NYT Editorial: "Hillary Clinton, Drowning in Email"

[markpkessinger]

From the very same editorial board that was so quick to endorse her . . .

[font size=5]Hillary Clinton, Drowning in Email[/font]

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDMAY 26, 2016

Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the presidency just got harder with the release of the State Department inspector general’s finding that “significant security risks” were posed by her decision to use a private email server for personal and official business while she was secretary of state. Contrary to Mrs. Clinton’s claims that the department had “allowed” the arrangement, the inspector general also found that she had not sought or received approval to use the server.

So far, no security breaches have been reported; a separate F.B.I. investigation is looking into that. But above and beyond security questions, the inspector general’s report is certain to fuel doubts about Mrs. Clinton’s trustworthiness, lately measured as a significant problem for her in public polls.

Across the years of the Clintons’ ascendancy, the public has seen that Mrs. Clinton can be fiercely protective of her role and prerogatives — at times grudging in admitting error and, during Bill Clinton’s presidency, blaming a “vast right-wing conspiracy” for allegations against her and her husband that began early in his tenure and continued on through the impeachment scandal. (The right wing was definitely on his case, but hardly alone in its doubts about Mr. Clinton’s personal conduct.)

This defensive posture seems at play in the email controversy, as well as her refusal, for that matter, to release the lucrative speeches she made to Wall Street audiences. The reflex she is revealing again now — to hunker down when challenged — is likely to make her seem less personable to many voters, and it will surely inflame critics’ charges of an underlying arrogance.

< . . . . >

[FreakinDJ]

1. LOL

They called it "Self Inflicted" scandal

[AzDar]

2. The levee is fixing to break...

[MaeScott]

16. "trustworthiness "? Lololol. She'd sell you the Brooklyn Bridge in a NY minute

[HereSince1628]

17. That levee's been riddled with muskrat burrows for years and held

Everyone expects it to keep on holding because you know... The PAST!

HRC's campaigns have always argued her capacity for self-induced scandals ACTUALLY show great resilience against opponents, while dismissing her propensity for self-induced scandals. Not one of them believed that one day this would lead to getting ensnared.

When Biden was a political opponent he was painted as always running his mouth and getting into trouble. That was fatal to Biden's presidential aspirations.

This has been a very educational election cycle. Perhaps the best in my life at revealing how campaigns involve fiction and how much successful fiction depends upon willing suspension of disbelief.

[amborin]

3. "MrsClinton now faces a measurably greater challenge in proving that she is the well-qualified polit

ician"

[RobertEarl]

4. OMG They are taking her down!~

What a terrible article for her!

The NYT is become anti-Hillary....

[Alex4Martinez]

5. The most damning part is that it was so utterly unnecessary to do this server-at-home thing.

What the hell were they thinking?

How clueless/arrogant/entitled/dumb do you have to be to make such a decision?

You work for the government, use the God damned government devices and email accounts.

Jesus Christ.

[Art_from_Ark]

7. I think it's pretty obvious

Hillary's steadfast refusal to release the transcripts of her speeches to banks gives an indication of why she would prefer a server over which she had complete control.

[bobbobbins01]

20. I'm still trying to wrap my head around why she did it.

Why not use the government email like normal and have a private email on a private server for all the other shady business. Combining them was a terrible rookie move.

[sorechasm]

24. Looks like arrogance to me.

Maybe it was all 'shady business' as you say.

It appears that her 'personal' business (the Clinton Foundation profits) took precedence over her public service. Did she consider the SOS position as merely a stepping stone to the WH, and consequently not worth the trouble of following the rules?

[Alex4Martinez]

25. I think you're right, she was building her resume.

She never stopped wanting the biggest prize of all.

That blind ambition blinded her to the realities and significance of her responsibilities.

Unbelievable quest for power and influence-- the family foundations alone, and then add to that POTUS...

Way too much, epic overreaching. It's Shakespearean.

[madokie]

37. Thats the deal

"Did she consider the SOS position as merely a stepping stone to the WH, and consequently not worth the trouble of following the rules?"

You would think that anyone who has been wanting that big prize of the white house like she has since bill walked into the oval office she'd know better. After all she is educated in LAW.. Graduated and passed the bar anyway. Apparently it didn't take with her though. What a shame.

[Locrian]

26. gov business, shady business

gov business, shady business - probably too much overlap for her.

