You may be right. It seems many voters have no problem with government in the shadows as long as their "team" is at the helm. It didn't cost her my vote because I wasn't going to vote for her in any case. I have an aversion to dynasties. But were she not the former First Lady, this would have been enough to have me looking in other directions. I'm a big supporter of transparency. It's one of the reasons I voted Obama over McCain in '08. Still wish he would have kept his promise, but I guess I was delusional to believe in campaign promises.
37
The thing with the Clintons is that is one scandal after another. They never stop. Who knows what the scandal du jour will be before the general election, after we have given her the nomination? Swiss bank accounts from the sale of the pardons? There is FAR, FAR too much at risk! Run, Liz, RUN! PLEASE! The party needs you desperately!
28
The ever vigilant press will poo poo this email debacle so, of course, the voters won't care because they won't understand how insidious and deceitful Hillary is and always has been.
35
How about publishing a list of all the appointed officials before her who did exactly the same thing, and about whom no hand-wringing was deemed necessary by the press? And how about some discussion about whether it was illegal at the time she was in office? Otherwise, just admit the Republicans (and the press) are desperate to find something negative to write about her.
30
The real fun will be in anticipating Hillary's explanation. Will it be "I didn't know not to do it, but if you criticize me you denigrate all women" or will it be "Are you crazy? You want me to send emails on a system controlled by Barack Obama?" Perhaps, on the other hand it will be a a partial admission such as "I wanted my Benghazi emails to go where ever Lois Lerner's Tea Party ones went."
29
As is often the case, we find that Shakespeare said it best 400 years ago, "Much Ado About Nothing".
I've done the opposite, namely used my work e-mail address for pretty much everything - including personal. One reason I suppose, is that as a scientist, I began using e-mail in 1980's - long before there were any commercial outfits offering e-mail accounts. Never saw the need for a second e-mail address.
An e-mail address is part of your identity. Most of us, at least those of us who do not have multiple personality disorder, only need one identity.
I've done the opposite, namely used my work e-mail address for pretty much everything - including personal. One reason I suppose, is that as a scientist, I began using e-mail in 1980's - long before there were any commercial outfits offering e-mail accounts. Never saw the need for a second e-mail address.
An e-mail address is part of your identity. Most of us, at least those of us who do not have multiple personality disorder, only need one identity.
10
It won't turn into anything substantial on the legal side, but I think Hillary has to do something to get out from under the shadow of Clinton sleaze, cutting corners, complying in words only, etc. to become President worthy. She has no record of accomplishments or obvious skills like her husband. This will just bury her once again into that seediness which follows her around like a bad smell.
21
Of course if this were a Republican...
34
I think the political calculus should be how competent does Hillary look? She puts the communications of the secretary of state on a server in her house. The NSA can read Merkel's blackberry, why not Hillary's email
18
Professor Nyhan is probably correct. The voters are not likely to care about Hillary Clinton's email shenanigans. And that is because, by in large, the media doesn't care.
If the Democrats, including especially President Obama, can lie serially about the ACA with no real repercussions within the media, then this matter can easily be swept away as soon as a new distraction arrives. And that won't be long.
If the Democrats, including especially President Obama, can lie serially about the ACA with no real repercussions within the media, then this matter can easily be swept away as soon as a new distraction arrives. And that won't be long.
35
Would the NYT and Mr. Nyhan be so dismissive of the implications of the Secretary of State openly violating rules, regulations, and laws? I think not. If said Secretary of State worked for a Republican President? Both the NYT and Mr. Nyhan would be demanding Congressional investigations, special prosecutors, and running slanted story after slanted story on it.
46
Cant we find someone not named Clinton or Bush? This nation needs a fresh start.
24
This is the perfect example of how the media handles a scandal when it involves a democrat: Nothing to see here. Move along. Of course, those republicans will make a big thing out of it.
This is why Americans don't trust the media to report on these things.
This is why Americans don't trust the media to report on these things.
58
Most people would be fired from their jobs immediately for this kind of conduct. Why do we hold someone who is in a position of power to a lower standard? What makes the Clintons above the law? If The CEO of a major corporation had an affair with an intern the NY Times would have called for his resignation or termination due to sexual harassment. If a hedge fund manager conducted all of his email on his personal account and then said he would choose which emails to show regulators the NY Times would call for harsh penalties and assume he was covering up misdeeds. At what point do the rules apply to the Clintons? When will the NY Times make a statement based on what they claim to be their principles and call for Hillary to be either investigated or at least unworthy of further election? If this is not that time then the NY Times only principles are helping the powerful, helping the Democratic party and helping themselves. All complaints against Republicans or powerful corporate interests will ring hollow when you cannot hold those you share an ideology with to a similar standard.
