Posted on 08/23/2015 9:51:00 AM PDT by John Semmens
The Hillary Clinton for President campaign is seeking to deflect criticism of the candidate's handling of her email account while Secretary of State by casting her as "a passive and unwitting naif" rather than a deliberate liar and lawbreaker.
"As anyone who has had to deal with government regulations knows, the rules are opaque and difficult to understand," said Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton's campaign. "Who hasn't had nightmares trying to cope with IRS forms? What business hasn't run afoul of incoherent EPA guidelines? It shouldn't take much imagination for voters to comprehend the problems that confronted Hillary when she was appointed Secretary of State. How was she expected to know what was and wasn't classified? We're confident that the vast majority of voters will see her mishandling of secret material as an innocent mistake."
Fallon further contended that "using a private server may have actually improved security. Can there be any doubt that foreign spies are constantly attempting to break into government communications? Just last week, current Secretary of State John Kerry conceded that China and Russia are probably reading the emails he sends and receives on his government provided server. By breaking the rules and conducting her communications through a server housed in a bathroom closet in Colorado, Secretary Clinton may have done a better job of keeping her emails confidential than her successor has by following the rules."
In support of Mrs. Clinton's innocence, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) suggested that "the confidential material found in Secretary Clinton's emails may have been planted there by her political enemies. To-date, no one has conclusively proved that she was even aware of these emails. I suggest that we quiz her on the content to find out if she has even read them. If she doesn't know what's in these emails I think that would be pretty persuasive evidence that she neither wrote nor read any of them."
In contrast, Representative John Yarmuth (D-Ken) was unimpressed by the effort to portray Clinton as an ignorant victim of complicated and confusing regulations, saying "if she was too naive to cope with State Department rules maybe she is too naive to be president. I mean, I have sympathy for the struggles of a person out of her depth, but can we really afford to put an innocent dupe in charge of our government?"
if you missed any of this week's other semi-news/semi-satire posts you can find them at...
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,178281.0.html
Actually this sounds like the former Dem congresswoman who is working for HRC said on Fox Sunday news this morning.
Thanks for the ping. This is only semi-satire, close to the truth of what the RATs will say to protect her thighness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.