We've seen this slime-ball tactic before. Plenty of times.
First, the Republicans drum up silly charges against the Clintons. The charges are either unproven or trivial. Nevertheless, the Clintons are forced to respond. When that response comes, the major media do not run stories headlined "Those GOP smear-masters are at it again." Instead, the writers direct all of their cynicism and sneers toward Bill and Hillary: "Ah, those scandal-prone Clintons are playing defense -- AGAIN. How evasive. How slick. How disingenuous."
Such pieces create an aura of scandal even when there's no actual scandal.
Nobody in this country truly cares
about the email thing. Even the conservatives don't care, although they do see the political advantage in pretending to care. Facts don't matter when the intent is to create a sense of unease, of foreboding. And the mainstream media always does its part to create a spooky atmosphere, churning up the fog machines and playing dark organ music in an attempt to convince us that the Clintons are scarier than Jack the Ripper and Ted Bundy combined.
Here's an example
How essentially combative was Clinton? The main piece of news to emerge from the session was her confusingly worded disclosure that she has already deleted the emails that she believes are no one’s business but her own.
Go to hell is not typically a sentiment expressed by politicians on the brink of a presidential campaign. But in Hillary Clinton’s case, it reflects a sincerely held belief that has been nearly a quarter-century in the making.
Here's a slimier example
from the Daily Beast...
“There has been a pattern of good and bad behavior going back to the mid-1980s,” said National Journal editorial director Ron Fournier, who got to know the Clintons as a reporter in the state capital of Little Rock.
“It’s not enough to give a couple of brief comments and talk her way out of this,” Fournier said. “She can’t spin her way out of this. She can’t explain her way out of this.”
Thus the Clinton-press clash shows no signs of abating.
Also from the Daily Beast: "Hillary Gives Us the Full Clinton."
And it is perhaps only a Clinton, a family that made answering questions by not answering questions into an art form, a family whose patriarch famously parsed the word “is,” that could have pulled off a press conference quite like the one Hillary Clinton did Tuesday.
Actually, that "is" thing made sense in context. It did not anger the public (despite what the GOP rewriters of history will tell you): Bill Clinton's approval ratings went up
Give no ground. Drop personal details about the emails you want to keep under wraps—your daughter’s marriage, your mother’s funeral, your yoga routine.
Insinuate that you are being targeted.
“You would have to ask that question to every single federal employee,” Clinton said in response to a question about the American people could be expected to trust her in determining which emails were private and which were personal.
Why Hillary Clinton is not just like any other bureaucrat is, of course laughable on its face...
Do you think this writer was similarly outraged when Cheney had that infamous secret energy meeting?
Here's the WP
But Tuesday ended up feeling more like a throwback to the darker side of 1990s politics, when — with just two hours to spare before her U.N. address — Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill announced that Clinton would hold a “brief press conference” after her speech.
Since that violation became public, the airwaves have been filled by a familiar cast of characters who have stirred uncomfortable memories, even as they have leapt to her defense.
On Fox News Sunday, former Clinton White House lawyer Lanny Davis attempted a clumsy, legalistic rationale on her behalf, only to be asked by moderator Chris Wallace, “Do you ever get tired of cleaning up after the Clintons?”She
On CNN, designated wise man David Gergen — who had been brought into the Clinton White House in 1993 to help its image — ruminated that Hillary Clinton had been “badly damaged” because she was reminding voters of “some of the worst aspects of the 1990s.”
was reminding voters? That's like blaming Sharon Tate for the Manson murders.
Another WP opinion piece:
"The Insiders: Perfunctory and uncomfortable, Hillary Clinton did not end the story"
For those who are now expected to defend her, they can say she has answered the questions and her opponents are just hounding her. But in a move that everyone knows will keep the controversy alive, she directly challenged her critics, saying that her server will remain private. That is an open invitation for subpoenas and hackers to come and get it.
And then there's the ever-reliable HuffPo
Tuesday afternoon, the first act of "Hillary Clinton Email Dämmerung" concluded, with the former secretary of state providing an eager mass of reporters with a brief press conference, in which she "Addressed The Controversy For The First Time" and, as you might expect, "Raised More Questions Than She Answered."
And then there's the NYT
"Convenience.” “Convenience.” “Convenience.” “Convenience.”
Hillary Clinton’s reliance on that word during her news conference at the United Nations on Tuesday minimized the exemption from standard procedure that she allowed herself when she decided — all on her own — to use only a private email address for both personal and government business.
She told reporters that she hadn’t wanted to be weighed down by a second electronic device. It wasn’t secrecy that motivated her. It was purse space and pinkie strain.
And behind her forced smile, which was practically cemented in place, she seemed put out by all the skepticism and all the questions. She shouldn’t be. This latest Clinton controversy is not the work or fault of Republican enemies or a ruthless, unappeasable press corps. It’s her doing.
Nope. It's Republican enemies and a ruthless (or purchased) press corps. They ran exactly the same sort of bullshit stories during the Whitewater investigation. They should have been ashamed of themselves then, and they should be ashamed now.