The Daily 202: Clinton’s credibility gap widens after FBI rebuke- The Tale of Two Losers

By James Hohmann July 6 at 9:30 AM

Hillary Clinton and President Obama get barbecue at Midwood Smokehouse after their rally in Charlotte yesterday. (Photo by Melina Mara/The Washington Post)

THE BIG IDEA: Want to know why two-thirds of Americans do not consider Hillary Clinton trustworthy? Rewatch pretty much any public comment she’s made about her email use over the past 16 months and then watch James Comey’s speech yesterday.

The FBI director shredded so many of the talking points that the former secretary of state and her top aides have used over and over again throughout this scandal, including that she never emailed classified material; that information in the emails was classified retroactively; that none of the emails were marked as containing classified information; that there were definitively no security breaches; that she turned over all work-related emails to the State Department; that the set-up was driven by convenience; and that the government was merely conducting “a security review.”

Rosalind Helderman, who has been covering this saga closely, writes that Comey “systematically dismantled” Clinton’s defenses. She juxtaposes Clinton quotes since last March against Comey quotes from yesterday.

— While Clinton dodged a legal bullet that could have been catastrophic to her candidacy, yesterday was neither vindication nor exoneration, and it certainly will not put the matter to rest. Instead, Comey’s declaration that she was “extremely careless” in handling classified material and should have known better will dog her through November. Though the FBI director said “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring a criminal case against Clinton, his nearly 15-minute speech was tantamount to a political indictment.
— The Comey sound bite that may ultimately prove more damaging to Clinton than “extremely careless”: “To be clear, this is not to suggest that, in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences,” he said after announcing that the FBI is not recommending criminal charges. “To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.” This lets Republicans make the case to the American people that they are the ones who should dole out the punishment.

— Most Americans – including elites in both parties – believe both Bill and Hillary Clinton think a different set of rules and standards apply to them than everyone else. This dates to the 1990s.

— Bigger picture: Yesterday was just the latest reminder that Clinton would probably be trailing in the polls if Republicans had nominated a stronger candidate. Donald Trump, rather than emphasize the damning revelations from Comey’s speech, instead chose to suggest that Clinton tried to “bribe” Attorney General Loretta Lynch and that the system is “rigged.”

— This morning’s clips might be the worst Clinton has faced since launching her campaign. Here are 10 reflective examples:

Time Magazine: “FBI says Clinton Claim on Reading Emails Was False.”

McClatchy: “Clinton’s handling of email went beyond carelessness, experts say.”

Wall Street Journal A1: “For Clinton, Political Fight Over Emails Is Far From Over; FBI report raises doubts about her candor, undermines her argument that she has the sober judgment she says Trump lacks.”

New York Times A1: “F.B.I. Critique of Hillary Clinton Is a Ready-Made Attack Ad.” (Sidebar on A13: “F.B.I. Findings Damage Many of Hillary Clinton’s Claims.”)

Associated Press: “Clinton’s claims about her emails collapsed under the FBI investigation.”

Boston Globe A1: “Comey’s scathing assessment of her e-mail practices reinforced existing questions about her trustworthiness and a perception that she plays by her own set of rules. His rebuke will be used to raise doubts about Clinton’s claims that her competency and judgement make her the most qualified candidate to be president of the United States.”

Bloomberg: “Clinton Needs a Dr. No.” From Al Hunt: “The FBI was right to recommend that no criminal charges be filed.… But she still needs a cure for the reckless arrogance she displayed, an attitude that could produce more disasters if she reaches the White House. To protect herself as president, and to protect her presidency, Clinton needs a Dr. No. That’s somebody more powerful than the smart loyalists she surrounds herself with, somebody with the stature to say: ‘Ma’am, you cannot do that.’”

The Daily Beast: “FBI Director … Crushed Hillary Clinton’s Email Excuses.”

The Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald: “Washington Has Been Obsessed With Punishing Secrecy Violations – Until Hillary Clinton.”

Some additional highlights from The Post’s team coverage—

“Even without charges, FBI rebuke leaves a heavy political cloud over Clinton.” (Philip Rucker, Abby Phillip and Anne Gearan)

Glenn Kessler revised an Aug. 2015 fact check to give Clinton a “Four Pinocchio” rating, instead of Two Pinocchios, based on new information about whether she sent or received classified information.

“Clinton’s email problems might be even worse than we thought.” (Chris Cillizza)

“FBI: No evidence Clinton’s email was hacked by foreign powers, but it could have been.” (Karen DeYoung)

“Six things we learned from the FBI investigation.” (Mark Berman)

“It’s time for Hillary Clinton to face the music – and the media.” (Margaret Sullivan)

The Trump campaign posted a one-minute video on Facebook juxtaposing Clinton and Comey.  The RNC released its own web video on YouTube:

— The new push on the right: Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) called for a fresh, independent investigation of Clinton’s use of email, saying in a statement that the defunct independent counsel statute should be revived to “make an independent and impartial decision” about whether she should be charged. (David Weigel)

— A reminder from the left, via Salon: “The George W. Bush email scandal the media has conveniently forgotten; Back in 2007, the White House ‘lost’ more than five million private emails.”

That is why we have to elect a non-politician called Trump for the highest office because between the Obama’s, Bush’s and the Clinton’s – corruption has grown to a level that is not sustainable and maintain a democracy.

kommonsentsjane