Over many years, the republican party has made it a perennial business to uncover any possible dirt and for doing just about anything to add to the scandal mill, in order to paint the picture of Hillary Clinton being corrupt and untrustworthy. Truthfulness and accuracy in their reporting is immaterial.
Remember the White Water scandal? As per Wikipedia, “the Whitewater controversy began with investigations into the real estate investments of Bill and Hillary Clinton and their associates, Jim and Susan McDougal, in the Whitewater Development Corporation, a failed business venture in the 1970s and 1980s. A U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigation did result in convictions against the McDougals for their role in the Whitewater project, but the Clintons themselves were never prosecuted. Three separate inquiries found insufficient evidence linking them with the criminal conduct of others related to the land deal.”
The Whitewater scandal, which when thoroughly investigated over many years, produced absolutely no evidence of any wrong doing by Mr. or Mrs. Clinton. But the right have never given up in their pursuit to prove their duplicitousness. It was this scandal which was the catalyst for a congressional investigation and then the appointment of the famous prosecutor, Kenneth Starr. This was followed up by the republicans’ unsuccessful attempt to impeach the sitting President Bill Clinton for lying under oath about his personal indiscretions.
Then, there were the tapes created by the now deceased Reverend Jerry Falwell, leader of the “Moral Majority.” Wikipedia describes this part of history as follows: “In 1994, Falwell promoted and distributed the video documentary The Clinton Chronicles: An Investigation into the Alleged Criminal Activities of Bill Clinton (Also Hillary Clinton). The video purported to connect Bill Clinton to a murder conspiracy involving Vincent Foster, James McDougall, Ron Brown, and a cocaine-smuggling operation. The theory was discredited, but nonetheless sold more than 150,000 copies.”
Let’s not forget the numerous Benghazi hearings at the cost of millions of taxpayer dollars, designed to prove, once and for all that she, as Secretary of State ordered the military not to rescue those Americans who were under fire in Benghazi. The right is not giving up on their efforts to prove that she is guilty of this deed despite all the previously collected testimony and evidence, to the contrary.
With all of the above examples, demonstrating how the right has unmercifully pursued Hillary Clinton with the goal of ruining her reputation, it is no wonder that Hillary Clinton has to fight her natural impulse as a human being, towards being secretive at all costs. However, because of her position in the president’s cabinet, she could not afford the luxury of giving in to her desire to insulate herself from the right’s continuous, multi decades, brutal assaults designed to impugn her character.
Now, let’s take time to look at one of their most recent failed efforts. Remember how the right slanderously portrayed the organization, ACORN. The conservative activist, James O’Keefe used edited undercover videos to embarrass NPR and to bring down this legitimate enterprise, which was created to register would be voters.
On 9/1/15, the Washington Post opinion writer, Dana Milbank describes how this same conservative activist, James O’Keefe attempted to charge Hillary Clinton with corruption in his article, “Clinton’s accusers are running out of ammunition.” Here are some excerpts:
“Conservative activist James O’Keefe came to Washington Tuesday (9/1) to unveil evidence of “illegal activity conducted by high-level employees within Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.”
“He then rolled tape of . . . a Canadian woman attempting to buy a T-shirt and some campaign pins at a Clinton rally. To O’Keefe, this was evidence of foreign contributions being made to Clinton – an “illegal activity” with a total value of $75.”
“Many of the 50 reporters who showed up at the National Press Club for this unveiling felt as if they had been punked.”
“My first reaction is this is about buying a T-shirt,” said one. “It doesn’t seem like much of a bombshell.”
“Is this the best thing you have?” I asked O’Keefe.
“Is this a joke?” inquired Olivia Nuzzi of the Daily Beast. “This feels like a prank… We’re talking about buying campaign swag.”
“But O’Keefe was serious: “This is just the beginning! We’ve got more!”
“Next installment: O’Keefe catches a Mexican national buying a Clinton sweatshirt?”
“Are you sure it’s not a joke?” the Daily Beast’s Nuzzi repeated toward the end of the news conference.”
“But O’Keefe had achieved his purpose. “It’s going viral,” he said, noting that “it’s in the Washington Post right now.”
“It was, under this headline: “New James O’Keefe video sting catches Clinton campaign being kind to a Canadian.”
“As with much of the product generated by the anti-Clinton scandal mill, the merit of the allegations doesn’t really matter. What’s important is that the constant stream of accusations further the notion that Clinton is corrupt.”
Finally, Hillary Clinton’s boneheaded usage of a private server and email system as Secretary of State has provided the right with legitimate fodder to use against her. If she did this to prevent the right from access to her work, this was a foolish decision because there is nothing she can do to protect herself from their relentless attacks.
No, Hillary Clinton did not do something that is illegal by which she can be criminally charged. The New York Times has incorrectly reported the story that the FBI is investigating her specifically for possible criminal wrongdoing. However, she did act counter to the president’s office directions regarding email handling procedures.She needs to accept responsibility, apologize and put this incident behind her or else, provide a reasonable explanations for her decisions.
From what I am led to understand, anything properly marked “classified” by the state department is automatically blocked to where it is impossible for anyone to forward to her an email which is stamped “classified.” Consequently, any email she she sent or responded to was not noted as being “classified.” When the state department personnel accepted her return emails, a record was then established within the state department’s purview.
Any audit would find some documents which should be classified and then retroactively assign a classified status. The state department does have a long history and reputation for over classifying data.
Now, I have a question for anyone who is not a far right, tea party, conservative, republican ideologue. After what the far right has done to the Clintons for years, and after what they have done to undermine and disrespect our current democrat President Obama, what makes you think that they will treat any better, whoever is our next democrat U.S. president?