Start at around the 7:30 minute mark, and there is a conversation between David Corn and Lawrence O’Donnell that describes with 100% accuracy what it is that drives people insane about the Clintons and how they react to this sort of thing. Corn just nails it in IMHO.
“There’s no car crash over there…” You can watch that very thing play out here in the comments, with people WITHIN the Democratic party at each other’s throats. I’ll invariably be called a sexist for having even written about this or told I am reverting to my old Republican ways or other bullshit. There is just something about the Clintons that brings out the worst in everyone.
I saw people on twitter comparing Lawrence to Joe Scarborough for this, when the only really stupid things said were by Alex Wagner re: the AP story. And Lawrence, of everyone, has reason to be leery about the Clintons, because he was a Senate staffer dealing with the Clinton budget and had to deal with all the last minute maneuvering by Bill and his crew, who were famous for saying one thing to Congress, making a deal, and then saying something completely different in front of the cameras forcing the staffers to have to re-do everything they had just worked on. If anyone on that panel has cause for Clinton fatigue, it would be him, but it wasn’t evident at all in my eyes.
At any rate, the stategery for how they are going to deal with this is now clear:
Hillary Clinton won’t be presiding over a soul-searching press conference or sitting down for a come-clean interview about her use of a private email address any time soon — at least if everything goes according to her team’s plan.
The former secretary of state and her advisers have decided to adopt a time-tested Clintonian approach: take a concrete step to ease the pressure, then wait out the storm, according to three sources with knowledge of her team’s approach.
Their theory is that her late Wednesday tweet asking the State Department to release the 55,000 pages of emails she provided to the agency would start to calm the media and political tempest, while giving her spokesman an easy answer to many journalists’ questions: ask State.
Clinton and her team are aware that her tactics will only hold out for so long and that she’ll eventually have to answer questions about her e-mail practices, but she and her advisers are aiming to delay that moment, ideally until she formally announces she’s running for president. At that point, they hope, the controversy will have subsided to the point where her campaign launch will be a much bigger headline than her response to a month-old scandal. An added benefit to the approach: the potential for Republicans to overreach and overreact while Clinton stays silent.
And the State Department gets the shit bomb. Merry Christmas, John Kerry.
If there is nothing there, why not just address it, and move on? It just makes you want to pull your hair out. What I wouldn’t give for a Democratic candidate with a team that fought as hard as Hillary’s and as smart as Obama’s.
LongHairedWeirdo
“Why not address it and move on”? What would “addressing it” look like, if not “asking State to release all e-mails”?
Serious question: What would satisfy people, besides that? Other than seppuku?
Mike E
Cole SMASH
myiq2xu
I’m gonna enjoy watching JC grind his teeth and fall in line supporting Hillary.
Gin & Tonic
@LongHairedWeirdo: HRC gave State 55k pages (or 55k e-mails, not clear.) It might be nice to know there aren’t another 55k that she’s holding back because she decided (as opposed to the National Archives, or the DoS archivist) they’re not important. So she’s never “ask[ed] State to release all e-mails”, she’s asked State to release all the e-mails that she deigned to give them.
kc
Exhibit A.
SatanicPanic
I don’t know why I should even give a crap about this “scandal”. Who cares
Amir Khalid
It’s been, like, a day or two since this scandalette erupted. I’m still waiting the two weeks to see if anyone will even remember it when that much time has passed.
NotMax
The sexism, misogyny and chauvinism practically drips from the screen.
But I kid. :)
Bobby Thomson
There’s something about the Clintons that brings out the worst in Republicans and former Republicans, I’ll give you that. Not everyone.
catclub
I have been putting off buying the book by Gene Lyons “The Hunting of the President”, that and Al Franken’s “Lying Liars”.
I guess it is time. I was not as aware of what was going on then.
Somebody mentioned that any Democratic operative should be asking for Jeb Bush’s emails from fall 2000 every time this comes up. Also Scott Walker’s hidden emails from when he was Milwaukee Executive.
Samuel Knight
Wow GOP probably can’t believe how the Dems fall for this again and again. Panicking and attacking one another before even the most basic facts are clear.
There are going to be lots more hits like this. And dem candidates will never react perfectly
askew
@LongHairedWeirdo:
I think if Hillary did an interview and answered some basic questions starting with why did she do this, did the WH know and approve about this exception ahead of time, how can we be sure all emails were turned over to the State Dept, etc. it could be put to rest.
The WH is clearly reaching irritation point with Hillary’s mess. Valerie Jarrett didn’t defend Hillary during an interview this morning. She basically punted right back to Hillary’s team.
And how does Hillary think it is a good idea to send out Lanny Davis to defend her? He is slime and his defense today was we can trust we have all the documents because Hillary said so.
Lastly, John Kerry has a serious negotiation going on with Iran right now and he and his staff have to deal with cleaning up Hillary’s mess too? HRC better hope that Kerry doesn’t get sick of this and cut her loose.
catclub
@Gin & Tonic:
You are right there with Trey Gowdy’s committee.
askew
@catclub:
Lanny Davis did that this morning on MSNBC and looked like a weasel. I think that is a big mistake and won’t deflate the issue at all in part because she held a Federal position with stricter laws and she dealt with foreign governments and classified information.
Warren Terra
I don’t like her avoiding creating official records of her official actions, and I think there’s a lot of valid criticisms to be made about her behavior, and her handling of the controversy this week.
On the other hand, it’s worth remembering that this came out when a reporter for the gossip-heavy site Gawker filed a FOIA request for her emails with Sidney Blumenthal – that is, with someone who holds no government office, who to my knowledge isn’t a registered lobbyist, but who is a longtime personal friend and sometimes political advisor. Someone, in other words, with whom she has interactions that really aren’t obviously anybody else’s business.
Under such circumstances, you can see why she might want greater control over her email, if the alternative is having no privacy at all.
catclub
@Samuel Knight: Yep. Looks like you did read the Salon piece by Digby.
Just Some Fuckhead
What I see is there is a whole ‘nother level of accountability for Democrats generally and the Clinton’s specifically. I’m sure it must get tiring for them to continue to have to deal with bullshit pseudo scandals going on 25 years now. Of course, the Clinton’s can always go away and put themselves out of our misery but the bullshit won’t stop coming from Republicans and our failed media experiment.
LongHairedWeirdo
@Gin & Tonic:
My point exactly. No matter what they do, someone will say “it raises more questions”. Under those circumstances, what does addressing it look like?
mai naem mobile
Jeezus H Christ. I cannot handle this just for the campaign period. Forget dealing with it for a whole presidential term. Just fucking release all the damn emails minus the classified shit and deal with the embarrassing shit. I can’t believe she’s got morons who would put reallly awful stuff.in.an email. Its March 2015. The media will.be over it.by the end of.summer tops.
the Conster
When is she going to announce she’s running? Is she going to announce? Why hasn’t she announced? If she’s not going to run, then none of this matters. What is she fucking doing? Shit or get off the pot, Hills. Really, time to move on.
trollhattan
It’s Friday and already the drinking hour for some of You People. If this thread doesn’t hit a TBogg Unit you’re all slackers.
Epicurus
Can I take just a moment to remind people that while Mrs. Clinton carries the former President’s last name, she AIN’T HIM!?! Please. It’s beyond ridiculous that she is being taken to task for her husband’s “sins.” No, she is not perfect, and she has done some remarkably stupid things, but let’s stop pretending that she is merely an extension of her husband. That is quite frankly misogynistic and patronizing. As the landlord posted earlier, as horrible as she might be, I will gladly vote for her if she is the Democratic nominee. There is no “there” there on the other side.
catclub
@askew: So Lanny looked better than usual.
Warren Terra
@askew:
Lanny Davis always looks like a weasel, probably because he is one. So your example doesn’t really speak to the merits of the communication strategy Catclub proposes.
On the other hand, it speaks volumes about Clinton’s continuing inability to extricate herself from the cloud of vile hacks that surrounded her, fed off of her, an doomed her 2008 campaign that Lanny Davis was on your TV speaking for her interests.
Kevin
“I’m not crazy because some other crazy person agrees with me!!!”
Sorry John, that’s not good enough. If you compare yourself to O’Donnell, you aren’t even clearing a low bar.
And the “Merry Christmas Kerry” dig at the end…what do you want, her to just release all her emails to the press? Cause i’m sure there is nothing the state department would want to hold back there, and i’m sure the ensuing outrage of “how irresponsible can the Clintons be releasing that confidential information!!!” which would be led by you and other people in hysterics, once again yelling “SEE!! SEE!! WE TOLD YOU!!!”
Gin & Tonic
@LongHairedWeirdo: Easy peasy. “I gave the mail server to the National Archives.”
askew
@Warren Terra:
Considering the WH refused to let her hire Blumenthal I do think it is relevant if he was providing advice to her as SoS. If his emails weren’t part of her government role but on her future political aspirations then they wouldn’t be relevant. Unfortunately when she made the boneheaded decision to mix her personal email with her government work she opened herself up for this scrutiny.
Josie
@catclub: Actually, Lanny did a pretty decent job of asking to the media to avoid innuendo and suspicion in place of facts. For once, and probably for the only time, I found myself agreeing with him.
ETA: Although he still looks like a weasel.
askew
@the Conster:
Originally the idea was she would announce her run next month according rumors. I read somewhere yesterday that she was thinking of pushing it off to July (again rumors so who knows).
askew
@Josie:
Really? He looked like a buffoon. His answer to how we know if all emails were released was trust Hillary. How is that good spin?
Botsplainer
Janeway was a better captain than Kirk.
Discuss.
The Moar You Know
This is not a scandal. This is ginned-up Republican bullshit (not illegal and the worst thing you can say about how she’s handled her emails is that this is how the entire Republican party handles theirs, can you say double standard? Knew you could!) it’s exactly the same as they’ve been throwing at Obama for six years, but you take it seriously when it’s thrown at a Clinton and not an Obama.
