08-17-2016, 10:27 AM
$tevie wrote:
[quote=vision63]Why would she think doing what she did was obviously wrong when it was done by others to zero ridicule?
Because she is the one who pointed out that there was a vast right-wing conspiracy going on. She has known for almost two decades that if she breaks wind she will be accused of trying to poison the closest Republican. If I had people all over my case like that, I'd have five lawyers vet everything before I do it. Well, maybe not my poops but I'd be damned sure they were flushed all the way down before I left the ladies' room.
PS: this doesn't make the people persecuting (and attempting prosecuting) Clinton correct in my book by any means, for crying out loud. It is just that if I am walking among rattlesnake nests, then by golly I will try to avoid the rattlesnakes. I'm not going to walk around with dead mice strung around my neck.
I get that but I just don't see how it's avoidable. I think Obama's and his administration had a near impossible discipline and message control that was unprecedented. Virtually no scandal. I think because he was a highly educated and cunning man of color, he knew what would be waged against him. He never fed into any of it. I think that's how he's guiding Hillary. When something isn't unusual at the time, how then, does it become something that should have been vetted? I mean Colin Powell and his staff used gmail. So did Condie's staff. But "now" it's a big deal.