by Mike Smith Opinions are certainly mixed. Some writers and political observers have concluded that FBI Director James Comey handed Hillary Clinton a political gift when he announced last Tuesday he would not recommend pursuing criminal charges against the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. Others disagree because Comey described Clinton’s handling of sensitive electronic material as “extremely careless,” calling into question both her ever-shifting description of events and her management ability. It rekindles discussions about her truthfulness and judgment.
If you are an ardent supporter of Mrs. Clinton, nothing said by the FBI will change your mind — you’re still with her. You’ll focus on the fact that the FBI did not recommend criminal charges and then criticize any contrary views as politically motivated. Conversely, if you don’t support Clinton, you haven’t changed your mind either: Your focus is on the director’s incriminating description of her actions. You might also argue that the FBI used the wrong standard — the standard of intent — in making its decision not to prosecute, rather than the standard of negligence.
The debate between these two factions will undoubtedly continue. To opponents “extremely careless” behavior is gross negligence, and a prosecutable offense. To supporters it was an honest mistake that other cabinet officials have made and for which Clinton is being unfairly prosecuted.
But the debate between these two factions isn’t what Clinton needs to be most concerned about. After all, they are already locked into their respective positions. Rather, her biggest concern is the large number of Americans — mostly centrist voters who will decide this presidential election — who haven’t yet made up their minds whether to support her presidential bid. And Hillary Clinton has a major political problem — many Americans don’t trust her. Even she has acknowledged this is an issue. This email controversy — and what is now the established fact that she was “extremely careless” with sensitive information — only deepens these concerns.
In an atmosphere where many Americans believe that the political and economic systems are rigged to favor the rich and the well-connected at the expense of everyday working families, Clinton’s activities only serve to prove the point. Any other federal employee, particularly military and law enforcement personnel, would have been fired for setting up a system where government emails, especially classified emails, go to a private server at their home instead of the designated government server.
This cavalier disregard for the rules and her husband’s meeting with the U.S. attorney general at an Arizona airport when Clinton was still under federal investigation only strengthens the widespread perception that Clinton and her husband operate in a world where they are exempt from the rules that are applied to the rest of us. And they’ve become incredibly adept at explaining why they are above the rules and laws the rest of us honor and labor under.
Sen. Bernie Sanders famously said in a debate with Hillary Clinton that the American people “are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails.” And Clinton replied, “Me, too!” But Sanders was wrong: They weren’t, and they aren’t. Because the actions that surround these emails symbolize the objections to elitism that have propelled Bernie Sanders to the forefront of American politics.
Democrats should be nervous about this email controversy, even if the threat of criminal prosecution has dissipated. Its impact on Clinton’s “trust factor” will linger.
In the end, only Hillary Clinton can take the necessary steps to regain the trust of Americans, but it’s not going to be easy. So far, Clinton’s strategy to win the presidency seems to be this: Elect me because the other guy is so horrible. This message doesn’t concentrate on building trust. Instead, its sole purpose is to portray Clinton in a light that is only slightly better than Donald Trump, the opponent she is trying to diminish.
The message also lacks the presidential inspiration the American public is seeking. People want to feel good about casting their vote for a candidate and not be forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. What Hillary Clinton needs to prove in the coming months is that she is not the protector of the status quo where the political and business elites protect their own interests at the expense of others. But that’s going to be a tall order for someone like Clinton, who has operated in this space of elitism for decades.
Mike Smith was the secretary of administration and secretary of human services under former Gov. Jim Douglas. He is the host of the radio program, “Open Mike with Mike Smith,” on WDEV 550 AM and 96.1, 96.5 and 101.9 FM. He is also a political analyst for WCAX-TV and WVMT radio and is a regular contributor to The Times Argus, Rutland Herald and Vermont Business Magazine.