fool me once...
like i say, i really think she's following the neo-con playbook, here, and just doesn't realize that all it really does is make her look weak on national security.
remember: clinton's logic around this is likely "this worked in the primary, so let's do it again.". it's pure pragmatism. while people were calling them out on their dirty tricks, the campaign turned around and promoted the people responsible, because the conclusion was that they were successful.
the people that will tell you that she is the embodiment of wall street corruption are not just throwing rhetoric at you. it's maybe unfair to blame the whole thing on one person: the united states is a culture of randian objectivism. it's not just her. she's a "product of her era".
and it's not like the other guy is any better.
i'm just pointing out that:
(1) even on something like this, you can't trust her.
(2) i don't think the strategy of working voters up against russia - a paper threat, at best - is going to be successful.
it's not just that what's in the emails is being ignored. you'd think somebody would get fired. but, the people responsible are getting promoted. it's almost like it was an excuse for dws to resign so she could move to the campaign. and, it seems more like they're bragging about how corrupt they are than that they're doing anything to address it.
so, there's something else going on here.