Missing the big picture in the Clinton email thing

[Gulo Blue]

People getting hung up on what laws Clinton did or did not break rewards news organizations for dropping the ball on what matters. Why did she do it that way? What was she hiding and from who? If she just did it out of paranoia, then big deal.

 

[Michchamp]

she didn't want to be subject to FOIA.

not to defend her, but this is getting way too much ink in the press relative to its actual harm. in the realm of political scandal and corruption, not using the right email account is pretty minor, no? of course, if like you say, there was something hidden that was particularly damning, like say for example she was actually the architect of the 2003 Iraq Invasion, not Bush's administration... well, then the coverage should focus on that.

stupid Time magazine just drew a parellel between LBJ's struggles in 1968, and Hillary's struggles now, and *actually equated* the Vietnam War with Hillary's use of the wrong email account.

Now it takes a particularly vapid worldview, or extreme partisan bias to get to that point...

 

[Gulo Blue]

But why didn't she want to be subject to FOIA?

Your 2nd sentence pretty much reiterates my point. This is a big deal or a little deal based on whether or not she's hiding something. It should motivate reporters to dig deeper, not go crazy over just the fact that the email was done wrong.

 

[Michchamp]

But why didn't she want to be subject to FOIA?

Your 2nd sentence pretty much reiterates my point. This is a big deal or a little deal based on whether or not she's hiding something. It should motivate reporters to dig deeper, not go crazy over just the fact that the email was done wrong.

I wish I knew, but can only speculate.

maybe she knew she would be subjected to an endless series of FOIA requests from the GOP when she eventually ran for president, and figured "I'm rich and powerful enough to ignore this law for little people, so screw it."

???

 

[Gulo Blue]

I wish I knew, but can only speculate.

maybe she knew she would be subjected to an endless series of FOIA requests from the GOP when she eventually ran for president, and figured "I'm rich and powerful enough to ignore this law for little people, so screw it."

???

That's a very plausible explanation.

But she shouldn't fear that. She should take a page from Michigan and charge high fees for responding to FOIA requests. She can't profit; she can only pass along the costs of responding...but if you need a trained librarian and a lawyer to comb through everything, that can be a lot.

 

[tinselwolverine]

This is why Joe Biden should get into the race.

He wouldn't have used his own e-mail server; he wouldn't have been able to afford it.

 

[jwlcosu]

People getting hung up on what laws Clinton did or did not break rewards news organizations for dropping the ball on what matters. Why did she do it that way? What was she hiding and from who? If she just did it out of paranoia, then big deal.

What you're saying suggests that you'd be cool if similarly suffering cabinet members went the private server route as well. Rules don't apply to Presidential appointee paranoiacs? Is that where we're headed? Say it ain't so!

 

[Gulo Blue]

What you're saying suggests that you'd be cool if similarly suffering cabinet members went the private server route as well. Rules don't apply to Presidential appointee paranoiacs? Is that where we're headed? Say it ain't so!

Of course not. BUT we've seen this before. People get so worked up over the smoke they never get around to checking to see if there's any fire. Scooter Libby! Valerie Plame! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble!

...but it all started with some fake documents that Bush referenced in a State of the Union address. Seems like it would be worth tracing the origin of that document to figure out who created it, wouldn't it? We made such a big deal over who outed what agent we completely dropped the ball on the question that mattered.

Maybe (hopefully) there's nothing here. But focusing the media on the legality of the server isn't the way to find out.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Why is it that 9 out of 10 statements that start with some variation of "What you're saying is..." are followed with something you're not saying?

 

[elrod817]

Why is it that 9 out of 10 statements that start with some variation of "What you're saying is..." are followed with something you're not saying?

So what you're saying is, jwlcosu's post accurately interpreted your comments?

 

[Gulo Blue]

So what you're saying is, jwlcosu's post accurately interpreted your comments?

<deep sigh> Yes. That is exactly what I'm saying.

 

[Michchamp]

Of course not. BUT we've seen this before. People get so worked up over the smoke they never get around to checking to see if there's any fire. Scooter Libby! Valerie Plame! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble!

...

Now - and I could be wrong here, so feel free to correct me - but I think perjury and obstruction of justice related to the investigation of a more-or-less serious crime (publicly outing the undercover spouse of a political opponent) is actual fire to go along with the smoke. No?

 

[Gulo Blue]

Now - and I could be wrong here, so feel free to correct me - but I think perjury and obstruction of justice related to the investigation of a more-or-less serious crime (publicly outing the undercover spouse of a political opponent) is actual fire to go along with the smoke. No?

I think swaying public opinion to go to war with Iraq through forged documents is the fire, and whoever did that got away with it. But yay! We got Scooter Libby!

 

[Gulo Blue]

...and keep in mind, while it looks like Libby was the leak, Libby was only convicted for obstruction of justice and perjury. Nobody was penalized for being the source of the leak either. Even if that was the big part of the whole thing.

 

[jwlcosu]

Of course not.

Whew! That's a relief. It appears I heard an inflection at the end of your "big deal" statement that wasn't there. My mistake. I've read crazier things on Digglers Junk.

 

[tinselwolverine]

...and keep in mind, while it looks like Libby was the leak, Libby was only convicted for obstruction of justice and perjury. Nobody was penalized for being the source of the leak either. Even if that was the big part of the whole thing.

Richard Armitage, who was the Deputy Secretary of State at the time, informed Bob Woodward and Robert Novak that Valerie Plame was with the CIA. The reason Fitzgerald chose not to prosecute him for that is because - the following is copy/pasted from Wikipedia - "but did not charge Armitage with a crime because he 'found no evidence that Armitage knew of Plame's covert CIA status when he talked to Novak and Woodward.'"

Here's the link to Wikipedia's page on Armitage.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Richard Armitage, who was the Deputy Secretary of State at the time, informed Bob Woodward and Robert Novak that Valerie Plame was with the CIA. The reason Fitzgerald chose not to prosecute him for that is because - the following is copy/pasted from Wikipedia - "but did not charge Armitage with a crime because he 'found no evidence that Armitage knew of Plame's covert CIA status when he talked to Novak and Woodward.'"

Here's the link to Wikipedia's page on Armitage.

Awesome. So we got a guy for lying about something that wasn't deemed worth prosecuting. At least in this guy's case.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Awesome. So we got a guy for lying about something that wasn't deemed worth prosecuting. At least in this guy's case.

This happened a number of years ago and everybody should know this.

After both their terms ended, Cheney expressed anger with Bush that Bush didn't award
Libby a full pardon.

This was headline news for - a good amount
of time.

 

[Gulo Blue]

This happened a number of years ago and everybody should know this.

After both their terms ended, Cheney expressed anger with Bush that Bush didn't award
Libby a full pardon.

This was headline news for - a good amount
of time.

I remember that part of it.

Clinton's private server emails were probably to/from Cheney. They mostly discuss meeting times for their People-gettin'-away-with-shit Club.

 

[byco42]

I see a lot of diversionary tactics here. Hillary screwed the pooch in ways that we would be fitted for orange onesies. And her staff will pay for Hillary's gaffes, her being the accountable person we all know and respect.