Is the Hillary Email Scandal a Ruse?

Details: Created: Thursday, 20 August 2015 12:48; Published: Thursday, 20 August 2015 12:48; Written by Ax D. WhiteMan

It's occurred to me that Hillary's current email controversy is miles away from where it started.

When the "clintonemail.com" was revealed, the big concerns were Benghazi, and donations to the Clinton Foundation which were numerous and well documented in Peter Schweizer's Clinton Cash.

Now the controversy is focused on her discussing "classified information" on email - as Secretary of State. Sorry, but despite the current feeding frenzy, I don't believe that is going to be her undoing. Secretary's of State are supposed to deal in classified info. Sure, her email system was poorly constructed and probably violated numerous security standards...

But that's never been a secret. She sent and received 10's of thousands of emails over 4 years on that account. It's difficult to claim that wouldn't constitute some level of approval - and it's hard to see where that won't eventually become her defense.

We seem to have accepted that she's turned over most of her email and server, we're ignoring that there is no reference to donations and almost none to Benghazi, and running down this rabbit hole about classified information.

The truth is Hillary has turned over NO emails. She has turned over printed paper containing what she claims are unedited text of all her official email. Even if she didn't edit, alter, or delete anything from the email prior to printing; by it's very nature it lacks all of the header information, any active links, or attachments. Yet, we've already accepted her paper dump as "her email" - even though we know that she purposefully destroyed all digital evidence that could verify the authenticity of her email.

If there were any serious effort to "investigate" Clinton, the senders and recipients of the reported emails would have their email records subpoena'd and compared with the paper versions for edit's. ANY modification could be considered brazen obstruction. It also could lead to thousands of additional emails that were not submitted. But really, how is destroying a hard drive of information under investigation not already brazen obstruction?

But nobody is looking past the submitted documents - or even suggesting they might not be complete or unedited.

It just sounds to me like this is another successful innoculation by the Clintons, and when someone questions; foreign donations, Benghazi, or email; she'll invoke the famed "asked and answered, old news" defense for which the Clinton's are famous.

just sayin...