She should’ve known better
She should have known better. And she should have talked to the American public a lot sooner. After eight years as First Lady, four years as secretary of state, and months of preparation for another presumed White House bid, Hillary Clinton should have known some basic rules. Such as: When you are in public service, your work is public.
When a controversy develops, you get out in front of the story before it develops a life of its own.
And when you are a leader, you meet not only the letter but the spirit of the law. Hillary Clinton violated all those rules. Finally back on Tuesday, eight days after it was revealed that she regularly did the public’s business on her private email account, Clinton came forward to explain herself—an explanation that left us wanting.
She said she used her personal email address for public business as a “matter of convenience,” though she now recognizes “it would have been smarter to use two devices.” Her answer was unsatisfying, however, because as most people who have both a work and personal email account know, you can easily navigate between them on a smartphone or computer.
She also said she complied with the rules as written and that all work-related emails are now in the hands of the State Department. But we’ll have to trust her on that because, remarkably, she has since deleted thousands of emails and is refusing calls for an independent examination of her private email server.
Clinton has often talked about the need for a zone of privacy for people in public life, something that citizens can understand when it comes to kids and marriages. But when it comes to doing the public’s business, transparency is not an option, and Clinton’s behavior raises real doubt about whether she embraces transparency as a value.
It’s the same question we have about Florida Governor Rick Scott, who, among other things, denied for two years that he had done public business on his private email, but late last year finally released nearly 200 pages of emails that his lawyer had said didn’t exist.
By contrast, it’s worth noting that former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, who is exploring a presidential run, recently released eight years of emails from his time in office. Yes, those emails already were public record, but his release made it easier for people to read them. Bush says Clinton’s decision to store her government emails on a personal server was “baffling.”
It’s not just emails that have Clinton facing questions about transparency. She similarly faces questions about donors to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, and what they might want in return.
Hillary said little about the foundation Tuesday, except that she is proud of its work. But former President Bill Clinton, speaking in Miami last week, defended the foundation’s acceptance of millions of dollars from foreign governments, including after his wife became secretary of state.
“I believe they do a lot more good than harm,” Bill Clinton said of the donations. “The [United Arab Emirates] gave us money. Do we agree with everything they do? No, but they help us fight ISIS.”
Perhaps, but people who give large sums of money to people in power generally want something in return.
Mrs. Clinton once blamed a “vast right-wing conspiracy” for the attacks on her husband, but today, she can’t blame anybody but herself for the criticism she faces. Whether these questions have an effect on her expected run for president remains to be seen.
But still, she should have known better.
(FORT LAUDERDALE, FLA.)