You might want to think about that and why that is.
@Samuel Knight: This thread’s a great example and getting better every post.
SatanicPanic
@Just Some Fuckhead:
exactly. I have to reiterate my point from the other day- Obama is extraordinarily good on this kind of thing- he seems to have been able to avoid any real scandal for 6 years now, which is amazing. And that’s spoiled us. Hillary is just an above average pol facing an enormous, never-ending stream of crap. By any normal standard she’s handling this just fine. We can’t expect everyone to be Obama.
LongHairedWeirdo
@askew:
The answer might well be “that there’d be FOIA requests for all of her e-mails, and they’d be combed, taken out of context, and used for Oppo research, so she made sure any official State mails went to another State address and she’s covered.”
“Oh, so you still believe in that paranoid Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, eh? You crazy (female dog)!”
Josie
@askew: I suspect that our differing opinions on how he performed are affected by our respective attitudes towards Hillary, so I won’t argue the point.
chopper
this isn’t such a huge deal that it requires a ‘soul searching press conference’. a ‘concrete step to ease the pressure’ would be just fine if it did a decent enough job dealing with the questions regarding whether or not her emails were actually completely provided to the state department, but i don’t think a ‘come clean interview’ would otherwise be necessitated.
this situation may seem par for the course with the clintons but it’s not a huge deal. it just does a great job at fitting in with people’s preconceived notions (and not without merit) about the clintons.
LongHairedWeirdo
@Gin & Tonic:
“But first I deleted my PGP private key”
“WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO HIDE?”
Kay
@the Conster:
Looks like about a month from now. I agree about announcing. I think I might have done that with less build-up, just because she always seems vulnerable to accusations of slyly and secretly plotting everything, or whatever :)
Gin & Tonic
@LongHairedWeirdo: I’ll bet you a beer she wasn’t using PGP or S/MIME.
chopper
@askew:
that’s because lanny davis is a weasel. and not one of those cute ‘hey look, he’s riding on the back of a bird!’ ones either. just a straight-up shitbag weasel.
David Koch
In be4 dingbat Hillbots call Cole a “sexist”
askew
Let’s just hope that her announcement will be better than last time’s “I’m in it to win it!”
In positive Hillary news, Bob Menendez is going to be indicted by the Feds so that will take the focus off her for awhile.
askew
@chopper:
And Hillary trotting him out to defend her shows us once again she’s learned nothing from 2008. She still has her sleazy hanger-ons and makes poor decisions.
Anonymous At Work
@LongHairedWeirdo: Actually, Doonesbury handled this. Whitewater was a nothing but the Clintons had an office dedicated to “covering up” that there was no cover-up. Because, if you say “nothing’s there” and prove “nothing’s there” then Republicans and the DC press corps will assume “something’s there” and everything else was a cover-up.
Cacti
Republican Cole still knows that the Mayberry Machiavellis are evil, and that Hillary not using a .gov e-mail is the worstest thing since Bill committed the high crime of trying to get laid.
David Koch
The worst part is we have a great jobs report, but no one will hear about it as it will be drowned out by another self inflicted Clinton scandal
but we have to support her cuz she’s a woman or somethin.
catclub
@Gin & Tonic: What about GPG? PGP was SO commercial!
It would be a trip if she turned out to be like Dilbert’s mom.
Kevin
@David Koch: I don’t think he is sexist, just has a massive blind hatred for the Clintons, and can’t function/think straight when something involves them.
“urgle burgle, she did…something…and people talking about it…so she bad, Clintons bad, I not bad for being Republican and hating them at the time, wasn’t me, it was them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”
Yeah…no. You don’t get absolved for being crazy just because a lot of other people dislike them. Especially since those other people are either:
a) Republicans, or
b) the media
Two groups infinitely more unpopular than either Bill or Hillary.
Aaron Morrow
It’s still fun for the kewl kids in the Village to attack of the Clintons. JEB is being held to a lower standard, but no one cares because he’s not “new money,” he’s the third (fourth?) generation from a proper Beltway family.
As long as the media attacks the Clintons, some people will always blame them for being attacked. If I have to choose between POLITICO and Vox, I’ll join the latter in ignoring this, unless non-Tea Party nuts are also up in arms about the private email accounts of Chuck Hagel and Janet Napolitano.
trollhattan
O/T File under “B” for better late than never or “R” for Yeah, I can Read the polls.
max
If there is nothing there, why not just address it, and move on?
For the same reason you shouldn’t pick at scabs.
max
[‘It might get infected.’]
p.s. I cannot, for the life of me, bring myself to care. I was bothered that that one guy in the Bush administration destroyed millions of emails deployed through government emails addresses, but if he’d been running a email server in his house, I wouldn’t have expected any different from a regular joe so I don’t care. I assume that if government officials want to go off the record, they can find a way to do so. And really, if everyone was subject to everyone reading everything they write it’d be a lot like a penitentiary. So I don’t care.
This has been another episode of Village Mania: Pre-Primary Edition. Brought to you by Dewey, Cheatem & Howe. Remember to tune in next time if you’re still awake to hear this which you probably aren’t. Have a nice nap. {National anthem plays}
askew
@David Koch:
Yep I am sure the WH and other Dems are thrilled that the usual Clinton melodrama has drowned out the good news on the job reports. But, we better get used to it because we are going to get 2 years of this shit.
Cacti
@Aaron Morrow:
I think Politico has 7 stories related to Clinton’s e-mails featured on their front page.
For all of the sardonic quips our front pagers like to make about “team win the morning,” the BJ blog host is a complete jabbering dupe for that sort of thinking.
catclub
@Aaron Morrow:
The term of art is hereditary aristocracy, and that is the main difference between George Bush and Sarah Palin.
Death Panel Truck
@askew: If Mark Penn has anything to do with her campaign this time around, I’m done.
And she will be, too. Penn makes Bob Shrum look like a political genius.
askew
@Aaron Morrow:
Jeb is being held to a lower standard in the media because he didn’t have to follow the same guidelines and his boss didn’t have a directive to not use personal email for government business. And he didn’t deal with classified information or foreign governments on a regular basis.
Hillary supporters on the other hand are holding Jeb and everyone but Hillary to a higher standard. Because it doesn’t matter if Hillary does it but they sure were outraged when W, Palin, Walker, etc. did it. It’s funny watching them turn themselves into pretzels to try to justify what Hillary did.
Betty Cracker
@myiq2xu: That’s what grownups who don’t want the White House to fall into the hands of unhinged warmongers and idiotic fuck-ups do. It’ll be instructive for the PUMA crowd to witness that for sure.
different-church-lady
CHEW TOY!!!
Germy Shoemangler
George Stephanopoulos is ON it…. Every morning at 7 I turn on his morning show and he leads with it. Then he turns his show over to Jon Karl, who reports with a tight little smile; barely concealed glee.
Anyone who watched only the network news would believe this homebrew email scheme was unprecedented.
chopper
@askew:
i’ll be honest, i like hillary. but when i read ‘lanny davis’ i started rubbing the bridge of my nose and saying ‘oh jesus, why’
askew
@Death Panel Truck:
Penn won’t be around. The Clintons threw him under the bus and blamed him completely for losing to Obama. Well him and Solis Doyle. But, all the rest of the corrupt assholes Hillary has surrounded herself with for decades look to be back. So, much for learning from a loss.
chopper
@SatanicPanic:
well, obama is definitely different.
this fits in with what david corn was talking about in the clip. some small scandal happens, what he calls a 2 or 3/10, and clintons’ detractors flip out and act like it’s the biggest thing ever, and the clintons and their supporters circle their wagons and stonewall.
normally you expect high-ranking pols and presidents not to deal with every single bit of drama, but as obama has shown there comes a point where it becomes a smart move to address it to defuse the tension. it doesn’t always work but it often does something and more than stonewalling does. and often other high-ranking pols will later bemoan the fact that they didn’t address it earlier when it would have been more effective. they just don’t want to come off as always explaining, always apologizing etc (which is understandable), but not doing so at all only helps create an image of being slimy and hiding shit.
the clintons don’t have a great history in that regard.
Elizabelle
C-Span 1: President Obama live at Town Hall in South Carolina. Talking about employment practices and education.
I prefer to revel that he is our president, and leave the 2016 race be.
I wish we had vigorous alternatives to Hillary! It would be in our interest. Ah well.
ETA: He’s talking now to a 10-year old boy who’s considering being president. Q was when did PBO get interested in presidenting? He says he thought he’d be an architect when he was 10, then a basketball player, then a lawyer.
PS: PBO told Trey to graduate from college, and maybe PBO is just warming up the seat for him.
Cacti
I’m inclined to agree with the assessment of Paul Begala re: this latest tempest in a teapot.
Belafon
Until after she left, there was no requirement that she had to use a government owned email address to conduct SoS business. Since that is the case, and she did turn over emails (unlike a certain Darth Cheney), why do we insist on panicking?
And I’m sure Democratic party leaders would love to have a party where members didn’t panic when their opponents make accusations.
different-church-lady
@mai naem mobile:
I’d rather deal with this than years of “WHITEY TAPE” and “BIRTH CERTIFICATE”.
The idea that y’all are treating this like it’s unique to Hillary would be amusing if it weren’t so sad.
geg6
You and others keep blaming the Clintons for your own fantasies and nightmares, John.
I don’t have a dog in this fight. I don’t love or hate either Hillary or Bill. I’m kinda neutral on them both. I hate lots of things they’ve done and I love lots of things they’ve done. I voted for Bill twice and am not ashamed of it nor am I proud of it. I’ll do the same for Hillary, if given the chance. No, I don’t love her like Obama and I won’t have the same enthusiasm as I had/have for him, but it won’t be far behind either because I really love the idea of making history a second time with her.
