Transparency for Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party is merely a matter of convenience, as revealed by their reactions to the FBI’s recent announcement to reopen their investigation into Clinton’s private email server.
The Democratic Coalition Against Trump, a pro-Clinton Super PAC, filed a complaint with the Department of Justice, accusing FBI Director James Comey of meddling in the election. The complaint is frivolous, as Comey was appointed by Barack Obama. Further, Clinton partisans defended Comey for doing his job when Republicans made similar criticisms against him after the FBI initially decided not to recommend an indictment for Clinton.
The Clinton spin machine was geared in full throttle shortly after the FBI released their announcement. There were claims the investigation wasn’t reopening, that the emails “might” just be duplicates, and demands that Comey provide broader context into his announcement. But calls for transparency have been lacking in Clinton partisans’ allegations that the Russian government is responsible for the hacks that led to the WikiLeaks releases, as well as that some of the emails may be fabricated.
Not a single email released has been proven to be false, yet Clinton backers have claimed as such, while also arguing that the emails are benign anyway. This is far from true. The WikiLeaks emails revealed the Democratic National Committee (DNC) rigged the primary for Clinton, and that every policy stance, statement, tweet and speech made by her is inauthentic and insincere. Everything the Clinton campaign does revolves around political expediency, rather than any set of basic principles, ethics, or morals.
In response to repeated allegations of the Russian government meddling in the election, the Department of Homeland Security issued a vague statement which said the patterns of the hackers who released emails on WikiLeaks, DC Leaks and the WordPress site run by Guccifer 2.0 “are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts.” These are the same officials who claimed in 2014 that North Korea was behind the Sony hacks, when recent evidence reveals the hacks were most likely an inside job.
This isn’t to say the Russian government is not behind the hacks, but due to the effects this Neo-McCarthyist rhetoric toward Russia is having on the United States’ foreign policy and national security, the Democratic Party owes it to the American public to provide substantial evidence to corroborate their serious allegations.
In an August interview, I spoke with Bill Clinton’s former Secretary of Defense William Perry with regards to the long-term implications this anti-Russian rhetoric will have on U.S. relations. “Regardless of the differences we have with Russia and regardless of the concerns we have with Russia, we have to understand there is the possibility of a truly catastrophic event if this rhetoric were to lead, somehow, to a military conflict which could escalate into a nuclear conflict,” he said. “It is imperative we find a way to tone down the rhetoric, in particular find a way of engaging Russia in meaningful dialogue. That does not mean we have to approve all their actions. What it means is while we have many areas of disagreement, there are some areas where we have mutual interests and have to work together. I don’t think the rhetoric in the presidential campaign is going to be useful in dealing with these problems.”
As The Washington Post editorial board claimed when Republicans criticized Comey’s decision not to recommend an indictment for Clinton, the attacks against Comey are damaging the rule of law. It would have been indisputably politically influenced to delay reviewing new evidence until after the election.