I don't know Rachel. You're smart. You're being intentionally obtuse about the damn emails right?
Hillary's emails were government documents that belonged on government servers and she knew that.
She could have simply decided whether she wanted [email protected] or [email protected] or [email protected]. She could have actually had all 3 of those addresses – voila! – in less than five minutes with all of the security promised to the Secretary of State of the United States by the United States Government.
In five minutes.
Instead she put a server in her basement or whatever.
Not even the geekiest people you know, Rachel, have email servers in their basements.
You are a master of understanding political machinations so I would be insulting you to not assume that you know why she would do such an inconvenient and dangerous thing:
Hillary Clinton was keeping her work emails as Secretary of State off of State Dept. servers, against official government policy – policy that is in place to protect national security and to assure governmental transparency – in order to avoid FOIA requests and congressional oversight.
And it worked. For two years or so, such requests did come up nearly empty just because of this.
This was serious – which is why Comey felt compelled to have his dog and pony show, just as he had his dog and pony show about the infinitely more corrupt Trump when the time came.
You can not reasonably claim that it is serious and dangerous that the Russians hacked the DNC's and other American citizens' emails in order to meddle in the US elections and also claim that it is not serious for the Secretary of State to place her emails outside of secure government servers.
The new report that just came out says nothing about everything I've just typed. It is about the awkward position all of those people in the State Department were in, and who did this and that wrong, BECAUSE THE SECRETARY HAD AN INSECURE OFF-SITE EMAIL SERVER AT HER PRIVATE RESIDENCE. And they had to email her, right?
They were found to have done no systematic wrongdoing.
That is completely different than saying that there was absolutely nothing to it, as you were saying tonight.
You know, it's just like Joe and Hunter Biden. It galls you to no end when this amoral monster makes a show of pointing out Democratic corruption.
Who ever would think that in America a huge voting bloc would jeer at one side's moral failings and completely support their "leader" regardless of his coarseness, depravity, or crimes?
But there you have it. The current state of the Republican party, what can you do?
If only there were a viable candidate who wasn't corrupt and didn't take a bunch of money all of his/her career and instead represented the interests of the working people who had elected him/her, right?
And that is why it is so easy for Russia to f with us. The racism they can gin up is there in us. The ignorance. The corruption of the Clintons, the Bidens, the Bushes, the media. Check, check, check, check.
Bernie Sanders has been fighting the good fight and has been on the right side of nearly every argument for just about your entire life. But you know that.
Even more importantly, he has always meant to be on the right side and is trying, even today, even right now, as we speak, to ascertain what that is and how to bring it into being.
If you in the media had treated him fairly in the primary, if the Democratic Party had treated him fairly, if there had been no sh** emails for the Russians to find in the first place, he would have been the nominee and won the presidency and none of this would have happened.
(I'm sure your pollsters and pundits, knowing that he won Michigan and Wisconsin, was more popular with independents, and so on and so forth, know that he would have won the general had he won the primary, though you never talk about that.)
The Democratic Party would have inherited all of that enthusiasm – an entire generation that was transforming American politics before your eyes.
To this day you do not acknowledge the sweeping historic reality of the Sanders 2016 campaign, how it is he (we) that made Elizabeth possible, he (we) that made higher taxes on the rich possible, he (we) that made Medicare for All possible.
None of it is likely to happen, of course not, which is why Bernie Sanders remains the only candidate, maybe in your entire lifetime, with even a sliver more than a snowball's chance in hell of getting into the Oval Office, who would actually have your and everyone else's back, to the very poorest, who we know would fight for these very unlikely things and be willing to fail if necessary, as hard as he has fought all of these decades, all the time willing to fail if necessary. And try again.
By now, he's proven it.
So maybe report that please.