Jonah Goldberg responds to Her Hillariness’
apology attempt to shore up bad polling numbers:
So Hillary Clinton mumbled some kind of apology yesterday: “Even though it was allowed, I should have used two accounts. One for personal, one for work-related emails,” she told ABC News. ”That was a mistake. I’m sorry about that. I take responsibility.”
This raises the question: Who gives a rat’s ass? Were you demanding an apology from Hillary Clinton? I wasn’t. I wanted the facts. And those are still in short supply. Which raises a second point: What the Hell is she talking about when she says the State Department “allowed” her private, off-site, server? First off, Hillary Clinton was running the State Department. Does she mean that she allowed herself to do it? If so, this may be the greatest example of Clintonian weasel-wording yet. If she doesn’t mean that, can we have the name of the official who told Clinton it was okay? Can we have the paperwork? Or is the Clinton team still drawing straws to see who gets to take one for the team? Which brings us back around to this apology business. Note that she’s apologizing for the narrowest definition of her transgressions, which is a clever way of trying to minimize the scandal. It was perfectly allowed…but I should have used two email addresses. My bad. This is a strange way to “take responsibility,” after months of saying you did absolutely nothing wrong and attacking anyone who said otherwise. If she’s going to apologize for anything, she should apologize for that. Or she could apologize for putting national security at risk. Or she could apologize for violating rules rank-and-file people can get sent to jail for.
As Goldberg alludes, cynics already figure there will be some loyal Clintonista to take the legal fall and protect She Who Would Be Queen. That’s already a sad statement on the lack of equality before the law in this land, where LOTS of government workers routinely take actions that would land you or me in jail. Personally, I’ll go a step further: it’s entirely possible, given the lawlessness of our Federal government in recent years, that nobody will end up paying a penalty for what is probably the most partisan and irresponsible handling of the State Department’s sensitive information in that agency’s history. Remember: David Petraeus was at least forced to plead guilty to criminal charges over allowing unauthorized access to classified information… and that I’ve said clearly the penalty was not nearly severe enough given the breach of trust involved. The actions of our former Secretary of State are an order of magnitude worse in terms of effects on national security.