[lagomorph777]

36. Combining government and personal business was how she made a living.

Look at the Qaddafi's Gold e-mail posted earlier today.

[Alex4Martinez]

40. I saw that, "Q's Gold". Oh boy.

"we came, we saw, he died".

She might just be toast with that one.

[pdsimdars]

28. It's that world domination game they were playing. . . with their foundation

[Avalux]

39. But it WAS necessary for her. With no IG in place, she had full control.

Hillary is arrogant and entitled, but not clueless and dumb. She didn't fill the IG position the entire 4 years in office, we now know why. She leveraged her position as SoS to make deals for the Clinton Foundation, evidence of which would have been on that private email server but we'll never know because there's no audit trail.

The desperate-to-be queen had absolute control over the emails she wrote as SoS (that didn't belong to her). It may not have been illegal, but certainly is underhanded and wrong.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. New narrative taking hold

[BillZBubb]

8. And yet the Times has been "all in" for Hillary EVEN KNOWING THIS WAS COMING!

not personable, arrogant--sure those are true of her, but those aren't the issues here. Honesty, judgment and criminal behavior are the issues. She's shown herself to be totally dishonest. She used abysmal judgment. And the FBI is investigating her for criminal acts. The Times had to know all of this when they endorsed her.

She's going to be an albatross around the neck of the Democratic party.

[markpkessinger]

9. I totally agree . . .

"But . . . TRUMP!" only goes so far as a campaign strategy.

[madokie]

38. Not going to be, she is

an albatross around our necks

[FourScore]

10. Indictments are coming. I feel certain of that. n/t

[silvershadow]

11. K&R

[snowy owl]

12. Honestly, this election is up in the air. Too much loyalty;too little intellect

[bigtree]

13. above and beyond security questions

...of course.

Not about the law, rules, consequence, but politics.

This contrasted against a primary loser and a republican rodeo clown.

[Live and Learn]

14. Yikes, maybe the emails were something after all. nt

[Major Hogwash]

15. The Gordian knot tightens.

I just hope it doesn't bring the Democratic party to its collective knees!

[John Poet]

18. There's no life preserver big enough

Hillary not only fucked herself, but fucked over the Democratic party.

Reminds me of Bill and "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

[Arazi]

19. And here's her refusal to release the transcripts out in front again

[Uncle Joe]

21. I also believe the Inspector General Report coming out to be a major motivation for Hillary

backing off her word and canceling the last primary debate in May before the June 7th primaries.

Hillary has gone into hunker down mode, and is now just trying to run out the clock, she wants to avoid national scrutiny after this devastating report because it clearly contradicts everything she has been telling the national American Audience at previous debates and interviews for at least a year now.

If Hillary ever makes it to the general election, she will be afforded no such luxury.

Thanks for the thread, markpkessinger.

[ucrdem]

22. "So far, no security breaches have been reported . . . "

[markpkessinger]

31. Where I work . . .

. . . if I were caught discussing any matter related to the firm's business on my own private email server, it would be grounds for immediate termination, irrespective of whether or not the firm was damaged by it.

[ucrdem]

33. I understand but she was the boss.

There are rumors that she was pushed out of State but in any case this is basically office gossip aka old news.

[RBInMaine]

23. No one gives a shit about this.

[markpkessinger]

29. Judging by the reader comments to the editorial . . .

. . . it would appear you are mistaken.

[ljm2002]

32. When the NYT editorial board cares...

...you can bet your boots that other people care as well. In fact the NYT is influential enough that their caring will create lots of others who care.

Surely you know this. I suspect you were quite pleased when the NYT editorial board endorsed Clinton's candidacy. Just a guess...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

34. The FBI and IG seemed to have given it more than a glance.

[99Forever]

42. How's life on The Denial River these days?

Gonna launch into yet another lameass attempt at a chickenshit Joe McCarthy style red scare this morning?

[KoKo]

27. NYT "Editorial Board".....Recommend Read

[BernieforPres2016]

30. Yet none of the MSM will state the obvious

Which is that the Democratic Party needs to dump Hillary for Bernie to avoid a debacle in November.

[lagomorph777]

35. "underlying arrogance"

seems to be the way the campaign and its supporters want to operate.

[Cheese Sandwich]

41. I'm not sick and tired of hearing about these damn emails.