But what I see is other people’s pathologies being projected by their reaction to the Clintons. It’s very revealing and not very flattering, I must say.
Robert Sneddon
@askew: Mark Penn is still around. I last heard his name popping up in British Conservative circles a little while back. He’s fit, tanned, tested and ready when Senator Clinton announces her candidacy, I’m sure.
Tree With Water
Public servants can never be trusted with editorial control of public documents. Period. Never. Clinton is no naif, and she knows that as well as I do. But her good judgement was overridden for reasons I don’t as yet understand. In that light, whether or not she adhered to the laws governing public documents is irrelevent. Unless she can explain why she opted for editorial control of public documents despite knowing better, all the strategizing in the world won’t do her any good.
Belafon
@Belafon: But, as someone said, we’re not part of an organized party.
different-church-lady
@Belafon:
As a famous dead guy kinda said, “A lie can travel around the world before the truth can sleep past the alarm, stumble out of bed, bark its shin on the bedframe, burn its toast and say, ‘Fuck it, this shit ain’t worth it’ and go back to bed.”
catclub
@different-church-lady: I’d rather deal with this eight days a week than Scott Walker appointing Supreme Court justices.
different-church-lady
@trollhattan:
I…
different-church-lady
@different-church-lady: …will…
different-church-lady
@different-church-lady: …do…
different-church-lady
@different-church-lady: …what…
different-church-lady
@different-church-lady: …I…
Elizabelle
@catclub: Prezactly.
different-church-lady
@different-church-lady: …can.
Mandalay
@LongHairedWeirdo:
Well this would be a start:
– Explaining why she decided to avoid using a .gov email address as SoS.
– Explaining why years elapsed before she handed her SoS emails over to the Dept of State.
– Explaining whether she is happy for the Dept of State to have full access to her email to ensure that all relevant emails have been handed over to the government.
I’m tired of the strawman that she is not running for president so she does not have the support team in place to handle this issue. She could sit down with any of a gazillion interviewers today and address the points above. And if she doesn’t want to have an interview she could issue a statement. But she just hides. And she is supposed to be presidential material? It’s pathetic.
different-church-lady
@catclub:
Boom goes the dynamite.
Baud
Who do you want me to be
To make you sleep with me
trollhattan
@max:
I found Willard’s buying and removing the PCs from the Mass governor’s office a far more compelling story line.
Cacti
@Belafon:
Hell, until 2014, there was no formal codification of e-mail as federal records under 44 U.S.C.
Under 22 CFR 171.6, the State Department doesn’t normally turn over official records to the national archives until they’re 25 years old.
Cacti
@Mandalay:
Any new insights from Judicial Watch that you’d like to share today?
different-church-lady
@The Moar You Know:
I have come to view the two terms as synonymous.
Elie
@askew:
Your points are valid.
I am getting that pit of my stomach bad feeling again.
Hillary is our only candidate — we are literally putting all our eggs in this basket and I am afraid — very afraid.
She can do a lot of damage to the Democrats. Things are very different now from when she and Bill ruled the roost. Our party and our interests are much shakier than then and again, we have, no alternative to her that can go against Jeb. I wish that were not so, truly, but she is the game. Elizabeth Warren has no desire to run and has said so unequivocally.. she is also not a tested national candidate for the kind of exposure and stress that a Presidential candidate experiences in this country right now.
I am all for being fair, etc, but we have seen this before, y’all. The Clintons got away with it then in a very different political climate. This is NOT that climate. We thought it was bad then, but its gotten much much more toxic and filled with dark money. Both of them are older and have been molded by years of uncritical worship and entitlement. I cannot have my future dictated by their blindness and ego. I don’t know of alternatives right now, but seriously, a bunch of folks telling me this is nothing is just not going to cut it. Stop deluding yourselves. Please.
chopper
@different-church-lady:
i think many treat this shit as if it’s unique to the clintons because obama has a better track record at dealing with back-burner not-quite scandals before they metastasize. it’s the same reason people so often now worry about her ability to campaign – it’s because we’re used to obama who is just better at it.
Elie
@Elie:
I guess I might feel better if her response to this weren’t so – lame. I just don’t think they are in front or on top of this right… just not feeling that energy.
Cacti
@Elie:
Okay, I’ll bite.
What was it that they “got away with”?
dslak
Oh, this is all so very serious. Hillary’s campaign is already over. Nothing is more sacred than the means one uses to transmit electronic communications.
Elie
@Cacti:
but in 2009, the Obama administration communicated to its cabinet etc that they expected people to use government email.
But even if that were not the case, couldn’t she come up with a more energetic response (note that I did not say defense) than she has? Where is the energy, the strength and confidence (not to be confused with stonewalling)? Y’all know what I mean here… There is critical timing on these things to shut things down. She is smart enough and has a smart team (I think?) What gives?
Mandalay
@catclub:
Not really. That approach makes it look like you are ducking the question, and want to change the subject, and it stands out like a prick on a sunny day.
Elie
@Cacti:
Got away with being sloppy in their activities and communications. You don’t think so?
dslak
@Elie: You mean leadership? Let me know when anyone in the Village admits that a Democrat has it.
SatanicPanic
@Cacti: What is impeachment anyway? not a big deal, right?
Cacti
@Elie:
The first primaries are 11-months away.
This is just the first of what will surely be many shiny objects for the beltway press to bat around.
And I’m still waiting for your answer about what the Clintons “got away with” in the 1990s.
catclub
@Cacti: Yeah. They got away with it by only being impeached once and being continuously investigated for 8 years.
I was going to say they have been burnished, tested in the fieriest ovens of controversy, and come through to tell the tale.
mai naem mobile
So I just looked up this Menendez story. Some comments are already blaming it on Obama because Menendez stood up to Obama on Cuba and the Iran deal. So, lemme see, Obama risks losing a Dem senator who would sustain a veto on most stuff that he vetoes. Said senators state is governed by a douchebag blowhard 2016 GOP.candidate. I am speechless.
Cacti
@SatanicPanic:
Yes, those blow job charges really brought everything crashing down. And now Bill Clinton is a pariah who can barely show his face in public.
The Moar You Know
No requirement to do so whatsoever.
Nobody asked for them.
Her “happiness” or lack thereof is totally irrelevant.
@Mandalay: That wasn’t so hard, was it? What other questions do you have? Something about Benghazi or Monica?
BGK
@trollhattan:
So am I free to scream at my teevee the next time Dr. Maddow has Pile of Schmidt on as the “reasonable Republican?”
dslak
@The Moar You Know: Secretary Clinton, please tell us the contents of your e-mail inbox during Benghazi, the most important event ever in U.S. military history. The fact that you cannot jump through our arbitrarily high hoops only serves to demonstrate the merits of these hearings.
Elie
@Cacti:
You didn’t think that they had a number of unforced errors back then — that Monica Lewinsky and that whole horrible episode was totally ridiculous for him (Bill) to have put us through and harmed his Presidency and the Democrats? Yeah, he came through it — they came through it, but it cost a lot of political capital that could have been used differently. You thought that was ok? Really? Cause if you do, I really don’t have much else to say to you. You are just like some of the right wingers defending “your” candidate… ho hum
Allan
If I were running against Hillary Clinton, I would hire Lanny Davis to go on TV and speak on her behalf.
Eric U.
this just shows how effective the republican smears of the Clintons was among a certain portion of the population. And in the group of “republicans,” I include Sullivan, who published every republican smear he could get his hands on.
Iowa Old Lady
@Anonymous At Work: Exactly. There are no emails plotting Benghazi which proves she has something to hide!
Alex
@Cacti: You’re being a bit glib. The premise of the original investigation was ludicrous, but Bill Clinton undeniably perjured himself while under oath and obstructed justice. Serious federal crimes for which he remains disbarred.
dslak
@Allan: You make a good point. How do we know that Davis is not in fact working for JEB!?
Cacti
@Elie:
Embarrassing, sure. Harmed his Presidency? Not in any meaningful way. The only liberal policy priorities Bill ever chased were income tax changes (a win), and healthcare reform (a loss), and he seemed disinclined to pursue any others after the GOP congressional wins of 1994. Not sure what you think he was going to spend his allegedly lost political capital on.
Harmed the Democrats? Then as now, Congressional Democrats were a disorganized mess. Al Gore did far more harm to the country by running away from the highly popular Clinton, and keeping the 2000 election close enough for George W. Bush to steal.
JPL
500 days of Hillary. Oh Boy!
Cacti
@Alex:
Yes, he made false statements in a civil deposition concerning his sex life, in connection with what was supposed to be an investigation of the Whitewater Development Corporation.
There was a reason nobody but the most partisan GOPers cared about it.
Elie
Over my many years, I have had the unfortunate experience of supporting and voting for a Democratic candidate that I know is not going to win (Mondale, Humphrey, Dukakis, Carter, Kerry). I did what I could and I will for her too if she is the nominee. That said, doing that – voting for a lost cause is a horrible horrible feeling that I hope that I and you all also, never have to do again. My anxiety, relates to those memories and NONE of those candidates did anything bad — they just didn’t know how to get it done — how to effectively craft and delivery their vision and message.
Yes, the primaries are 11 months away as Catci reminds me. And she hasn’t even declared her intent yet, right? Presumably that will happen soon cause she is putting us in a real bind if she doesn’t — we really would not have time to build anyone else up. Again — I know I am asking her to follow a script of MY design, which may not be totally fine, but shit — If she wants it, she needs to want it bad and to ACT LIKE IT — maybe even before she declares her “decision”. (I won’t go into the egocentricity of her making us wait — like — for what exactly?)
Mandalay
@Samuel Knight:
But the basic facts are clear: Hillary Clinton only used her personal email account, over which she had sole control, for using email as SoS, and it took her years to hand over those emails to the Dept of State.
Now if you want to say “no biggie” to the situation that’s fine, but why pretend that the basic facts aren’t clear?
