This message was self-deleted by its author

[NYC_SKP]

93. This thread is now closed for business. Please look for my other fine articles like this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026572902



.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Atlantic: The Clash Over Clinton's Cash—And Why it Matters

Call me a concern troll, but this is what we're facing.

-- Appearance of conflict between serving as SOS and running a Foundation that gets donations from sensitive "players" in sensitive nations.
-- Not reporting these as requested by the Potus.
-- And lost or deleted emails that we do or don't know were associated with any of these things.

There doesn't have to have been any actual quid pro quo for it to look really careless at least, and scandalous.

We Democrats really need to think long and hard about whether she can win, and whether or not we're well served ignoring alternative candidates.
I happen to feel that she's not the best choice and, further, I think she'll lose the general election if she wins the primary.

The Clash Over Clinton's Cash—And Why it Matters
If the whiff of corruption and deceit linger about the Clinton candidacy past election day, is she really the candidate that Democrats want in 2016?

David Frum Apr 25, 2015

Today was the latest installment of the never-ending Clinton scandal saga, but it won’t be the last. Yet in some ways, the specifics are a distraction. The sale of access was designed into the post-2001 Clinton family finances from the start. Probably nobody will ever prove that this quid led to that quo … but there’s about a quarter-billion-dollar of quid heaped in plain sight and an equally impressive pile of quo, and it’s all been visible for years to anyone who cared to notice. As Jonathan Chait, who is no right-wing noise-machine operator, complained: “The Clintons have been disorganized and greedy.”

“All of this amounts to diddly-squat,” pronounced long-time Clinton associate James Carville when news broke that Hillary Clinton had erased huge numbers of emails. That may not be true: If any of the conduct in question proves illegal, destroying relevant records may also have run afoul of the law.

But Carville’s dismissal is right as a matter of politics. Scandals, even quite bad ones, tend not to matter as much as they used to, unless the person at the center is sentenced to prison. The impulse to rally to the team is strong, and this impulse has been used shrewdly by the Clinton family over the course of their long, ethically challenged career. They will try to exploit that impulse again now.

~snip~

It’s not trolling if it’s true, and nothing is more true in presidential politics right now than this: The whiff of corruption and deceit will linger about the Clinton candidacy to voting day—and waft through the corridors of a Clinton presidency even if the greater potential strength of the Democratic presidential coalition overcomes the bad odor around its candidate. Yet politics won’t stop on the first Tuesday of November 2016. The truths exposed about the Clinton candidacy will shape and even define a Clinton presidency. That should matter as much to those who hope for a popular and effective Democratic administration after 2016 as to those who hope to prevent one.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/the-clash-over-clintons-cashand-why-it-matters/391466/

Related:

The Atlantic "A Quick Guide to the Questions About Clinton Cash"

The Atlantic: Hillary's Campaign Is Built on a Shaky Foundation

Run away.