Just wondering here: If it's "treason" to inform a terrorist regime that they can't make a treaty with a U.S. president who ignores his obligation to submit the treaty for ratification, what is it when the Secretary of State and the president exchange e-mails on a non-secure, private e-mail server that thus exposes the president's e-mail address (and whatever the two of them discussed) to hacker?
And what is it when the president lies and said it never happened, and that he knew nothing about it? Because that's what he did, as the White House now admits:
That is some spin from Josh Earnest. OK, fine, Obama knew Hillary's e-mail address. And OK, fine, they exchanged e-mails. But he didn't know any of the details, and he never wondered (or asked anyone) why she never used a state.gov e-mail address as policy would proscribe.
And it never occurred to him that this server hosting Hillary's e-mail account might not be as secure as the federal government's servers, thus exposing his conversations with his top diplomat to hackers and rogue nations?
So if we're to believe this spin, then what, exactly, did Obama supposedly learn about from news reports? That there was a hulabaloo about it?
Come on. What I'll possibly buy is this: Obama is neither curous enough nor smart enough nor sufficiently interested in the details to wonder and/or ask why Hillary's e-mail address was clintonemail.com instead of state.gov. He probably knew it was unusual, and he might have even known it was against policy, but he didn't run for president to handle problems like that. He has people, man, you know what I mean? Don't bother him with the details.
Obama was trying to leave the impression on Sunday that he only learned through news reports that Hillary didn't use a government e-mail address. That was a lie - a pretty implausible one, but one he hoped he wouldn't get challenged on. Once the challenges came, and Earnest couldn't possibly stick to that story, they tried to spin it to mean something else. But it was just a plain old lie.
For all the hyperventilating about Republican "treason" concerning this letter to Iran, Obama and Hillary may have done real damage to national security by having e-mail discussions over a non-secure server. For example, what if they discussed their disinclination to do anything if Russia invaded Crimea? What if Putin read that conversation with the assistance of hackers working on his behalf?
You don't think that could have happened? It absolutely could have. And Hillary's culpable for being such a secretive control freak that she insisted on hosting her own server, probably to hide her conversations with foreign governments about contributions to the Clinton Global Initiative and other things that might be subject to FOIA requests. And Obama's culpable not only for letting her do it, but for actually e-mailing her on that server - exposing at least his personal e-mail address, and God only knows what else.
By the way, Hillary is apparently having a "brief presser" at 2:20 p.m. We'll see how that goes.