72
Speaking as a librarian, that is someone who believes in making information available to scholars, and the public whenever possible, I have to say that Secretary Clinton was wrong to set up a private email system. However, let's be fair. Years ago she spoke of a vast right wing conspiracy that was out to get her and her husband. I think she was right then and that she is still right. Look at the desperate attempts to tar her with the Benghazi disaster. The security arrangements for an individual embassy or consulate is a responsibility that most senior officials would delegate to subordinates. Among conservatives there are many people who do not think that liberals have a legitimate right to life, or a right to govern. Is it any wonder that Hillary Clinton resorted to using a secret network?
18
Oh, please. Libya was Hillary's idea - she and Rice and Powers pushed for the intervention, which turned out to be a disaster and created yet another failed state and terrorist haven. Then, she ignored all warnings about increasing violence and radicalism there, and all requests from the ambassador for more security, in spite of the fact that she referred to him as a "personal friend". I guess you are only a friend of the Clintons when there is something they can get from you. Then she deflected all criticism of her negligence with a concocted story. That is her excuse to go to really extraordinary lengths to hide all of her correspondence as Sec State? Note that she opened this new email account the first day of her confirmation hearings - so her plan all along was to obscure and obstruct and lie. Don't make excuses for her mendacity.
18
The media and its most avid customers create a "furor" out of thin air. Reconsidering, elements of the media then comment that the issue under discussion is unlikely to affect any real world outcome, which makes the recurrence of the word "furor" in the title puzzling.
If the GOP is to be prevented from locking up the third and final branch of federal government in 2016, which seems increasingly unlikely, Clinton will have to win without the support of the fuzz-brained "idealists" whose outraged comments dominate this space.
Requiring the conduct of government to proceed on camera - especially at the level of the U.S. Secretary of State, who has to make deals with America's enemies and competitors - is quite simply an insane requirement which if enforced would prevent anyone from working together to accomplish anything at all. What the New York Times says is required of good government is simply what reporters want to require of everyone in the world - to speak into the microphone, 24/7.
If the GOP is to be prevented from locking up the third and final branch of federal government in 2016, which seems increasingly unlikely, Clinton will have to win without the support of the fuzz-brained "idealists" whose outraged comments dominate this space.
Requiring the conduct of government to proceed on camera - especially at the level of the U.S. Secretary of State, who has to make deals with America's enemies and competitors - is quite simply an insane requirement which if enforced would prevent anyone from working together to accomplish anything at all. What the New York Times says is required of good government is simply what reporters want to require of everyone in the world - to speak into the microphone, 24/7.
8
More ridiculous misdirection. Having her correspondence on a secure government server would not put it "on camera". Top secret is still top secret. It should not be secret from her employers and co workers. If everyone in government is expected to use secure government email, why should Hillary be exempt?
20
I'm a loyal Democrat, but I don't support Hillary Clinton, in part because she's always seemed to feel that the rules don't apply to her, as in the personal e-mail circumstance. I've never forgotten in the Whitewater scandal, that the log of her billable hours couldn't be found for the longest time, and then mysteriously appeared on a White House table with only her fingerprints on it. She is too clever by half, and it's somehow all about her. What did she accomplish as Secretary of State? When she retired, all they found to brag about was the astonishing number of flight miles and hours she'd racked up.
59
The IRS can't recover its emails (but heaven help anyone who is audited and comes forth with a similar claim)
And the Clintons' keep a private email server which they alone control (which is a heck of a lot more complicated to do that opening a private email account on gmail; this is not something they did casually).
As others have put it so clearly: one set of rules for those that rule, and another set for the rest of us.
And, whatever you may think about Republicans, the Clintons are part of the heart and soul of the Democrats. Interested readers are encouraged to review the circumstances of the infamous pardons former President Bill Clinton issued during his last hours in office. There's a pattern here.
And the Clintons' keep a private email server which they alone control (which is a heck of a lot more complicated to do that opening a private email account on gmail; this is not something they did casually).
As others have put it so clearly: one set of rules for those that rule, and another set for the rest of us.
