then not all of the potentially indictable men and women will be prosecuted. I suggest that we would by necessity choose an order in which to pursue those indictments. My preference is to set the order based on the aggregate harm done to US interests by the alleged offense.
I don’t see any of this happening. I oppose prosecuting Ms. Clinton for whatever she did or did not do regarding her handling of electronic communications before prosecuting at least Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney for crimes against humanity.
In a perfect world, none of this would have happened. We live in an imperfect world. Of the potential battles that we might choose to pursue starting now, prosecution of Ms. Clinton for all this is at the very bottom of my list.
Your list of battles to choose may, of course, may vary from mine.
…will be Obama’s Mark Rich.
Protect her and himself.