Hillary Clinton admitted this Sunday that it is “fair” for voters to have questions about her truthfulness. However, she then proceeded to make the very type of statement that has undermined her credibility with voters. Despite the express statement of the FBI that her emails contained clearly classified information, including some with classified markings, Clinton insisted that there was no such finding and seemed to deflect blame for her conduct to subordinates. The Washington Post gave Clinton “Four Pinnochios” for her interview on truthfulness and the email scandal. Clearly, Clinton is right that there is “work to do” on the truthfulness thing.
The FBI was scathing in its view of Clinton’s decision to use an unsecure personal server for her communications as Secretary of State — a decision that clearly came from her and not her subordinates who raised objections. Despite her decision to not to use the expensive, secured system at the State Department, Clinton insisted in her Fox interview that “I take classification seriously.” She then added that
“I relied on and had every reason to relied on the judgment of the professionals with whom I worked. So in retrospect, maybe some people are saying, ‘Well, among those 300 people they made the wrong call.’ At the time there was no reason in my view to doubt the professionalism and the determination by people who work every single day on behalf of our country.”
That would seem to blame her staff for her use of the personal server. However, it was the statement on the FBI findings that has caught the attention of many people. FBI Director Comey called Clinton and her staff “extremely careless” in using a personal email account and server.
When asked about the finding that she sent classified emails, she objected to that take on the FBI findings: “That’s not what I heard Director Comey say. Comey said that my answers were truthful and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people.” She repeated that the emails found to be classified were “retroactively” classified, which is not true.
However, Comey said that 110 of her emails contained information that was classified at the time she sent or received them. He also said that a smaller number emails had markings showing them to be classified. She added that “Director Comey said my answers were truthful and consistent with what I have told the American people.” However, Comey called her careless in her use of the personal server and the sending of these emails. He also directly contradicted her on the classification of the emails.
What is astonishing is that, while recognizing “fair” questions about her truthfulness, Clinton proceeded to repeat the very statements that were discredited by the FBI Director and the available record.
In giving her “Four Pinnochios” for her interview, the Post noted that
“While Comey did say there was no evidence she lied to the FBI, that is not the same as saying she told the truth to the American public — which was the point of Wallace’s question. Comey has repeatedly not taken a stand on her public statements. . . .
And although Comey did say many emails were retroactively classified, he also said that there were some emails that were already classified that should not have been sent on an unclassified, private server. That’s the uncomfortable truth that Clinton has trouble admitting.”
Some 57 percent of voters find Clinton to be untruthful according to polls.
This goes along with the comment of PhillyT above.
Who gets to decide whether or not “information” or a document containing it is classified? Who is the ultimate classification authority within a government department, such as the State Department ? Can one government department (FBI) decide that information within a different government department (DOS) is classified, even if that second department disagrees? Information and document classification is a very subjective area, and opinions differ widely.
Also, all these emails were sent or received between and among various State Department officials and employees. How come no one raised any alarm at the time within DOS? Why is there not a huge outcry to arrest and lock up dozens or hundreds of DOS employees? Or is this outrage simply to “Get Hillary.”
Shocked, shocked I tell you.
Tyll, the point being that Clinton is in the existing government and breaking laws. Trump is not. That is a different conversation. Trump may be whatever, but we are paying Clinton and she is a crook. About time we pull her employment. Clinton is a proven menace to the entire globe.
It remains a puzzle to me why you continue to focus on Clinton and ignore Trump, such as his call for espionage by Russia.
Tyll – I watched Trump’s call for the 30,000 missing emails and it was kinda funny. If he was calling for espionage, it was already done. Hillary supposedly wiped the disk with a cloth two years ago. Drudge does have a report that the NSA has them though.
nick S. Lots are of republicans and independents are saying the same thing after his vendetta against the Khan family. A sane person would apologize for being wrong and move on. Instead he is still tweeting about them.. At best he is extremely emotionally immature and highly volatile. He has taken on the wrong Muslim family.
SWM – wasn’t Hillary the first one to claim Obama was born in Kenya? Politifact has been shown to be light on actual fact-checking. They are deep in the hip pocket of the Clintons now.
