Well, she\u2019s finally done it. Former SECSTATE Hillary Rodham Clinton has come clean!<\/p>\n
She recently provided another 2,000 emails from her private email system to the House committee investigating Benghazi. So she must have released everything!<\/p>\n
Yes, there\u2019s a two-month gap in the emails released by Ms. Clinton to that House Committee<\/a><\/em>. That\u2019s because there simply weren\u2019t any relevant emails from that private account from the months of May and June, 2012, in the material released. Per the State Department, \u201conly those emails related to the security of the consulate or to the U.S. diplomatic presence in Libya were made public\u201d.<\/p>\n It\u2019s irrelevant that May and June 2012 were a time of escalating security issues in Libya. What does it matter now that on 22 May 2012, the IRC office in Benghazi was struck by RPGs? Or that on 6 June 2012, an IED blew a 12 foot hole in the US Consulate\u2019s wall?\u00a0 Those incidents weren\u2019t something about which Clinton corresponded with anyone<\/em> from here \u201cprivate\u201d account.\u00a0 In fact, that must mean there simply was nothing of note<\/em> \u201crelated to the security of the US consulate or to the U.S. diplomatic presence in Libya\u201d about which she corresponded with anyone<\/em> from her private account during\u00a0 those two months<\/em> – unlike the months immediately preceding and afterwards. Isn\u2019t that obvious?<\/p>\n The fact that the pre-release review of those email messages recently released appears to have been done by Clinton\u2019s lawyers and not by the State Department or Congress is a mere coincidence.\u00a0 It’s understandable that they’d conduct such a review, since emails from her private account for that time are particularly sensitive; this was also the time that Clinton’s close aide Huma Abedin was obtaining her \u201cspecial exemption\u201d to work for Clinton as both a government employee and an employee of the Clinton foundation.\u00a0 We all know that was completely legit and aboveboard.\u00a0 Besides – Clinton\u2019s lawyers would never<\/em> put protecting their client\u2019s<\/em> interests ahead of fully disclosing the truth!<\/p>\n No, chicanery, political CYA, or obstruction couldn\u2019t possibly have been the reason for the lack of independent review, or for the gap covering May and June.\u00a0 No Clinton<\/span> would ever withhold information, fail to testify fully, or shade the truth about a material issue of fact.\u00a0 Her husband\u2019s conduct while POTUS proves that.\u00a0 So does her own past conduct while First Lady and afterwards \u2013 as well as while a member of the House Judiciary Committee investigating the Watergate Scandal<\/a><\/em>.<\/p>\n No, nothing to see here at all; we’re done here. Next topic!<\/p>\n In fact, how about everybody just leave the lady alone.\u00a0 I mean, really \u2013 she barely has time to get a $600 hairstyle in NYC these days<\/a><\/em> due to all of these impertinent questions!\u00a0\u00a0 And because of the crush, her doing so requires so much security that it means a rather large building has to be put on virtual lockdown!\u00a0 But like her husband proved at the LA International Airport years ago:\u00a0 getting a reasonably-priced haircut of is necessary from time to time, so she simply has<\/em> to do it!<\/p>\n <\/p>\n (Yeah, the above is sarcasm.\u00a0 Anyone who’d swallow all of that at face value has my sympathy.)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"