Doug r
@SatanicPanic: exactly. did she break the law? so what’s the big deal?
Elie
@Alex:
Thank you… you said it better
Violet
The issue isn’t this particular “scandal,” such as it is. It’s Hillary’s reaction to it, plus the next one and her response to that one, and the one after that and so on. It’s not like this sort of thing is going to happen only once. It’ll keep happening.
Cacti
@Eric U.:
Threads like these are good for showing who the “reformed” Republicans are, and when approximately their road to Damascus moment came.
notorious JRT
@Warren Terra:
I guess I am confused. Every day I create and respond to emails. For work related things, I use my work email account. This is a requirement of my employment with which I have NO difficulty complying. For personal email, i.e., all messages unrelated to my job, I use a personal account. Why do our elected / appointed officials find this so hard? I didn’t like GOP folks taking their email off public records; I don’t like HRC removing hers from the public record. This is an unforced error and disappointing call by her.
And, each of you who yawn and say, “So, what?”, that is fine for you and perhaps me, and perhaps Cole in the end. But, HRC has her gender and her “Clinton-ness” as excuses for independents to withhold their votes from her and give them to a republican whom they perceive in there muddy middle way to be bland and benign. The only thing independents feel strongly about is the dramas they hear about in the easy media. Pooh pooh this if you like, but IMO, she is doing herself no favors. Lanny Davis? Is there any spokes-whore more odious?
Elie
@Violet:
THIS. YES
Mandalay
@Cacti:
Purity failure! The official line here is “NaderNaderNaderNaderNader”. Please stick to that because any other view is unpossible.
Cacti
@Mandalay:
That sounds serious, Chairman Gowdy.
Can you please point out the sections of the United States Code prohibiting the use of private e-mail addresses by cabinet level officials?
Since one doesn’t exist, maybe you can cite the one detailing the statutory period for former Secretaries of State to turn over their official correspondence to the State Department for storage and eventual archiving.
The Code of Federal Regulations says that the State Department doesn’t turn over official records to NARA for archiving until they’re 25 years old, so it doesn’t seem like there would be a huge hurry for such things.
Doug r
@Botsplainer: she did get rebels and government officials to work together, albeit at the ass end of space .
Emma
I have been trying to stay out of this. Clinton haters will hate — and yes, it’s hatred if you start insinuating that the impeachment of President Clinton actually had some real constitutional issues behind it or starting sentences with “I want to be fair, but….” — and there isn’t much one can say to change it.
All I can say is the Clintons were and are our test of political will and we have failed again and again. Instead of defending our own, as the Republicans do, we accept the Republican framing of the issue and then go to town on them. And then we whine because we lose to the Republicans.
If our candidate is someone else in 2016, I fully expect we will do the same thing to them. Because while our lives are the messy stuff of living, we want our politicians to be saints so the Republicans don’t yell at us.
Mary G
@notorious JRT: This. I was mostly over this after I read some more and saw her tweet, but sending Lanny Davis out to speak for her has me all riled up again. Why keep him? Nobody likes him; is she so far in her bubble as to not realize it? Can she not find a likeable man or woman to represent her to the media?
dmbeaster
@SatanicPanic: As if the impeachment of Clinton was anything other than a clown show, signifying nothing so much as Republican baloney. So yes, the Clinton impeachment was not a big deal in terms of something done wrong by Clinton.
Mandalay
@Cacti:
Heh. You really think that if it can be shown that no laws were broken then there is no problem? Good luck with approach.
fuckwit
@Mandalay: Hmm, interesting point. This could be classic Rethug Projection, combined with their classic “attack attack attack always!” strategy.
In other words, there are probably serious, nasty, evil bombshells lurking in the hidden or destroyed private email archives…. of Jeb!, Walker, Shrub, Cheney, and especially Karl Rove, who has already been caught using private email to hide his sleazery in the US Attorney firing scandal. So, the Rethugs will, as they always do, accuse the Democrats of TRYING (or even WANTING to try) to do something nasty that they themselves have already been doing, expertly, and egregiously, for many years.
Classic Rove strategy. This is starting to smell more like oppo. A preemptive strike, from the people who use preemptive strikes habitually. They try to get us on the defensive, when it is they who are vulnerable, and thus the whole issue disappears.
Extra bonus: it is always easy for the party who believes in destroying or corrupting government to shame and guilt the party who believes in a strong and trustworthy government. We have higher standards, so what’s not at all scandalous to them is scandalous to us. The same rules don’t apply to them; they just don’t care. That gives them enormous freedom of action.
John Cole +0
@Cacti:
Care to inform me when David Corn and Lawrence O’Donnell ripped up their Republican membership?
Elie
@Emma:
You can be both loyal and honest with yourself. That is the way to success. If you are blindly loyal, you can’t help your candidate trouble shoot issues and improve their approach to things. My hope is that she will. It IS important — now more than ever. The Republicans are no model for how to bring along and support our candidates. We are not in a monarchy or dictatorship, — yet. Presumably, we have a model that allows us to adequately hold our much higher quality candidates to Democratic standards which involve accountability and a vision in line with our larger values and purpose. Hillary has all of that capability. Why low ball her and us by having the blind expectation of loyalty that we see from the Republican mole people? We are better than that.
MazeDancer
It’s the stupidity, stupid. No cabinet official can have a private email system bypassing the official archives. Especially one thinking of running for President.
I am with John in derangement. This whole crazy thing put me over the edge.
The SERVER WAS IN HER HOUSE IN NY? Sorry for the shouting but the level of stupid and self-absorption in that is mind-boggling. She was planning to run for Prez. Open and transparent and abiding every rule is the only way to go. No one told her “You can’t do that”? Can’t believe no one said anything for the whole time she was Secretary.
The NY Times said the private system let her give out “chosen one” email addresses so it was the cool thing to have. Another Clinton way – make friends until you drop them cold. Tired of their way. And do not want her kind of “I’ll just do what I want” thinking in a President. And that includes inability to choose great staff who will tell you no.
Have to agree with @notorious JRT:
Betty Cracker
Wonkette reports that Peggy Noonan is sick of the damned Clintons.
Doug r
I think this is a big deal amongst people who wouldn’t vote for her anyway. Mostly old white guys. Anybody who likes Obama likes Bill. She needs to tap into Obama’s enthusiastic base and GOTV organisation.
SatanicPanic
@Emma:
What I don’t get is everyone rushing out to accept every “scandal” at face value, as if 99% of “scandals” haven’t turned out to be nonsense. Monica Lewinsky? Seriously? Who cares? (the answer- not the American voters) I guess we should go out and retroactively impeach FDR too. Sheesh.
different-church-lady
I’m still not understanding what the big deal is about this. How on earth could she be hiding anything when the NSA has a copy of every single byte of private email everywhere?
different-church-lady
@Doug r: And let’s not forget those who are trawling for eyeballs and clicks.
Mike J
@Betty Cracker:
In that case we should just cncel the elections.
Have you ever noticed that Dems think it’s a bad idea to stand behind anybody who annoys Republicans, but Republicans look for “annoys Dems” as a minimum requirement?
Gin & Tonic
@MazeDancer: The SERVER WAS IN HER HOUSE IN NY?
It wasn’t. That was the registration address for the domain. The MX records indicate that the domain was actually hosted by MXLogic, a McAfee subsidiary which does e-mail management.
Mandalay
@John Cole +0:
Exactly. And add Chris Matthews, Steve Kornacki and Alex Wagner to the list. They are all throwing her in the wood chipper.
Some folks here act like it’s impossible that anyone can be criticizing Clinton’s actions simply because they genuinely believe what she did was wrong; there has to be some other reason:
– If you are criticizing Clinton you must hate her.
– If you are criticizing Clinton you must be a closet Republican.
– Or (in your case) if you are criticizing Clinton you must be a misogynist.
The level of stupid here is at an all time high.
different-church-lady
@SatanicPanic: No, it’s more subtle than that. Cole is quite clearly not “accepting” this as a scandal. What’s he’s doing is getting very freaked out over the idea that others are going to accept it as a scandal.
It’s quite clever — he gets to pretend he’s above ridiculous notroversies while at the same time still getting to have a freak out.
Here’s how it goes:
COLE: OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG!
US: Dude, you’re being ridiculous.
COLE: Yeah, well David Corn is worried about it too!
US: Have you considered the possibility that David Corn is also being ridiculous?
different-church-lady
@Mandalay:
OK, you’re trying to make us laugh now, right?
fuckwit
@Cacti: Obama had specific big policy goals: ending the two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, implementing Obamacare, recovering from the economic crash, just for starters. He scored wins on those. I don’t remember Clinton coming into office with any big, specific policy goals, or even any really progressive ideas (I don’t count gutting welfare as one). Health care reform was HRC’s thing, not his, and she moved the ball forward on that but it took Obama/Pelosi/Reid to deliver. Then again, it was a more peaceful time (end of Cold War, the dawn of the internet economy), and I don’t remember there being any major pressing emergencies. I remember voting for him in 1992 because I was sick to death of Bush/Reagan and all their warmongering and sleazery, and Perot was too weird to vote for.
dslak
It’s unpossible for Chris Matthews to not be ridiculous.
John Cole +0
@different-church-lady: I don’t think it was a scandal, I think it was fucking stupid. And I think that she shouldn’t have dodged all the FOIA requests the past couple years.
Tree With Water
@different-church-lady: Do you have access to the NSA computers? Because if not, those e-mails may as well be locked up in Dick Cheney’s vault for all the good they do you, me, or anyone else. That’s one path to understanding the import of public officials assuming (oh so casual) control of public documentation(s). In Hillary’s case, she’s playing dumb about that import, which does not reflect well on her.
lethargytartare
@John Cole +0:
why was it stupid if it’s not a scandal?
different-church-lady
@John Cole +0: And you’re worried that other people will freak out about it. And you’re dealing with this concern by freaking out.
