At least Politico does:
"New trove of Clinton Benghazi emails proves thin."
"State Department says set of about 30 Benghazi-related messages discovered by FBI contains only one that's all-new."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-clinton-benghazi-emails-227813#ixzz4JZlSEyRb
Still, this is the media. They always have to try to achieve 'balance.'
"A set of about 30 Benghazi-related messages found by the FBI during their investigation into Hillary Clinton's private email system turns out to contain little fodder for critics or supporters of the Democratic presidential nominee."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-clinton-benghazi-emails-227813#ixzz4JZleD000
Nothing for critics or supporters? I'd think that if there is nothing for critics and even the media admits there's nothing for critics then by definition it is in fact 'fodder for supporters of Hillary Clinton.' Surely, when the subject is emails and the Democratic party no news is by definition good news?
There is a rule where only the emails Democrats-wether Hillary, Debbie-Wasserman Schultz, anyone at the DNC or DSCC-are scandalous in the mind of the media.
So if even the media admits there's nothing here, that's actually plenty of 'fodder for supporters.'
Sometimes you almost have to admire how hard the Beltway works at this phony balance thing. Remember: both of them are calling each other racists, isn't that awful? What happened to our public discourse the Beltway whined, why would they both call each other racists? Too bad we have no way of figuring out who's telling the truth.
Anyway, regarding Benghazi, nothing has been more investigated with less being found. There is no there, there.
"The disclosure of a new set Benghazi-related emails led GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump's campaign to attack Clinton over the deletion of roughly 32,000 emails from her private account while a House probe into the attack was active."
"However, in a court filing early Wednesday morning, government lawyers said a closer review of the records the FBI located revealed only one of the messages was entirely absent from those produced by previous State Department searches: a flattering note sent by a veteran U.S. diplomat following her testimony on Benghazi before a Senate panel in January 2013."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-clinton-benghazi-emails-227813#ixzz4JZopFXIg
You see why I'm having a hard time seeing why this isn't fodder for Hillary Clinton supporters?
"It's unclear why the message from Shannon, now Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, for wasn't produced in previous searches or among the roughly 30,000 emails Clinton's lawyers deemed work-related and turned over to State early two years ago."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-clinton-benghazi-emails-227813#ixzz4JZpFX4AF
"New trove of Clinton Benghazi emails proves thin."
"State Department says set of about 30 Benghazi-related messages discovered by FBI contains only one that's all-new."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-clinton-benghazi-emails-227813#ixzz4JZlSEyRb
Still, this is the media. They always have to try to achieve 'balance.'
"A set of about 30 Benghazi-related messages found by the FBI during their investigation into Hillary Clinton's private email system turns out to contain little fodder for critics or supporters of the Democratic presidential nominee."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-clinton-benghazi-emails-227813#ixzz4JZleD000
Nothing for critics or supporters? I'd think that if there is nothing for critics and even the media admits there's nothing for critics then by definition it is in fact 'fodder for supporters of Hillary Clinton.' Surely, when the subject is emails and the Democratic party no news is by definition good news?
There is a rule where only the emails Democrats-wether Hillary, Debbie-Wasserman Schultz, anyone at the DNC or DSCC-are scandalous in the mind of the media.
So if even the media admits there's nothing here, that's actually plenty of 'fodder for supporters.'
Sometimes you almost have to admire how hard the Beltway works at this phony balance thing. Remember: both of them are calling each other racists, isn't that awful? What happened to our public discourse the Beltway whined, why would they both call each other racists? Too bad we have no way of figuring out who's telling the truth.
Anyway, regarding Benghazi, nothing has been more investigated with less being found. There is no there, there.
"The disclosure of a new set Benghazi-related emails led GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump's campaign to attack Clinton over the deletion of roughly 32,000 emails from her private account while a House probe into the attack was active."
"However, in a court filing early Wednesday morning, government lawyers said a closer review of the records the FBI located revealed only one of the messages was entirely absent from those produced by previous State Department searches: a flattering note sent by a veteran U.S. diplomat following her testimony on Benghazi before a Senate panel in January 2013."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-clinton-benghazi-emails-227813#ixzz4JZopFXIg
You see why I'm having a hard time seeing why this isn't fodder for Hillary Clinton supporters?
"It's unclear why the message from Shannon, now Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, for wasn't produced in previous searches or among the roughly 30,000 emails Clinton's lawyers deemed work-related and turned over to State early two years ago."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-clinton-benghazi-emails-227813#ixzz4JZpFX4AF
What does it matter? Clearly she wasn't hiding this.
