Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Editorials & Other Articles
Showing Original Post only (View all)Eugene Robinson on Hillary emails [View all]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/apologizing-for-the-e-mail-mess/2015/08/17/d8853068-4514-11e5-8e7d-9c033e6745d8_story.html?hpid=z5Hillary Clinton is her own worst enemy
This isnt about whether Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, which is likely. It isnt even about whether she becomes our next president, which she has a better chance of doing than anyone else. Its about basic respect for us and for the truth.Why, when she took office as secretary of state, did she decide to route official e-mails through a server in her suburban New York mansion? There is just one plausible explanation: She wanted control.
Clinton was no stranger to the rules of the federal government. She had to know that if she used a State Department account, her 60,000-plus e-mails would become part of the official record. She certainly knew, without any doubt, that her political opponents would delight in rummaging through her communications. Lets be honest: Hillary and Bill Clinton do have enemies, lots of them, who show no compunction about launching unfair and vicious attacks. She must have wanted to make sure they never got the chance.
But all of that is beside the point. If you accept the job of secretary of state, you inevitably surrender some of your privacy. Any public officials work-related e-mails are the modern equivalent of the letters, memos and diaries that fill the National Archives. They tell our nations history and belong to all of us. Even if your name is Clinton, you have no right to unilaterally decide what is included and what is not.
. . .
If Clinton now has political problems because of the e-mails or, potentially, even legal trouble its her own doing. . . . If Clinton makes it to the general election . . she has needlessly handed her Republican opponent a weapon. Her trustworthiness, as measured by polls, was always a relative weakness. Even if Democrats accept that the e-mail flap is a partisan witch hunt, the GOP nominee will try to persuade independents otherwise. . .
This isnt about whether Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, which is likely. It isnt even about whether she becomes our next president, which she has a better chance of doing than anyone else. Its about basic respect for us and for the truth.Why, when she took office as secretary of state, did she decide to route official e-mails through a server in her suburban New York mansion? There is just one plausible explanation: She wanted control.
Clinton was no stranger to the rules of the federal government. She had to know that if she used a State Department account, her 60,000-plus e-mails would become part of the official record. She certainly knew, without any doubt, that her political opponents would delight in rummaging through her communications. Lets be honest: Hillary and Bill Clinton do have enemies, lots of them, who show no compunction about launching unfair and vicious attacks. She must have wanted to make sure they never got the chance.
But all of that is beside the point. If you accept the job of secretary of state, you inevitably surrender some of your privacy. Any public officials work-related e-mails are the modern equivalent of the letters, memos and diaries that fill the National Archives. They tell our nations history and belong to all of us. Even if your name is Clinton, you have no right to unilaterally decide what is included and what is not.
. . .
If Clinton now has political problems because of the e-mails or, potentially, even legal trouble its her own doing. . . . If Clinton makes it to the general election . . she has needlessly handed her Republican opponent a weapon. Her trustworthiness, as measured by polls, was always a relative weakness. Even if Democrats accept that the e-mail flap is a partisan witch hunt, the GOP nominee will try to persuade independents otherwise. . .
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
29 replies, 3585 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (45)
ReplyReply to this post
29 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Yup. He offers no evidence for his position either. The article is hardly a "Good Read."
SunSeeker
Aug 2015
#22