Here’s a tip: just because someone throws you a chew toy, it does not mean you’re obligated to chew on it.
Elie
I think that Cole and others who are concerned are right on. That said, I know that I wish her the best and seriously hope that all of you so confident that this is nothing, are right. I want nothing more than to be confident in the quality of her candidacy cause (once she declares – whenever), the shit is going to be non-stop. I hope all of our concern is misguided and that the future holds strong irrefutable evidence that “she’s got this”.
We all know she and we are going to be in a hell of a fight. We are dealing with people and interests who do not care about factual reality most times. Maybe she is developing the perfect strategy not only for dealing with lies and smears, but fantasy reality and unrelenting, aggressive attacks. She will need a lot of energy and presence for this. You all already know this is true.
Ok – this is nothing. We can sit back and relax. Whew, thanks.
SatanicPanic
@different-church-lady: mmmm hmmm. Someone should consider cutting their cable TV.
rk
I’d be surprised if there’s anything to this. She’s had a lot thrown at her during the last 20 years or so. I remember travelgate and filegate and whitewater, the so called “murder” of Vince Foster. Ken star went through her documents with a fine tooth comb and came up with nothing other than Bill Clinton’s sexcapades. I hate the fact that people say that they’re “fed up” of the Clintons. Why? Are they fed up that Republicans have an entire industry set up to constantly harass the Clintons? I’m not a fan of Hillary, didn’t vote for her and don’t want her to run. But she’s a hard worker, does a good job and nobody has ever provided any shred of evidence of any wrongdoing on her part in the last 20 yrs. Republicans and the media are the biggest fuckers on earth. The media will fall for every crap which comes out of a republicans ass. John cole was one of them at one time (I’ve followed this blog that long). He should know better.
different-church-lady
@Tree With Water: Anyone else care to explain this one to them?
different-church-lady
@SatanicPanic:
Dave c
I am not sure how I feel about the email thing yet, but I am way more disturbed by the fact that HRC has not kicked Lanny Davis to the curb. That insane lack of judgement and foresight seems almost disqualifying to my eyes. I exaggerate…but only just.
Betty Cracker
@Mike J: I have noticed that. And now that President Obama said he backs the DoJ’s decision not to charge Officer Wilson in Mike Brown’s shooting, I expect Republicans to rise up and demand the prosecution of Wilson!
FlipYrWhig
This is beyond a doubt the stupidest “scandal” being taken seriously by reasonable people I have ever seen. Anyone claiming to care about it is a damn fool.
different-church-lady
@Betty Cracker: I’m still hoping for Obama’s anti-breathing and anti-cyanide initiatives.
Tree With Water
@different-church-lady: Please, do explain. Honestly, I’m all ears and will check back.
catclub
@Betty Cracker: Most shocking news evar!
different-church-lady
@Tree With Water: No, no, I’m quite keen to see if someone else can figure it out…
Emma
Presumably, we have a model that allows us to adequately hold our much higher quality candidates to Democratic standards which involve accountability and a vision in line with our larger values and purpose. Hillary has all of that capability. Why low ball her and us by having the blind expectation of loyalty that we see from the Republican mole people? We are better than that.
And if we lose the 2016 elections, we’ll have the Supreme Court packed with Scalia-clones. I’m so glad that we would still be morally better than Republicans!
KS in MA
@Belafon:
Still, I totally agree:
“And I’m sure Democratic party leaders would love to have a party where members didn’t panic when their opponents make accusations.”
I mean, how hard is it to see that pretty near 100% of the opponents’ accusations are propaganda tactics?
different-church-lady
Here, maybe Louis CK can explain it…
notorious JRT
@different-church-lady:
I cannot speak for you, but the last time I checked, I; journalists; archivists; and historians have no access to whatever the hell the NSA has.
different-church-lady
@notorious JRT: Nope, that’s not it...
notorious JRT
@different-church-lady:
Not my point. Best wishes to all those already committed to vote Hillary if she runs in getting her elected all by your awesome selves.
MazeDancer
@Gin & Tonic:
Ah, thanks for clarification, thought the clip had said “server” in her house. That seemed too weird and then some.
max
@trollhattan: I found Willard’s buying and removing the PCs from the Mass governor’s office a far more compelling story line.
Yeah, the complete destruction of computers kind of sounds like they were seriously trying to hide a lot of stuff.
@different-church-lady: No, it’s more subtle than that. Cole is quite clearly not “accepting” this as a scandal. What’s he’s doing is getting very freaked out over the idea that others are going to accept it as a scandal.
Yeah. I keep hearing that. “Independent voters won’t like XYZ.” Well, 1) the R’s were going for scandal-mania no matter who the D’s nominated and 2) the press is clearly pining for Jeb, so they’re going to be piling on on Hillary anyways and 3) I think the remaining “independent voters” could probably be squeezed into a large IHOP. If they said voters to suck up and squeeze their butts they can probably fit them all in booths. (I have done this. It works!)
What will hurt Hillary, if anything does, is policy and what she’s in favor of. If the base proper doesn’t come out in numbers she’s sunk as any Democrat would be.
@notorious JRT: I cannot speak for you, but the last time I checked, I; journalists; archivists; and historians have no access to whatever the hell the NSA has.
You get that all kinds of political figures burn and hide stuff when they’re in office and they have going back a long long way. Nixon was trying to keep tapes – those tapes recorded serious bad acts.
What I need here is somebody to sell me on whatever bad acts Hillary has conducted. That isn’t Benghazi.
max
[‘Nobody has that.’]
chopper
@John Cole +0:
all i know is, when i get a FOIA request, i have to respond to it right fucking quick. it would be great if i could put it in the trash folder but i would get shitcanned. of course, i’m not important.
wasabi gasp
@lethargytartare: Would you consider that question to be scandalous?
Elie
@Emma:
You must think I am stupid. Of course I realize the impact of having a Republican WH. My point is that by making sure our candidates are ready and prepared to do energetic, aware battle — we will have victory. You are saying basically to stick our heads in the sand, hope for the best and pull the lever for Hillary as our only approach. Sorry, that is lame. Why are you so afraid of asking for her to bring her best game to this? You have less confidence it appears, than I do!
Betty Cracker
You knew this was coming:
notorious JRT
@max:
Dude, I am not expecting or wanting to uncover bad acts. I want my elected and appointed officials to leave a public record of their public work. Period. If said officials feel they would be damaged by leaving a public record of their conduct in office, perhaps they should reconsider that conduct. Pollyanna? You bet. But, that is me. BTW, defending HRC by invoking Nixon is not a winning maneuver in my book.
notorious JRT
@Betty Cracker:
Belly chuckle.
WaterGirl
@Betty Cracker: You are brilliant.
beejeez
Before I spend a lot more time getting twisted up about this thing, could somebody lay out the case for exactly what nefarious thing Hillary Clinton was up to by eliding the rules or the spirit of e-mail guidelines? I’d settle for some even vaguely plausible guess.
catclub
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_02/the_new_cool_hillaryhate054235.php
relevant! and note that it is from two weeks ago.
Elie
I guess that some of you think that because this is “nothing”, that Hillary doesn’t have to have any kind of strategy or response. Ok. got that. Of course, what we see, is that the best candidates are prepared not just with their A game attitude and awareness, but also modernize and update their approach. Are they gonna be ready for the major shit and have the best IT (not just for polling but social media) and other PR approaches to diffuse things. It is not this ISSUE that is that important, its what it reveals about her readiness for battle using a spirited and modern approach along with a strong desire to win. She must have the strong desire to win and she has to show that — yesterday!!! This wishy washy shit with declaring undermines that… and this kind of “ho hum” twitter response and crazy Lanny being defensive aint gonna cut it.
Gin & Tonic
@MazeDancer: Most “reporters” don’t know a server from a hole in the ground. Here’s the only article I’ve seen so far that actually gets the technical details more or less correct.
wasabi gasp
@Betty Cracker: Huh? That dude’s not John.
Suzanne
Re: the general topic of sexism, not specifically Cole.
Everyone is sexist. Every one of us has lived our whole lives in a patriarchy. Every one of us has absorbed some larger cultural ideas about sex and gender from living in a society that has taught us in words, images, actions, etc. about the proper roles for women, what is acceptable and what is not, and how women should exist in the world. We have swam in this dirty water so long that we don’t realize it is dirty. There is literally no avoiding it. All each of us can do is recognize it and try to move beyond it.
Honestly, I think lots of the commenters here have more of their behavior informed by sexist attitudes than they would care to admit. And on a blog that focuses in large part on electoral politics, which is a realm that women up until a hundred years ago could not even participate in with a vote, I would hope that there would be a greater sensitivity, a greater effort made into critically examining how all of us, especially men, may have some biases and expectations at work that are not conducive to complete equality.
I have seen commenters here mock Sarah Palin for dressing “slutty” “at her age”, isn’t that saaaaaad how she tries too hard? I have seen the host of this blog call a (male) commenter a “cunt”. I have seen handwringing about HRC wearing a leopard-print jacket, like it was a major defect of character. And really, there’s no chance that sexism could be at play? On a blog where a common refrain is “they hate the black man in the White House”, it’s not even possible to acknowledge that women are brought up to be sex objects and playthings and domestic help, that it has been so for thousands of years, and that JUST MIGHT influence our current thinking?
Being sexist doesn’t make you an asshole. Refusing to grow makes you an asshole.
John Cole +0
@lethargytartare: Because she should have just done what she directed everyone else in her staff to do in 2011, which is to use their .gov account, fer fucks sake. THAT IS WHY WE ARE HERE, BECAUSE SHE DIDN’T.
I don’t know why she didn’t- people out there impute all kinds of motives, the Republicans think it is because she was hiding something about Benghazi, other suggest because she is super secretive and needs to control everything, other state because she doesn’t think rules apply to her, etc. ad nauseum. I don’t know and I don’t care.
