So, Bob Woodward finds Hillary’s email predicament reminiscent of Watergate.
“So, you've got a massive amount of data in a way, reminds me of the Nixon tapes: Thousands of hours of secretly recorded conversations that Nixon thought were exclusively his.”
Oh sure: missing tapes, missing emails; I see his point.
Watergate, you may recall, began with a break-in at the DNC to steal information that might be useful for embarrassing their candidates. The real scandal involved a cover-up orchestrated by all the President’s men - unfortunately captured on tape. Nixon declared the tapes to be his personal property and refused to turn them over. Until he was forced to; and by then 18 minutes of the tape had mysteriously disappeared. By comparison, Hillary turned over 30,000 emails that she determined to be work-related and simply deleted the 30,000 she deemed to be “personal” and nobody else’s beeswax. And furthermore, she told us “there is no classified material” contained in any of those emails sent and received on her unsecured server:
(h/t: Gateway Pundit)
As with any Clinton statement however, it undoubtedly depends on the what the meaning of “is” is. Let the record reflect that with only 20% of the 30,000 emails that she DID turn over heviewed, State has currently unearthed 305 that contain classified information, some Top Secret.
Nevertheless, there’s a big difference between Watergate and Hillary’s non-scandal. Watergate was about the illegal collection of embarrassing data from the opposing party; today that’s called “opposition research” and conducted legally by high priced consultants. Hillarygate is about the illegal sharing of top secret documents divulging State secrets, all because Hilz “didn’t want to carry 2 phones.”
So my question: if Hillary’s emails sound an alarm at least as urgent as that of the Watergate tapes, where are OUR Woodwards and Bernsteins?
Still in their pajamas I guess.
Cross-Posted on Patriot Action Network