So today’s the big day.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be before Rep. Trey Gowdy’s Select Committee on Benghazi, a forum through which she’ll be allowed once again to grandstand in support of her bid for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. Pundits and talking heads are spinning themselves to distraction, while what perplexes me about the entire situation remains: I can’t understand why her popularity has ebbed and flowed as new ‘revelations’ as to the contents of her personal email server have come to light.
As a member of the military, and the possessor of a high-level security clearance, I am of course aghast at the cavalier attitude she and her underlings at State demonstrated with regard to classified information and its handling. Sure, yes, she and those charged with advising her on such matters should be held responsible and (not that I was on the verge of endorsing her anyway) this carelessness and risk should certainly demonstrate her lack of qualification for president. Bla bla, yadda yadda.
All that aside, the most damning part of her ‘secret’ ‘home-brewed’ server is that it exists in the first place!
How is it possible that the contempt shown for the American public’s right to know, even if only for the sake of posterity, the goings-on at State not returned in kind by a Nation founded on the principles of representative government answerable to The People?
I get it; it’s an election year. There’s plenty of gamesmanship, posturing and feigned outrage.
But seriously: No less a mouthpiece for Hillary Clinton than longtime confidant and hit-man James Carville himself has acknowledged brazenly and blatantly that her purpose for having a private server in the first place was, “I suspect she didn’t want Louis Gohmert rifling through her e-mails, which seems to me to be a kind of reasonable position for someone to take.” In Mr. Carville’s opinion, does that reasonableness stem from the fact that Gohmert sits on the House Judiciary Committee, which is responsible, among other things, for handling impeachment proceedings against federal officials? More generally speaking, it surely would seem “reasonable” if your intention was to, as a public official, avoid any sort of accountability to the people of America or their representatives in Congress (whose job is oversight of you and your organization) by way of completely controlling and keeping from exposure the entire catalog of your communications in your official role. Those communications belong to us, not her.
How is the party ostensibly ‘of the little-guy’ about to coronate a politician so contemptuous of Americans to be their nominee for president? How on earth does it even tolerate her in its ranks at all?
Forget (if you can) the national security risks and exposure her choice represents. Forget the “drip, drip, drip” of supposedly damaging information being squeezed out of a recalcitrant Kerry State Department. Forget inevitable-for-anbody-else-besides-the-well-connected indictments and FBI criminal investigations. Forget all that.
If we aren’t a Nation wherein someone who shows this brash level of (sorry to keep using this word, but it’s really the only one I can think of) contempt for Americans’ right to self-governance (which requires openness of government, which in turn requires Freedom Of Information, if that rings a bell) isn’t drummed out of our national dialog, but rather is actually the nominee for president of one of our major political parties, then perhaps we’re around the bend already.
In fairness, some on the Left really do seem to have conviction about responsible and representative government. Here is an excellent Q&A that boils down the importance of this issue far beyond the bombast of presidential politics and cuts to the core of the issue at hand. Jason Leopold:
The most important aspect of her emails that anyone should be paying attention to is the fact that we don’t have answers as to why she was using a private email account, and avoiding the Federal Records Act—which is a law—and why the State Department failed to respond to legitimate requests from journalists under the Freedom of Information Act for her emails years before this scandal was ever revealed.
If the fact that the person who holds the office of the #1 individual within the administration after the VP to succeed the president having a ‘home-brewed’ server for (obviously) the purpose of avoiding accountability isn’t news enough in and of itself, what sort of representative nation are we?
-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from HQ)