What I do know is that if she had just fucking used the .gov we would not be here, and you would think after 20 years of the Republicans jumping on any fucking thing they can, she would be smart enough to stop giving them shit to hit her with. I can you can guarantee the WH and this administration is sick of this bullshit issue, and State is etting fucked over having to deal with this mess.
It was fucking stupid and self inflicted.
Cacti
@John Cole +0:
So it’s David Corn and Lawrence O’Donnell’s fault that you’ve spent the past 3 days argling and bargling about Hillary Clinton using a private e-mail address?
dslak
If Hillary would just stop breathing, Republicans wouldn’t have anything to complain about. Why can’t she just organize her life around the entirely reasonable expectations of the Republican Party?
Cacti
@John Cole +0:
Just breathe deeply and say to yourself…
“I’m a reformed right wing bastard who spent the entire 1990s hating all things Clinton, and I never outgrew it.”
“The problem is me.”
chopper
@fuckwit:
raising taxes. that was one. he didn’t talk about that on the campaign trail for the obvious reason, but that was one.
all in all i think that was basically his one single liberal accomplishment. i mean the FMLA was nice and all also so i guess that’s two.
Cacti
@chopper:
You could also count the creation of AmeriCorps.
wasabi gasp
[email protected]
hattippin’ youknowwho
chopper
@notorious JRT:
oh betty cracker, you are a national treasure.
El Caganer
This is pretty impressive: 165 comments about nothing.
Elie
Her head just doesn’t seem to be in this thing. When your head isn’t in things, you make mistakes and your reactions aren’t crisp. When your head aint into it, you aren’t thinking ahead or pro-actively but reacting – usually late – to events.
John, it doesn’t matter why she did it. Its done. Recriminations about the past are a waste of time except to teach you what to avoid in the future. You can learn something from anything — even “non-issues”. Hopefully the next response (and there will be one on something else), will be a little sharper. Or better yet, maybe we can avoid some altogether…
chopper
@Cacti:
that one too. woohoo, liberal messiah in the house! what what
Allan
Small point of order:
It’s likely that the overwhelming majority of emails Clinton sent from her personal account were to and/or cced other state.gov email accounts, in which case they are already archived in State’s records. Or in the other Federal departments with which she communicated.
The stupidity of this email management decision is that there’s no chain of evidence. No matter how many emails Team Clinton turns over, they’ll never be able to prove the negative that there are no other emails which were destroyed on hidden.
Allan
@El Caganer: These are not the emails you seek.
dslak
@Allan: Yeah, and now she’ll never be able to convince Republicans she isn’t hiding anything about BENGHAZI! If she had only used a .gov account, there would have only been five or so hearings on BENGHAZI!, instead of the 200 we will have now.
chopper
@Suzanne:
all of this is absolutely true. this and this and another this.
the only superficial criticism of clinton i can consciously get behind is her age. and it isn’t a disqualifier or gender specific, i just wish we had a younger bench in the democratic party. it applies just as much to biden, warren, sanders, the whole lot. i’m not interested in having fossils, ageist as that is, represent us.
i like clinton. i do, i’m just worried having seen her campaign in 2008 that she’s going to do a shit job in 2016 and possibly give it up to some gooper asshole. seeing lanny davis on the teevee defending her makes me hyperventilate.
chopper
@Allan:
that’s a pretty big ‘it’s likely!’.
askew
@Allan:
Ain’t that the truth. That guy just repels people.
askew
@Elie:
Hillary is reminding me more and more of Kerry in 2004. I like Kerry and think he is doing a great job at State but man you could see him bumbling the 2004 election. Hillary is giving off that same vibe. Her team is still acting like it is 1996 and their methods just don’t work anymore. They should attempt to learn something from the Obama admin which was squeaky clean until this BS came up.
askew
@Doug r:
Yeah, that isn’t true. Not everyone who likes Obama likes Bill and vice versa and Bill isn’t running. Hillary is going to have to earn those votes herself and she is doing herself no favors right now trying to earn the votes of people who aren’t diehard Democrats.
Mnemosyne (iPhone)
@fuckwit:
The major pressing emergency when Clinton was elected was a recession that meant the other people in my college graduating class were wearing “Will Work For Food” signs at our graduation ceremony because NO ONE was hiring recent college grads.
My first job out of college was assistant manager at Crown Books. My manager was a laid-off aerospace engineer, because it was the only work he could find after the industry collapsed.
lethargytartare
@John Cole +0:
actually, I’m here because you posted a weird rant about how something that isn’t a scandal is the reason everyone hates Hillary
you seem to care. I’m just sayin’
bullshit. if she had used .gov, everyone would be claiming she hadn’t released everything, and they’d want her personal e-mail anyway, and you’d be screaming that the fact that she didn’t pre-emptively release her old AOL e-mails and post on instagram under her real name is the reason everyone hates Hillary
they’ve been making shit up whole cloth about her for 20 years. It’s stupid beyond comprehension how EVERY SINGLE TIME they make something up, you and your ilk blame her for not predicting how insane people are going to attack her next.
I can guarantee you they don’t give a fuck, and that they considered the insanity before they ever gave her the job.
assumes facts not in evidence
askew
@beejeez:
We honestly have no idea why Hillary decided to do this and contrary to what her supporters say this is unusual.
I’d guess that what is in there that she doesn’t want us to see are emails about her future political plans and possible conflicts of interest with Clinton Foundation and her State work. I don’t expect anything disqualifying is in those emails but I do imagine that we are going so see something in the gray area relating to the Clinton Foundation.
askew
@John Cole +0:
What is worrying is that she directed her staff to do this and then gave some of her senior staff email addresses on that private server. So, it makes it even more messy.
Emma
@Elie: Nice try. You’re no asking to bring her best game. You’re saying she has to be better than any other politician, including finding a way to neutralize people who have been hunting her since her husband was governor.
Flatly and last on the matter: personally, I don’t like her, for reasons unrelated to her politics. I would prefer another candidate, not for those reasons, but because I think we need to start looking for people more progressive than she is; but I will not join the hunt. I will vote for her if she’s the candidate, I might even contribute to her campaign. You’ve heard that saying about keeping your eyes on the prize? The prize is the Supreme Court. We let that get packed by a Republican president and we’re out of luck for another generation.
tones
@BGK:
I know I always do.
I will not, now or ever, watch Steve Effing Schmidt say anything -the exact same goes for effing Michale Steele.
The two who went on camera , over and over again, to ASSURE us that yes indeed , Sarah Palin is / was totally qualified to be president and how dare you even ask.
Eff those blaggards, I record the show so I can fast forward any time I see their ugly mugs.
Richard Bottoms
Actually it makes me not give a fuck about it at all, because nothing else matters except winning the White House in 2016.
If the first political thought in your head every single morning is not, what can we do to crush those Republican motherfuckers, you’re wasting my time.
Robert Sneddon
@Emma: Yes, Senator Clinton has to be better than any other politician in the same way the Muslim Communist Kenyan Usurper had to be better than any other politician, if she’s serious about running for President. She sure wasn’t serious about it back in 2008, at least until it was too late.
Step one: no unforced errors. Be aware that anything you do, anything you can say can come back and haunt you. There are no secrets, there is no-one you can trust 100% to keep their mouth shut. Look at everything you do through the prism of “can this be turned against me?” Don’t think that the hereditary privilege of being the wife of a popular President and well-connected to powerful, wealthy and important people will shield you from criticism, don’t think you can make up your own rules about how to do your job.
Senator Clinton has still to take that step. I hope she is actually aware she will have to take that step if she wants to run for the Presidency even after having the nomination handed to her by the Party apparatchiks.
Step two: no Mark Penn. This may not be her decision to make though.
Kris Collins
@Mandalay: Nobody hates the Clintons more than the Democratic Clinton-haters.
Corner Stone
@askew:
What’s unusual? Doing the same thing everyone before you did? Not breaking any laws?
Corner Stone
I love how all the people saying, “Welps, it may not have been illegal, but it sure as fuck was stupid!
Come again, amigo?
Let’s get real. It just doesn’t matter what she says, what she does. She could stop traffic to save an altar boy helping a blind little old lady across the street, and Cole and his fellow travelers *cough* haters *cough* would be screaming at how she slowed down an EMS response 20 blocks away.
This crazy bitch got shit here because she said the Bible was one of her favorite books.
Corner Stone
Hey Cole, maybe the real problem here was that HRC’s skirt was *this much* too short for her age?
“She was asking for it, I tells ya!”
Corner Stone
@FlipYrWhig:
Excelsior! Finally! What we should be thinking about this completely harfed up Republican oppo driven bullshit!
Corner Stone
@Mandalay:
I doubt that, but it’s not surprising that you’ve latched onto some form of non-law law that wasn’t broken as the worst thing ever.
David Koch
David Corn is a republican plant
Rachel Maddow is a republican plant
Chris Hayes is a republican plant
Jon Stewart is a republican plant.
Ryan Grimm is a republican plant
Glenn Greenwald is a republican plant
Anyone who criticized Hillary’s attempt to evade FOIA requests is a republican plant.
also too, sexist.
Corner Stone
@LongHairedWeirdo:
Exactly. “Addressing it” would do absolutely nothing for anyone except more screeching and parsing.
There is nothing she can say about this completely legal action that is going to satisfy the John Cole of the Lefts.
Corner Stone
Wait for it…wait for it…wait…NOW! Defensive crouch in the corner! Crouch, god dammit! Crouch!
Whew! That was close. If we hadn’t all shrunk down into a defensive crouch we may have had the right wing nut jobs start yelling at us about complete fucking nonsense.
David Koch
It’s hard to argue against a Pulitzer, Polk, and Oscar winner.
