Morning Wakeup Call for Friday, March13: Is She or isn’t She; the other woman

Daily morning of news and tidbits from Political Woman:

Clinton Fatigue

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m with Charles Krauthammer and experiencing the “onset of Clinton fatigue.”  And it’s only March 2015.  The Wall Street Journal has two op-eds today, Peggy Noonan’s who doesn’t think Hillary will run, and the editorial board who counters with who else will, the Democrats are “Hostage to Hillary.”  Follow up with The New York Times article from earlier this week, “Hillary Clinton Is More Vulnerable in 2016 Than You Think” which is also AC/DC despite its title, and we come down to the fact, only Hillary (and Bill) know for sure.

But who will challenge her and the Clinton machine, which may not be up to 1990’s standards, but still formidable?  Yesterday, I wrote Martin O’Malley was “emerging.”  But emerging can also mean the first person willing to put his “toe in the water.”  Remember the movie scene in Jaws, where everyone is staying on the beach on the Fourth of July weekend, and the mayor finally prods his town councilman and family to go into the water.  You watch the looks of fear and trepidation on their faces, but they wade in, and pretty soon, about three-fourths of the beach-goers follow them.  O’Malley could be the proverbial red herring, the wanna-be candidate to test the waters to see the public’s reaction to a potential challenger.

I’m more in David Harsanyi’s camp.  In his article, “Why Won’t Anyone Challenge Hillary?”  he points out that if she chooses not to run, she creates a vaccum that needs to be filled.  There may be governors, former governors, businessmen, who might decide to run.  Who thought Meg Whitman would make a run for governor of California?  The point being, we don’t know.  The only names being bandied about now are those whom everyone is familiar with – Biden, Cuomo, O’Malley, Webb, and Warren.  None are appealing with the possibility of Warren, and she has her own set of problems as well.

Hillary’s email problem isn’t going away anytime soon.  If it starts raising other questions, as in did she or didn’t she sign OF-109, then the fallout gets nuclear, specifically if she did sign the form, and the State Dept. isn’t saying.  The State Dept.’s records manual states all departing officials, “Must ensure that all record material they possess is incorporated in the department’s official files and that all file searches for which they are tasked have been completed, such as those required to respond to FOIA, Freedom of Information Act, Congressional or litigation-related document requests.” And it goes onto say, if you don’t do it, all State Department employees including the secretary, “fines, imprisonment or both may be imposed for the willful and unlawful removal or destruction of records as stated in the U.S. criminal code.”

The more “emailgate” “homebrew” stay in the public consciousness, the more people who lived through the ’90’s with the Clintons, don’t want to relive them again now 2015.  For the millennials and others who didn’t experience Jennifer, Travelgate, Whitewater, and Monica, they’re discovering a candidate who doesn’t know how to put two email accounts on a phone, and sends 55,000 printed pages instead of a thumbdrive (although there’s a very crafty reason for that one.)  Clinton will be running on her gender and her name.  Will it be enough?  She has to decide to run first before we know for sure.

Holder’s Successor on the Brink

All eyes have been on Hillary this week, but we also have another woman swaying in the wind, US Attorney General nominee, Loretta Lynch.  At this point in time, if it comes to a vote, she can count on four Republican Senators, and the Senate Democrats, which could give her the bare minimum needed for confirmation.  In one of her round of interviews with Senators, it was reported (h/t Politico),

“Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said when he met with Lynch more than two months ago, he asked the federal prosecutor to lay out how the Justice Department’s agenda would differ than that of Holder, who’s led the Justice Department since 2009.

“She told me it would not be different,” Burr recalled of his conversation with the nominee. “I voted against Eric Holder and he’s lived up to exactly what I thought he would.”

So I have to ask myself, if she believes that all the President’s Executive Actions are legal, and that there’s nothing that Eric Holder did that she wouldn’t do, then why confirm her, especially if you’re a Republican Senator.  This idea that the President is entitled to a Cabinet of his choice doesn’t hold water.  That’s what gave us Eric “Marc Rich pardon” Holder, who spent tens of millions of dollars investigating Darren Wilson for criminal prosecution, but wouldn’t prosecute the new Black Panthers for voter intimidation despite videotapes to the contrary, and has stone-walled on Fast and Furious since 2011.  And Ms. Lynch, by her own admission, says her Justice Department would not be different.  Who’s drinking the kool-aid here?

Add comment