And, whatever you may think about Republicans, the Clintons are part of the heart and soul of the Democrats. Interested readers are encouraged to review the circumstances of the infamous pardons former President Bill Clinton issued during his last hours in office. There's a pattern here.
45
Although I'm a Democrat, this revelation feeds my deep cynicism about the behavior and value of all politicians, regardless of party affiliation. I can't imagine any voter thinking that Mrs. Clinton's behavior evidences either a high ethical standard or even good political judgment. Whatever the outcome of the coming election campaign, this and similar revelations will definitely lessen the public's enthusiasm for her candidacy.
Anyone who defends Mrs. Clinton's elaborate efforts to thwart valid and easily understood government policies is clueless about the kind of discernment she apparently lacks and that this country needs to badly. We do not need yet another arrogant, insular, defensive and paranoid person in the White House.
Anyone who defends Mrs. Clinton's elaborate efforts to thwart valid and easily understood government policies is clueless about the kind of discernment she apparently lacks and that this country needs to badly. We do not need yet another arrogant, insular, defensive and paranoid person in the White House.
63
I think you are absolutely right to distrust politicians of all stripes. But, I wonder why anyone who believes as you do would choose to support the Democrats -- the party that relentlessly pursues expansion of power for those selfsame politicians you and I do not trust.
21
Sandy Berger ended up pleading to a misdemeanor and giving up his law license for removing four classified documents from the national archives. If Hillary deleted a single work-related email, shouldn't she also face prosecution?
40
How would anyone know? It's her server, she has complete control. If you remove a file from a Unix filesystem, there is no trace of it.
30
" ... with Democrats interpreting her actions more charitably ... "
Maybe some, but for many, including me, this is just dead wrong. I am a lifelong Democrat -- have voted straight ticket for every office in every election since 1968. I am not voting and holding my nose this time.
"No More Clintons No More Bushes" -- whoever creates that bumpersticker will make a mint.
Maybe some, but for many, including me, this is just dead wrong. I am a lifelong Democrat -- have voted straight ticket for every office in every election since 1968. I am not voting and holding my nose this time.
"No More Clintons No More Bushes" -- whoever creates that bumpersticker will make a mint.
25
As an avid Times reader, it is this kind of piece that gives fuel to the paper's critics. Its "no one cares," "nothing to see here" approach to this scandal is undermined by the comments posted by Times readers, including by loyal Democrats. It also contrasts with the paper's handling and analysis of Governor Christie's Bridgegate scandal, which had less grave implications and arose earlier in the election cycle.
66
It is ILLLEGAL...The mental gymnastics the liberal media will use to make this no big deal is simply astounding.
The amount of corruption in Wash DC and especially in Obama's IRS, State dept, DHS, Justice department is so large and so pervasive it is simply an insult to anyone with working brain cells to think that this is good for our country because the corruption is done by the democrats.
It is sickening the way the democratic party has become a lawless rules for me not for thee party.
I would ask the NYTimes if GWB's SS Condi Rice did this would it not be a big deal and you would be printing this drivel to excuse this treasonous behavior.
Today's democrats make Nixon look like a piker compared to the lawlessness of Obama's cabinet and executive orders.
HRC is no way qualified to be President, She is corrupt to the core and has accepted tens of millions of dollars from foreign sources...just like the president during his campaign. We are through the looking glass now.
The amount of corruption in Wash DC and especially in Obama's IRS, State dept, DHS, Justice department is so large and so pervasive it is simply an insult to anyone with working brain cells to think that this is good for our country because the corruption is done by the democrats.
It is sickening the way the democratic party has become a lawless rules for me not for thee party.
I would ask the NYTimes if GWB's SS Condi Rice did this would it not be a big deal and you would be printing this drivel to excuse this treasonous behavior.
Today's democrats make Nixon look like a piker compared to the lawlessness of Obama's cabinet and executive orders.
HRC is no way qualified to be President, She is corrupt to the core and has accepted tens of millions of dollars from foreign sources...just like the president during his campaign. We are through the looking glass now.
27
Wow, this journalist and the "experts" think we're stupid. Just b/c journalists focus only on the story of the moment, doesn't mean we voters will have the memory of fleas.
I'm a life-long Democrat; this will cost her my vote. This is huge. And no, I won't forget about this later in the election cycle.
Have you bothered to talk with actual voters?
I'm a life-long Democrat; this will cost her my vote. This is huge. And no, I won't forget about this later in the election cycle.
Have you bothered to talk with actual voters?
72
Democrats have proven for years that they could care less about the rule of law and the nations security.