Corner Stone
@David Koch: Shouldn’t that pretty much cement full throated support for HRC around this blog?
different-church-lady
@Corner Stone:
Not breaking any laws? Now, for a politician, that is unusual…
Keith G
Let’s see….today is March 6th. By May 7th there will have been four other “end of life as we know it” news stories. Just remember, it was just six months age that Ebola was going to kill all of us.
The email issue is a stupid own goal and it will leave a mark, but as long as there are no messages detailing criminal plans or other such activity, this will just end up as being more fodder for the wet dreams of the tin foil hat crowd (and Askew).
Corner Stone
@Keith G:
How is it a stupid own goal? How is it a fuckup?
grandpa john
@Corner Stone: Alexander Pope covered this quite well many years go in his “Essay on Criticism”
Keith G
@Corner Stone: HRC did something that fits into an already established narrative about the Clintons. Issues of legality aside, sometimes it is not a bad idea to go beyond and act with great care. Hils wants to be president. Hils knows that the knives have been sharpened for decades. Hils might want to act as if she can see around the corners and be a bit more proactive.
She doesn’t have to be a bit more careful/proactive, but she is the one who is making the choice to run for president.
Clinton fatigue is a real thing, as is Bush fatigue and Obama fatigue. Hillary might want to avoid feeding into Clinton fatigue deux until she is redecorating the Oval Office.
Corner Stone
@Keith G: This is nonsense. Pure, and fucking total, nonsense.
She’s getting hated on because people hate on her.
Former Republicans hate her because they’ve been told to. Obama partisans hate her because she dared challenge Obama.
The stupid fucking narrative that she’s driven this hate on by being herself, or by being married to someone who drove the whole establishment crazy balls, is fucking garbage.
Corner Stone
@Keith G:
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Issues of legality aside. GFY.
Corner Stone
@Keith G:
Do you not get even a little bit how much bullshit this kind of sentiment is?
Defensively go 120% because you know that no matter what you do you’re going to get fucked because of it.
This is a prescription for hiding in a locked bathroom with the steam shower going and the lights off. Slowly hugging your knees and rocking back and forth while singing Al White songs.
Fuck you.
PhoenixRising
@Elie:
Hahahahaha I have towels older than you, apparently. They don’t often mix up cause (right wing machine jamming the gears of governance) with effect (impeachment of a sitting POTUS over…nothing).
The fact that you think so–that in the months following the Gingrich Revolution, somehow an administration that was elected twice because of a Texas billionaire with big ears and a God complex could have done SO much MORE–is a triumph of ahistorical nihilism propagated by the noise machine.
Please proceed, and explain more about how the Blowjob That Changed America was the real problem that prevented a President who had already signed DOMA and welfare reform from getting Things done.
The burden of IDing those Things is on the person making that extraordinary assertion.
Keith G
@Corner Stone: Who pissed in your brand flakes, amigo?
Jesus.
Your scolding is of little persuasive value, either in quality or quantity.
Of course there is a lot of bull shit, but a lot that is bull shit has impact on elections.
Where was I even close to saying that she should get into a defensive crouch?
You are putting words in my mouth at a level that would make Mnemosyne blush. Have you two been hanging out?
Anyway, there is a new ale from Scotland waiting to accompany my tacos de pollo.
Corner Stone
@Keith G: Come on, friend.
Your relentless pearl clutching and cluck-clucking on this issue is fucking transparent.
Don’t tag me with Capt Mnemo just because you want to repeat nonsensical bullshit.
There is not one single actually eligible voter that might have possibly voted for HRC that wants to debate this non-scandal Cole genuflection to his Republican history/Obama partisan non-story. Hillary hasn’;t done a god damned thing wrong, and all the simple minded people who are trying so desperately to convince this matters reveal themselves for who they are. If you want to join them then, Salud!
This.Is.Dogshit.
Corner Stone
@Keith G: Fuck. So tiring. Wevs.
Keith G
@Corner Stone: Is it not possible for someone to avoid blowing their load a la Cole, but still understand that Hillary might have an expiration date not as generous as would be comfortable?
If that is clucking then I am a chicken, even though it has been decades since I was called that with any honesty.
Pearls? The ones I have, ya don’t clutch – well, not in typical fashion.
Thank you and good night!
Corner Stone
@Keith G: Listen, hate on her all you like. It’s a free country!
But don’t bullshittingly try and non-concern troll this on to her like it matters. It does not.
Cole hasn’t ever been right about a god damned thing from jump, and he is continuing his perfect track record with this nonsensical nonsense here.
Keith G
@Corner Stone: Twisted Thistle IPA from Belhaven Brewery in Dunbar (land of Macbeth) is quite good as a session brew. It’s 5.6% and a nice balance ‘tween hops and citrus. I got it at HEB.
Me likey.
Elie
I don’t like Hillary that much but I could. If she goes on and announces and pulls her britches up and “gets after it”, I will become a Hilbot just like that. My criticisms of her are largely just wanting her to show that energy and wanto… I just don’t see it and I just don’t feel it coming from her or her team. I want to be dead wrong and will celebrate if three years from now you can rub my face in my doubts and remind me of how wrong I was to have concerns… and that is what I have… not “I don’t want her to run”. I want her to raise her game cause it looks like she wasn’t quite ready for this salvo. It won’t be the last unfortunately, I want her to look strong and to BE strong. We have a lot riding on her success, so those of you who just blow off the concerns of people like me, just know, it is not a personal thing I have against Hillary. It is just that the progress we eaked out these last few years are very much dependent on her protection. We want Obama to give the keys to HER, not Jeb or some other asshole in Jan 2017… Blow me off to your content — but don’t blow off that concern… please take it seriously and lets help her to get there and be the one accepting those keys, eh?
Corner Stone
@Keith G: Even when I could drink beer I never liked IPAs.
Corner Stone
So when this WH admin fired Shirley Sherrod before the close of business one day due to Breitbart’s bullshit it was pragmatic and no drama.
But when the NYT puts out a purely clear hit piece we want HRC to go balls out denying it. Doing press Q&A’s, issuing all kinds of non-denial denials and generally going nutty.
Or else she somehow just doesn’t want to, enough.
The Raven on the Hill
“I am not a crook.”
Sigh. I’ve been separating work and personal e-mail accounts for years.
And, I will probably be holding my beak and voting for Clinton, but, damn, this gives me hives. Hell to be a bird with hives.
Keith G
@Elie: I think that there soon needs to come a point where Democrats need to forgo the “I don’t like/want her, but I will vote for her” line. It’s a drag.
Instead of saying to someone, “I really don’t like you, but I’ll support you.” wouldn’t it be better to say, “Here is what you need to do to cement my support.”? That seems to be the essence of political thinking.
Take it from the subjective to the objective.
Contrary to a recent commenter just up there a bit, I have always liked and admired Hillary, even when I have thought she has made a mistake or two. Politically, I never expect the leaders that I vote for to be messiahs or godheads. I do expect them to be daring and quick learners. When they show signs of repeating mistakes, I am likely to get a bit concerned.
Corner Stone
@The Raven on the Hill:
I’ve used my work email as a mix for the last 15+ years. I carry one device and email/text as needed.
I wonder how much empty space people who rigidly adhere to this dictum have in their life?
Corner Stone
@Keith G: I doubt that.
lol chikinburd
A quick text search of this page finds zero occurrences of the string “hard-working”, as in “hard-working Americans”, which would suggest that the source of many Balloon Juice commenters’ antipathy toward Ms. Clinton has not been adequately accounted for in this thread.
different-church-lady
@Keith G: I submit that fatigue fatigue is a real thing at this point.
Omnes Omnibus
Jesus Christ, three posts on this? Good fucking god.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Mandalay: Why am I reminded of “no controlling legal authority” – and not in a good way?
:-/
Cheers,
Scott.
Corner Stone
@Omnes Omnibus: Cole has a real problem he is unable to acknowledge.
A lifetime of perceived wrongdoing by someone he has been programmed to hate.
“God! Soooo tired!!”
different-church-lady
@Omnes Omnibus: Four, by my count.
Omnes Omnibus
@different-church-lady: That makes it better, I suppose.
Elie
@Keith G:
thank you for a thoughtful response. Yes — me too… I don’t expect a Messiah — but I want sincere and serious effort. A lot is at stake — as always. Its not personal but it IS extremely important. There are few throw aways here. She is in the position to be given a great deal. I will honor her — but it is the gift that my eyes are glued to… what she must guard — not only from this administration, but our hopes for what remains functioning for the vision of this constitution and the governance of this unique land.
David Koch
TBogg is obviously a sexist and republican plant.
No matter. Lanny Davis has parachuted in to save Hillary.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/lanny-davis-tamron-hall-hillary-clinton-emails
Omnes Omnibus
@David Koch: Lanny Davis doesn’t parachute anywhere. He comes in by glider.
My Truth Hurts
I don’t supoort Clinton and will not vote for her but not because she’s a useless centrist hawk, although that was enough for me not to ever vote for Bill. I don’t want her to run because after 8 years of naked racism from the right over Obama I am not up for 4-8 years of hearing the sexism from the shrieking monkeys of the right.
Suzanne
You know, just a thought…..lots of people are saying that if Hillary reeeeeeally wants to be president, she can’t just be as good as her competitors, she has to be better. That itself is an attitude held over from a sexist/racist culture. Women and minorities have long known that they can do more and better work than white dudes, and still get paid less for it, or get less recognition. Perhaps some of the accusations of sexism toward Cole stem from this, because it seems that that idea has just been accepted uncritically by some.
Suzanne
@My Truth Hurts: Now there’s a strategy: the right wing is sexist, so only vote for dudes, because the right wing is annoying.
Thanks. Glad to know how much people feel equality is worth. Apparently bupkis.
Omnes Omnibus
@Suzanne: Moi? My main concern about HRC is her age. Being SoS exhausted her; she worked her ass off and it showed. The previous three presidents were, I believe, in their 40s when elected and each seemed to age 20 years in the the eight they were in office. That is what makes me nervous about her.