"I watched with great admiration as she dealt with a tough and personally painful issue in a fair, candid and determined manner," then-U.S. Ambassador to Brazil Thomas Shannon wrote in a message sent to State Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills official account and forwarded on by Mills to Clinton's personal one. "I was especially impressed by her ability to turn aside the obvious efforts to politicize the events in Benghazi, reminding Americans of the tremendous sacrifice made by Chris Stevens and his colleagues but also insisting that our ability to play a positive role in the world and protect U.S. interests requires a willingness to take risks."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-clinton-benghazi-emails-227813#ixzz4JZpPWVfd
Talk about having something to hide.
"Two other emails found by the FBI were "near duplicates" of previously produced messages, State's lawyers said. The FBI provided files simply showed that Clinton had asked an assistant to print out the emails. One contained an end-of-year message she sent to staffers across the department in 2012. Another was a note from a former advance staffer for Clinton, Rick Jasculca, praising her for her response to the Benghazi attack."
"It took some kind of special courage to step to the plate and take responsibility for what happened in Benghazi," Jasculca wrote on October 16, 2012, following a CNN interview where Clinton said she accepted responsibility for the security failures.
"The conservative watchdog group suing for the Benghazi-related records, Judicial Watch, said it did not accept State's characterization of the released records as "near duplicates" and wants to see all 30 messages in the form turned over by the FBI. Some of the messages contain what State called "internal technical metadata" that the FBI captured or added as it retrieved the messages."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-clinton-benghazi-emails-227813#ixzz4JZpezm6X
Amazing after all these years of crying wolf, Judicial Watch is still a group the media takes seriously. Since we're all so concerned with transparency, why are Judicial Watch themselves never handled with any scrutiny?
In other news, Paul Waldman on how Hillary can repair her relationship with the press.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/09/06/how-clinton-can-repair-her-broken-relationship-with-the-press/?utm_term=.3b9e23828a43
She's off to a good start by taking questions on the plan two days in a row.
Dan Merica, a Hillary reporter, tweeted this out:
"Hillary Clinton and her press corps are getting used to being at 30,000 feet together"
"I watched with great admiration as she dealt with a tough and personally painful issue in a fair, candid and determined manner," then-U.S. Ambassador to Brazil Thomas Shannon wrote in a message sent to State Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills official account and forwarded on by Mills to Clinton's personal one. "I was especially impressed by her ability to turn aside the obvious efforts to politicize the events in Benghazi, reminding Americans of the tremendous sacrifice made by Chris Stevens and his colleagues but also insisting that our ability to play a positive role in the world and protect U.S. interests requires a willingness to take risks."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-clinton-benghazi-emails-227813#ixzz4JZpPWVfd
Talk about having something to hide.
"Two other emails found by the FBI were "near duplicates" of previously produced messages, State's lawyers said. The FBI provided files simply showed that Clinton had asked an assistant to print out the emails. One contained an end-of-year message she sent to staffers across the department in 2012. Another was a note from a former advance staffer for Clinton, Rick Jasculca, praising her for her response to the Benghazi attack."
"It took some kind of special courage to step to the plate and take responsibility for what happened in Benghazi," Jasculca wrote on October 16, 2012, following a CNN interview where Clinton said she accepted responsibility for the security failures.
"The conservative watchdog group suing for the Benghazi-related records, Judicial Watch, said it did not accept State's characterization of the released records as "near duplicates" and wants to see all 30 messages in the form turned over by the FBI. Some of the messages contain what State called "internal technical metadata" that the FBI captured or added as it retrieved the messages."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-clinton-benghazi-emails-227813#ixzz4JZpezm6X
Amazing after all these years of crying wolf, Judicial Watch is still a group the media takes seriously. Since we're all so concerned with transparency, why are Judicial Watch themselves never handled with any scrutiny?
In other news, Paul Waldman on how Hillary can repair her relationship with the press.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/09/06/how-clinton-can-repair-her-broken-relationship-with-the-press/?utm_term=.3b9e23828a43
She's off to a good start by taking questions on the plan two days in a row.
Dan Merica, a Hillary reporter, tweeted this out:
"Hillary Clinton and her press corps are getting used to being at 30,000 feet together"
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/06/politics/hillary-clinton-election-2016-press/index.html
https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN
https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN
No comments:
Post a Comment