I just have a couple of thoughts on the whole Hillary email thing.
The FBI has recommended no charges be filed. Which boils down to, “She did something perhaps stupid, but given all the circumstances, this isn’t worth pursuing.” Obviously this is going to scratch the craw of a lot of people who were hoping for a body in the landfill moment.
This seems to be the case throughout the Clinton’s public life. Allegations, something’s there, oh never mind, not what we thought or hoped for, but wait there this other thing! It has backfired this time in the embarrassing assessment that Hillary is, by a few points at least, the most honest of the candidates running. (I know, I was a bit shocked, too. Career politician, etc. But remember, Bernie is also a career politician, he’s just figured out how to not let the label stick.) With all the resources available to the Right, you would think by now that if there were anything—anything—to any of the longed-for malfeasances, misdemeanors, and mistakes, something would have stuck.
I’m sorry, but no one—no one—is that capable of dodging that many bullets. I have concluded that, regarding that landfill, there are no bodies. Not buried by Hillary. Or even Bill, for that matter. The only thing they managed to come close on with him was lying about a blow job. After how many millions spent trying to indict him on something else? (And then only to find that Mr. Starr has his own problems with sexual misconduct. Isn’t that just special?)
So here is what I think happened.
The FBI found that she was violation of the principle of certain rules. Nothing harmful came of it. They couldn’t even link it to Benghazi, which has turned out—several times now—to be its own kind of hellish nothing. So the best they can do is wag a stern finger at her and say naughty naughty.
Why not prosecute on the principle? Because in testimony the defense would reveal dozens upon dozens of others who have done exactly the same thing. Colin Powell has already alluded to that fact and apparently Condi Rice did the same thing. A door to endless review and the subsequent tarnishment (?) of reputations those who want to Get Hillary would rather not tarnish.
Secondly, given Edward Snowden, if I had been Hillary—or any of them—damn right I’d have my own private server. Something a bit more reliable than a digital colander. That way any mishap would be entirely on me (or her) and not the unfortunate consequence of a poorly protected government server.
Thirdly, someone, somewhere, must have realized that as this question has never come up before, it is primarily a Get Hillary mission and were she anyone else it would not have been raised. Putting her on trial would risk putting a system on trial certain people still hope can be salvaged to their benefit.
Hillary is (a) a Clinton, (b) a Democrat, (c) a feminist, and (d) a woman. She’s about to be president. Everything certain folks on the other side of the aisle cannot abide just because it does not conform to their preferred view of the world.
Will she be a good president? How should I know? She’s qualified. She’s demonstrably competent. She leans in directions I rather approve. But everyone thought Obama, for good or ill, was going to completely overturn and transform everything. He didn’t. Like any president, he will leave office with a mixed legacy.
But you know what, it doesn’t matter. Not to me. As I’ve said before, if the make-up of Congress is not changed, a reincarnated Abraham Lincoln couldn’t do much. Given that, I would rather have her there than just about anybody else who has a glimmer of a chance of winning.
As for all the Hillary Haters, you may have grounds. But they’re the kind of grounds you could dig up on any candidate, some more than others. That doesn’t explain the hate. Maybe you ought to ask yourselves why this particular candidate is on your shit list. Some of you may have good answers, but I’d bet most of you just don’t like her and have no idea what she’s accomplished.
That’s my opinion, anyway.
Have a pleasant election cycle.