ETA: I think these threads have been very revealing.
Suzanne
@Omnes Omnibus: I think that’s valid. I do think there is a cultural tendency due to patriarchal influence to think that women are “old” sooner than men, though. There are plenty of men considerably older than she is who are still working in high levels in government, and AFAIK/remember, no one had a cow about, say, St. Ronnie’s age. But you are right—it is a job that burns people out.
Suzanne
@Omnes Omnibus: You think they’ve been revealing? I feel like I haven’t seen this much sound and fury signifying nothing in quite some time.
Omnes Omnibus
@Suzanne: Honestly, I think that Hillary is tough as hell. In lawyer terms, she is a grinder; she works harder than anyone else. Does she have the reserves to do it?
@Suzanne: Yes, I do think they have been revealing. Cole and some others have revealed themselves as reflexively anti-HRC. When I consider my primary vote, she, as of right now, will be in the mix. I want to see who my options are before deciding, silly me.
Suzanne
@Omnes Omnibus: The woman is, and always has been, absolutely tough as nails. I think it’s her best quality.
I concur about waiting. I will get behind whomever I think is most likely to win a general election. Winning is more important than me getting everything I want.
Omnes Omnibus
@Suzanne: Concur completely. And let’s not trash a possible frontrunner for a non-scandal. Cole can be an overemotional idiot. He is doing it here.
The Raven on the Hill
@Keith G:
We’ve been politic with the Democratic centrists for decades. The Democratic Party has, in those years, moved steadily to the right.
@Corner Stone: It doesn’t take much effort or time, actually. It’s an utterly routine precaution. You can even do it on a single device, though if you are in a sensitive position that’s a security risk.
I can think of one good reason a high government official might do this: because they are concerned with penetration of their security by their own government. Which, come to think of it, is a reasonable concern these days, though not one the Clintons could speak of publicly.
Kraw.
Montarvillois
We laugh at the clown car but if Hillary self-destructs somebody better start warming up in the bullpen, pronto.
Davis X. Machina
@My Truth Hurts: They win, then. But your life is full of peace and quiet.
Sounds like a fair swap — your aesthetic preference v. Republican White House.
Corner Stone
@Omnes Omnibus:
I’m thinking of them more as reinforcing now, adjusted from revealing.
Corner Stone
@The Raven on the Hill:
That’s fine if one chooses to do that routine, sure. But my comment was more to the “why are people so damn stick up the ass about how this has to be the way it is?”
I use a different email for some online purchases, etc, but my work email is the first point of contact for me for a number of critical personal services such as my son’s doctor, his school/teacher and a number of other things. I just don’t get the criticality of maintaining separation.
Corner Stone
@Suzanne:
Cole can’t help himself so I think we’re in for a lot of overwrought cries along the lines of, “Didn’t she know that by breathing they were going to gin up a fake scandal about it? After all this time, why does she still do such tone deaf BS like this breathing shit she just did? THIS is why I am just so tired of the Clintons.”
LarryB
And how, exactly, is this different in degree with Obama hatred? The details of the drama are irrelevant. Haters on the right are gonna hate, just because there’s a D next to the name. However, I do think there are some [looking at you, Jon] who are more ok defending a man against the constant bullshit than a woman.
The Raven on the Hill
@Corner Stone: “why are people so damn stick up the ass about how this has to be the way it is?”
Well, there’s plenty as just want One More Thing to hold against Hilary Clinton. These, though, are my reasons: (1) Most personal e-mail is not secure; (2) it is a bulwark against corruption; (3) one does not want a negotiating partner to pop up with an e-mail that is not in the official record, but turns out to be valid (this is a big deal in my professional life); (4) it is a sign of careless execution of the duties of a senior official, as well as a risk to the country; (5) a complete record of correspondence is valuable for history.
“I use a different email for some online purchases, etc, but my work email is the first point of contact for me for a number of critical personal services such as my son’s doctor, his school/teacher and a number of other things.”
If Hilary Clinton wants the occasional doctor or school notification in her official correspondence, that’s fine with me. But I don’t want her editing her own record of official correspondence.
Corner Stone
@The Raven on the Hill:
Ah, the crux of the matter. As there is no proof that she did/is doing this, then it’s hard to argue we have been damaged. But! Alas, we can never really be sure, can we?
This is an argument that eats itself, like the snake chewing its own tail. Because if she had used nothing but the .gov email account, when the R’s did not find the incriminating (or merely adaptable to scandal) emails they slobbered for, they would then move on to claim that obviously she used a private email to conduct that scandalous business.
There’s no winning here. It doesn’t matter what she says, what she does. It just doesn’t.
Smedley Darlington Prunebanks (formerly Mumphrey, et al.)
@different-church-lady:
I’d much rather deal with Republican fucknoses screaming about Whitey tapes and birth certificates, since, as maddening as those are, they’re just bullshit, and after watching Republicans scream about this bullshit for a while, everybody can see that it’s bullshit, and they just laugh at the pitiful losers who insist on trying to make a scandal out of it.. And I don’t really know what, if anything, is in all those e-mails, or whether it’s a whole big bag of nothing, but all I have to go on on this is the record of how the Clintons deal with shit like this, and the record is bad. It seems like they just dig their heels in, and people begin scrounging around, and snooping and sooner or later, they come up with something, most often something lame, like the Lewinsky affair, but something that, because of how the Clintons reflexively deny everything, makes them look like liars.
I don’t know why they don’t just lay it all out. I know, people will say, “Well, yeah, but then the Republicans will beat them over the head with some horseshit, trumped up crap.” And, yeah, I know they will. That’s what they do. But as President Obama has shown us over the last six years, this doesn’t have to be a problem. He just lets these assholes tie themselves up in knots over all these bullshit “scandals” and it makes the Republicans look bad.
And the Clintons have years now, looking back, to show them that secrecy is a bad tactic, and six years now of President Obama showing us that laying it all bare works wonders. How can they still be doing shit like this?
.
Corner Stone
@Smedley Darlington Prunebanks (formerly Mumphrey, et al.):
To who? All the scandal mongering they have done against the Obama WH has been at least as effective as what they pushed against WJC. Bill left office with sky high approval numbers, Obama just started climbing off the 40% approval floor. The R’s gained seats in each election since 2008, and now control both the House and Senate.
It’s hard to argue that there is some successful roadmap laid out by the Obama admin on how to deal with Republican driven scandals.
The Raven on the Hill
Hilary Clinton, as far as I can see, does not want to be a public figure. She values her privacy very much. But high officials in a democracy are required to give up some of their privacy as part of their public service. Presidents are public figures, and they have to give up a lot of privacy; in some sense to be elected president is to become the property of the public.
Which means, though she seems to be a good chief executive, she is probably going to be a rotten public President. I’ve been saying for years that President has become too big a job for any single person, that Presidents usually come down either on the “chief executive” or “public figure” side. This troubles me for a reason I haven’t seen before: Clinton may lose the election because of her discomfort with campaigning.
Smedley Darlington Prunebanks (formerly Mumphrey, et al.)
@Corner Stone:
Republicans won the Senate not because of any “scandals” they could smear President Obama with, but because Democrats held a lot of seats in tough states, and because they’re so good at fucking things up and then blaming the other side for it.
Smedley Darlington Prunebanks (formerly Mumphrey, et al.)
And don’t forget how awful the Republicans looked in 2012, and how badly they lost, in no small part because too many of them wouldn’t unhitch themselves from delusional, paranoid conspiracies.
Corner Stone
@Smedley Darlington Prunebanks (formerly Mumphrey, et al.): Sorry, but optics, as far as looking bad, and results, to wit election results don’t bear out what you’re trying to say.
Barry
@askew: “I think if Hillary did an interview and answered some basic questions starting with why did she do this, did the WH know and approve about this exception ahead of time, how can we be sure all emails were turned over to the State Dept, etc. it could be put to rest.”
Proven lie. See: 1990’s USA.
Barry
@SatanicPanic: “Obama is extraordinarily good on this kind of thing- he seems to have been able to avoid any real scandal for 6 years now, which is amazing. And that’s spoiled us. Hillary is just an above average pol facing an enormous, never-ending stream of crap. By any normal standard she’s handling this just fine. We can’t expect everyone to be Obama. ”
And remember, in the – not just end, but beginning, middle and end, the right just made sh*t up. When needed, they’d make up lies, and then referred to them (‘questions have been raised’).
And the GOP started at a disadvantage, because Obama moved from nobody to President in several years. For example, he hadn’t been governor, which presumably always gives national opponents a starting point of old enemies to work from.
Corner Stone
@Barry: It’s amazing that so many people here want to proudly spout the, “If you’re innocent then you have nothing to be worried about, right?” line of bullshit.
Oh, wait. That’s not amazing, it’s the other thing.
socraticsilence
@Corner Stone:
I;m loving how the Hilbot people who even 6 years in wont give Obama a freaking break on anything are all over arguing this is a non-issue, because protecting one of the less competent Obama cabinet members to protect her destiny to amplify all the downsides of Obama and minimize all of the great parts is just that important.
Corner Stone
@socraticsilence: Come back when you can attempt some remote stab at coherence.
notorious JRT
@Corner Stone:
Good for you. I don’t really care if you don’t value your personal privacy and keep personal email at your Workplace. But, can’t help but notice you are not using a personal email account to conduct work communications.
Corner Stone
@notorious JRT: How would you know, as I made no reference to whether I did or did not?
I’d have thought that now with the ACA in place people with your condition would be able to afford the procedure to have that stick removed.
notorious JRT
@Corner Stone:
I know because you said you have used your WORK email as a mix. You draw lots of conclusions from blog posts of commenters other than yourself. Petty insults are not persuasive – to me at any rate.