I am sure they will dismiss the Clinton's latest attempt to subvert the law just as the NYT is promoting in this article by downplaying the issue and attempting to make any investigation into it look like a waste of time.
I am sure they will dismiss the Clinton's latest attempt to subvert the law just as the NYT is promoting in this article by downplaying the issue and attempting to make any investigation into it look like a waste of time.
18
It may not have a direct effect, and perhaps Sides says it won't affect persuadable voters. But it does contribute to the elitist image that she is somehow above the rules and law. Just like Romney's 47% comment reinforced his image as an uncaring rich person. Whether it will actually sway any voters isn't as clear -- as long as another imaging confirming incident doesn't occur before Nov 2016.
5
The Upshot misses the point that Hillary Clinton's use of a private email account provides extraordinary dramatic content for television ad campaigns shaped to target undecided voters in the weeks leading up to election day. The ads will amplify existing doubts of undecideds who occupy that neutral position because of pre-existing concerns. Any information artfully presented in the sense of advertising can tilt undecideds away from one candidate and toward another.
14
Sorry, I'm a die-hard Democrat, and I am very disappointed in HRC. This is the kind of thing I would expect from a Chris Christie or Dick Cheney type, but not from a woman who clearly made a very poor decision. And what about her staff? Were they all too intimidated to bring up the issue? That does not bode well. I hope that the DNC does the right thing, and asks her not to run. We can't have such compromised candidates in the next presidential election. Character matters, it really does.
35
Really? You wouldn't have expected this from Clinton? So, you are unfamiliar with her history? Because, lie, cheat, cut corners, flout rules and conventions - that is what the Clintons do. It is what they are.
19
Who cares if Hillary lies,cheats, and steals? Why, of course, no one. General Petraeus may be facing a year in jail. An ordinary government employee's life would be destroyed. But as you say, Hillary will skate again, as she and Bill have done so often before. One law for the rich, one for the poor.
37
I'm one of the voters who is unlikely to care.
7
Might I suggest keeping that to yourself in polite company, as it reflects as poorly on you as it does HRC.
24
It's remarkable that you don't seem embarrassed by that admission. You should be.
26
Your comment puts me in mind of H. L. Mencken's observation that democracy is based on the theory that the people know what they want and deserve to get it – good and hard.
8
Speaking as a life-long Democrat, long-time supporter of both Clintons, and someone who genuinely believes that anyone who votes Republican is mentally ill to some degree - this email revelation is the death blow. Hillary is unelectable. I will not vote for her.
61
I don't know. Installing a personal email server in your house, and using it to send official emails as Secretary of State, may very well seem rather sneaky to many voters. I don't think the GOP will let her forget about it.
30
It will be incredibly sad if the voters give Hilary a free pass on this issue. This is a government security issue and Palin was drug through the mud in '08 for this exact behavior while she was the Gov. of Alaska.
I typically vote left/liberal/democratic, so while this would be a negative way to present my own party, my personal beliefs is that every candidate should be treated with the same level of scrutiny. What Palin and Hilary have done is against the law and circumvents the reason why government business is supposed to happen through government communication channels: transparency, accountability, security.
I typically vote left/liberal/democratic, so while this would be a negative way to present my own party, my personal beliefs is that every candidate should be treated with the same level of scrutiny. What Palin and Hilary have done is against the law and circumvents the reason why government business is supposed to happen through government communication channels: transparency, accountability, security.
14
The American people have a funny way of deciding for themselves what they think is important. Perhaps the fact that she had a private email account will not make a difference in 2016, but what's in the emails is what counts. Frank Bruni nails it on the head in his column today; this is what we will always get from the Clinton "brand." The voters in 2016 will decide for themselves if Clinton Redux is worth the price. Mrs. Clinton, what is in those emails that you don't want us to see? Mr. Clinton, who has given all those billions to you foundation? Do the voters really want a presidency that lurches from one congressional investigation to another, trapped in a time warp from a bad reality show in the 1990s? The American people have a funny way of deciding if any of this matters. It's their right.
34
It really is a recurring nightmare. The two Arkansas grifters, trailing their miasma of sleaze and their loyal band of slimy characters the surround them like Pigpen's cloud of dirt.
12
Scott Walker's staff installed a secret WiFi network in his office when he was serving as Milwaukee County Executive and running his first campaign for Governor of Wisconsin. His Chief of Staff was convicted of doing work for the campaign while on the Milwaukee County payroll. It's hard to imagine that voters will reserve all of their rage to Mrs. Clinton for using a non-governmental e-mail system.