Autumn, I read Cornell West endorsed Jill Stein.
Trump is “CRAZY” is the new talking point from the Clinton throne.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/29/donald-trump-lies-this-week-russia-ted-cruz-dnc Trump lies constantly. Clinton lies to defend herself. Since they both seem to lie although in different ways, I think the voters will more than likely go with the non crazy one, Clinton.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/27/why-clinton-is-less-trusted-when-trump-lies-much-more/ “Clinton’s deceptions tend to be defensive — her reputation is under attack and she’s trying to save face. As determined by PolitiFact, a political fact-checking service, her false statements often come in response to scandals and allegations against her. For instance, with regard to her private email server, she has said she “never received nor sent any material that was marked as classified” and that the server “was allowed” at the time. Both proved false.
Trump’s deceptions, by contrast, are more on the offensive, more self-promotional. He exaggerates his successes in the business world. He called his book “The Art of the Deal” the “best-selling business book of all time.” It’s not, according to PolitiFact.
And he creates allegations against his political opponents and minority groups out of thin air, making himself appear better by comparison. Among his false statements, according to PolitiFact: Hillary Clinton “invented ISIS,” even though the group predates Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state. The United States is allowing “tens of thousands” of “vicious, violent” Muslim terrorists into the country every year. This attempt to justify his ban on Muslim immigration was also found false.
That distinction between Clinton and Trump — offensive vs. defensive — has major implications for whether people view their lies as “legitimate” and morally acceptable, according to Matthew Gingo, a psychology professor at Wheaton College.”
Meanwhile rather than go after Hillary on this, Trump has spent four days attacking a Muslim family. If I were a hedge fund, would I bet on him? Don’t think so.
Can anyone on this forum clarify this statement? I just heard that hedge fund managers have contributed $48 million to HRC. They contributed $19,000.00 to Trump. This can’t be accurate! If any of the readers have accurate figures, could you please post them.
” I just heard that hedge fund managers have contributed $48 million to HRC. They contributed $19,000.00 to Trump ”
If you thought supporting the winner had equal pay-off, regardless of who wins, had $67 million to invest, and thought that HRC had about an 80%(as Nate Silver did a few weeks ago) chance of winning then those numbers reflect a rational decision making process.
HRC >> 80% * $67 million = $53.6
Trump >> 20% * $67 million = 13.4
Looks like the wall street boys think Trump’s chances are a little better than Silver does.
What do they know that Silver and we don’t know?
Well, the State Department also contradicts the FBI:
http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/state-dept-now-says-fbi-got-it-wrong/25101/
Given how often the FBI has screwed up in recent years, I think you have to call this a tossup.
Professor, I think it’s time you moved on. John Kerry is the FIRST Secretary of State to use a government email account. That includes Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Madeleine Albright, and Warren Christopher. Mrs. Clinton exercised bad judgement. We all get it. What else have you got?
Reblogged this on Truth Troubles: Why people hate the truths' of the real world.
Dear Al, I really don’t believe professor Turley is a Trumpster. The democats need the republicans and the republicans need the democrats, but they don’t need anybody else. Personally I’m rooting for 2 governors.
What else can anyone really expect from the Queen of habitual liars?
I SAW the tv interview last night.
Two things: The blog continues to show the ugly photo of Hillary in an effort to discredit her.
And, the blog continues to conflate this email nonsense.
It is obvious that the blog and Turley dog wish you to vote for Trump. Welcome to Germany in 1933. Heil.
@Autumn
@Squeek
I enjoy both of your posts, please keep up the good fight.
Squeek, that photo with the hat in the shadows if thats the girl reporter WOW!
@Autumn
I hope for my grandson’s.
Keep in mind the Princess Chelsea lies in wait!
@Lash LaRue
Another reason why we must unite and defeat that beast!!
The ugliness here is not simply the amorality of the two-headed Clinton Leviathan this nation is an inch away from anointing to Royalty.
The gargoyle here is the reflection in the societal mirror: that fully half the morally-lazy population, stands gleefully willing to ignore the repeated proof that these people are a self-absorbed public menace.
“And the people bowed and prayed, to the neon gods they made.” (Simon & Garfunkel)