Regarding Hillary Clinton

[karynnj]

77. there is a simple reason to that the major new story involves something most feel was wrong

By wrong, I do not mean illegal, immoral or unethical. I do mean that it was something that differs from one of my values -- government should have some level of transparency. The optics are bad in having a private server run out of Clinton's NY home for President Obama's Secretary of State. (I will say the same if Kerry had one out of any of his homes.)

Even not liking that, I would concede no damage was done if every quarter -- or even every year, copies were sent to the SD. The fact is that it was already a year and a half out of office when the current Secretary's Chief of Staff had to have a face to face meeting to get the emails.

A secondary problem is that she commingled personal and business emails -- AND it was her people who separated them before sending the business one's to the SD. The Republicans have been conspiracy nuts about Benghazi, but this gives them a present wrapped with a pretty bow. No one is the SD can testify that this is complete or that everything that was not sent to a State.gov account (or another department) is complete and unedited.

The problem is that this follows the long observed pattern that the Clintons will cut corners and not follow rules -- and expect the Democrats to then defend them to the hilt. It happened in the 1990s -- and unfortunately, I worry that many better people, who are more prudent and ethical will be pushed to compromise their integrity to preserve HRC's viability.

Looking back, the original sin of the Democrats, with regard to the Clintons, were to be swayed to vote for a charismatic candidate in the 1992 primaries after he lied about Flowers and what he did to avoid the draft. (I have no problem that he evaded the draft, but he should have been honest.)