After reading this piece at Naked Capitalism: Hillary Clinton’s Email Hairball Summarized in 11 Points (a Test of Presidential Character), posted on March 29, 2016 by Lambert Strether, I followed several links from commenters there, resulting in one click landing me at Current Affairs website and a piece by Nathan J. Robinson:
Nominating a Presidential Candidate Under Active FBI Investigation Is An Incredibly Risky Gamble. Unless, of course, there is some kind of separate system of justice for the powerful…
Final paragraphs
In a world where we expected the law to be equally applied to all, Democrats should be panicking right now over the status of the investigations against Clinton and the Clinton campaign’s troubling responses. The Washington Post has documented numerous misstatements and evasions made by Clinton around the emails, concluding that “it appears Clinton often used highly technical language to obscure the salient fact that her private email setup was highly unusual and flouted existing regulations.” All of this should be making Democrats panic, and sending them scrambling to find a non-indictable nominee.
But that’s not happening, for a very obvious reason. Nobody seriously believes the law would be applied to Clinton with the same pitiless irrationality as it was to Bryan Nishimura. Yet that leaves us with a stark choice: either treat the Clinton scandal as troubling and a major campaign issue, or acknowledge that we are entrusting an oligarchical justice system to make the issue go away for Clinton in a way it wouldn’t for anyone else. Neither choice should leave Democrats comfortable.
7 comments:
There have been a number of email-me-at-home government officials. Defense Secretary Ash Carter is the latest reveal [ http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/pentagon-chief-personal-email-account-december-20-37949786 ]. Gotta wonder about these folks' flagrant disregard for rules and security, but investigations into their off-line emails tends to favor no breach of security. Several of Hillary's emails were LATER reclassified as possible breaches of security. She sorta-kinda used better judgement by using her government account for confidential communication. I view her actions as naive and regretful, but I'm sure she was educated by this disclosure. Perhaps these personal email account users are aware their emails aren't secure from other governmental agencies:
"After repeatedly lying to Congress and undermining the Senate Intelligence Committee, CIA Director John Brennan was caught lying again to the oversight committee this week when he refused to admit his employees had used “improper procedures” when they hacked into the Senate’s email accounts."
http://www.activistpost.com/2016/02/cia-was-hacking-senate-emails-watch-the-director-throw-a-tantrum-when-hes-called-out-for-it.html
Like Benghazi, I'm not that concerned with Hillary's emails at this point...water over the dam in my mind. I'm more concerned with the FBI and CIA (and probably other Homeland Security units) illegally tapping into other governmental agencies, whether by phone, emails, or other methods.
I'd rather Bernie discuss war crimes against Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, but that would offend too many, particularly the Republicans. Did you see the recent polls indicating the majority of Americans support torture? Wow! Did you see that most Americans don't want American Muslims serving in our military? Wow!
mike ~ I'm more concerned that Bernie should be the Democratic nominee rather than Hillary Clinton. Though Bernie discounted the e-mail issue originally, it does concern more than the e-mails themselves - it relates, once again, to her powers of judgement - as in her vote FOR the Iraq war.
Discussing Bush and Co's war crimes would do nothing to secure the nomination for Bernie, it would simply muddy the waters at this point. He's up against the powerful Clinton Machine at present, not the Republicans.
I'm growing more anti-Clinton by the day! ;-/ I used to be persuaded by TV in the UK, that Bill Clinton was one of the Wonders of the Western World, and later by my husband's good opinion of him during his reign in the White House (apart from - well..... his zipper problem) - I am no longer so persuaded. I despise the lot of 'em - Chelsea too.
Hillary's vote for the Iraqi war was offensive, but in-step with her colleagues and the American public at that time. It was Bush, et al, that provided the erroneous and unfounded rationale. Had the Bush administration's information been true, it would obviously be a different story and Hillary would be using Bernie's veto against him. I've always been pleased that Bernie and the other 22 members of the Senate voted against the war.
I don't favor Hillary, but I will cast my ballot for her should she be the DNC pick. There's no point in taking this as a personal affront. I'm not going to withhold my vote in spite and regret. Politics is a dirty dog and Bernie would be fresh air blowing into the dirt of politics, but he'd still need to contend with the dirt. I suspect Hillary is better at that...takes one to know one...LOL.
Today's news states that Washington DC's ballot omitted Bernie Sanders and it was caused by an error with the Democratic Party's filing one day late for Bernie's inclusion. There has been collusion, or at minimum, favoritism from the Dem Party toward Hillary.
The astrology from now through the election, primarily Saturn-Neptune square, but including transits that activate the fading-for-now Uranus-Pluto square [note that Uranus-Pluto are within 1* square in January, 2017, which will be their last close encounter], favors honesty, trust, and cooperation. That's Bernie! I certainly hope he wins the DNC nomination, but he's a winner either way, if he stays on track.
mike ~ I guess Bernie has been among down and dirty politics for long enough to know how best to deal with the dirt - in his own way. Hillary really doesn't have more valuable experience than him in ways that would matter. Her stint as Sec of State didn't exactly cover her with glory!
I hadn't read about Washington DC's ballot debacle - the error will surely be corrected, there's plenty of time for that to happen. It does smack of skulduggery, but surely would never be allowed to stand, far too obvious. Most likely to have really been just another careless error on the part of some DNC staff member.
Yes, he will be a winner whether nominee or not, he is doing what he set out to do, and will continue to begin a political revolution. It might not come to full fruition this time, but the pattern has been set, seeds continuing to be sown.
I liked Oliver Stone's support for Bernie in today's Huff Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/oliver-stone/why-im-for-bernie-sanders_b_9576984.html
mike ~ The Washington DC ballot sheets could have been an error or oversight by staff, this was NOT:
MA Sanders Voters File Suit Against Bill Clinton for Campaigning Inside Polling Stations
http://hubpages.com/politics/MA-Sanders-Voters-File-Suit-Against-Bill-Clinton-for-Campaigning-Inside-Polling-Stations
Second poll shows Bernie Sanders, Ted Cruz with primary leads
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/second-poll-shows-bernie-sanders-ted-cruz-with-primary-leads-b99697882z1-374144971.html
"The Public Policy poll shows Sanders, the Vermont senator, leading Clinton, the former secretary of state, 49% to 43% with 8% of voters undecided. That compares to Wednesday's Marquette poll that showed Sanders leading 49% to 45%."
Bernie's natal Sun is at 167°00'. March 31 transit Jupiter was at 167°14' (retro, so closing to exact).
Bob ~ Thanks - for Wisconsin primary on Tuesday 5 April, I think. Great! I hope the good astro-back-wind for Bernie holds until Tuesday. :-)
Post a Comment