6
Right, because people are likely to equate the positions of Milwaukee County Executive and Secretary of State, who reports directly to the President of the United States (who is not entirely innocent here either).
18
I doubt there were any national security implications around Scott Walker's e mails.
16
I am inclined to agree. If she is not in prison for Benghazi there is no chance her voters are interested in right and wrong.
8
If I remember correctly, a fair amount of the Benghazi investigation as it applied to Mrs. Clinton concerned e-mail transcripts. As it turns out, it has been reported that she had access to and used 4 private e-mail accounts housed on private servers located in the Clinton home. So what is it about her Benghazi e-mails that we are to trust? The 'selected' ones her aides released, or what we have not and probably will not see?
20
It would be interesting to learn if she ever cross-contaminated Secret level ideas/ notes/ email snippets onto her private email... when I was in the service, that happened alot with the big colonels/ generals; who thought the laws didn't apply to them either...
To include taking that infamous Blackberry ( a non-secure electonic device ) into a meeting room which was listed as a "Classified" room/ "Classified" information meeting ( at any level of Classificiation!)... now that would land her in jail!!!
Or worse, did she make any official comments/ decisions/ sharing of official details to a 3rd party, which should be/ must be on an official email address; but use her private one?
And of course, with all the breaches of security/ hacking going on by the Chinese/ Russians/ etc... then how do we know her devices/ and or home server is secure/ and if it was ever hacked? Sorry to say, but she is wrong, and what she is doing/ did is illegal for a US Govt employee/ official!
To include taking that infamous Blackberry ( a non-secure electonic device ) into a meeting room which was listed as a "Classified" room/ "Classified" information meeting ( at any level of Classificiation!)... now that would land her in jail!!!
Or worse, did she make any official comments/ decisions/ sharing of official details to a 3rd party, which should be/ must be on an official email address; but use her private one?
And of course, with all the breaches of security/ hacking going on by the Chinese/ Russians/ etc... then how do we know her devices/ and or home server is secure/ and if it was ever hacked? Sorry to say, but she is wrong, and what she is doing/ did is illegal for a US Govt employee/ official!
21
A "lack of transparency" in anything is bad, and anyone who thinks this is a minor transgression easily dismissed by voters are seriously deluding themselves. The stink raised against Karl Rove and the Bush White House doing essentially the same thing 8 years ago (resulting in the loss of 22 million emails) is illustrative. As Ruth Marcus asked in the WaPost last night:
"What is the legitimate reason for conducting official business on a personal back channel?
This issue will not go away so easily, and it is all due to a stupid, rookie mistake by some who should have known better!
"What is the legitimate reason for conducting official business on a personal back channel?
This issue will not go away so easily, and it is all due to a stupid, rookie mistake by some who should have known better!
21
"This issue will not go away so easily, and it is all due to a stupid, rookie mistake by some who should have known better!"
Definitely not a rookie mistake, this is 100% calculated. Maybe even focus-grouped. I am starting to believe my crazy uncle that the Clintons really are at Bond Villain level of scheming. I would never vote for a GOPper for any national office but this is another pebble on the scale toward 3rd party voting for me.
Definitely not a rookie mistake, this is 100% calculated. Maybe even focus-grouped. I am starting to believe my crazy uncle that the Clintons really are at Bond Villain level of scheming. I would never vote for a GOPper for any national office but this is another pebble on the scale toward 3rd party voting for me.
18
Your uncle is not crazy.
3
A “stupid, rookie mistake”? More like a calculated, illegal act of hubris and obfuscation by someone who fully believes they can ignore the law.
Elizabeth Warren – never say never. You're the better woman for the job, by far.
Elizabeth Warren – never say never. You're the better woman for the job, by far.
12
Well, that's the problem, isn't it? The Dem's 2016 geezer bench. Without Hillary they're stuck with the lecherous and stupid Biden or the unelectably leftist Warren. Sure, Fauxcahontas might make out like a bandit on the Upper West Side, but she'd get shot down in flames in the rest of the country, with results similar to the Nixon/McGovern 520-17 Electoral College pasting in '72:
"I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don't know. They're outside my ken. But sometimes when I'm in a theater I can feel them."
Pauline Kael, quoted by Israel Shenker, 'Critics Here Focus on Films As Language Conference Opens,' The New York Times 28 Dec 1972