I've noticed a contradiction

[BainsBane]

22. Okay, but take me as an example

I think Snowden did a public service in informing the public about unconstitutional government surveillance. I am not supportive of the Wikileaks dump because it was undifferentiated, a mass release of documents. Arguments in defense of it revolve around the view, articulated by Assange, that ALL government activity should be known to the public.

In regard to the Clinton matter, I don't know why it is such an outrage. I have been told I would be upset if it were a Republican. Why should I be upset? The laws compelling govt only use of email came into effect after Clinton left office, and State says Kerry is the first Secretary to exclusively use government email. That means Republicans and Albright did use their private emails for government work. To be upset, I would need to know more. I do not automatically assume nefarious intent as some here do.

My position on the public's right to know is that we should eventually have access to all government correspondence. Not necessarily now, but eventually, and the tricky part comes in figuring out when particular documents should be released. The argument that private emails can't be retrieved would seem to be contradicted by the House Benghazi committee subpoena. Clearly they think the emails must be available.

Now, I have explained my position, which is not as simplistic as described above. Will you explain yours?