The Hugh Hewitt Show

Yesterday, Hugh called Hillary, “Two Rules” Clinton, noting how the Clinton’s have long operated as if the rules for everyone else were not necessarily the rules for themselves.  Tuesday, I drew a line from the how the Clinton’s tended to get away with that to the extraordinarily imperial presidency of Barack Obama.  This morning Daniel Henninger, discussing Obama’s approach to trying to get a nuke deal with Iran wrote something extraordinary:

As the Obama administration moves toward the March 24 deadline for a nuclear-arms deal with Iran, what becomes ever more clear is that no other American president has so confused personal entitlement with political trust.

Henninger goes on to make the case that Obama’s past track record on international dealings is such that trust is eroded, which is a good case to make.  But that phrase “personal entitlement” keeps ringing in my head. Continue Reading

One half of the Smart Guys, Erwin, a man of the left, is very troubled by the news of 50,000 emails, and wants an explanation for why she violated the law.

The Audio:

03-04hhs-chemerinsky

The Transcript:

HH: Joined now by Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California, Irvine law school, half of the Smart Guys, John Eastman unavailable today. Erwin, welcome, it’s always good to talk to you. The big story of the afternoon, of course, is former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton avoiding the Government Records Act for four years, sending 50,000 emails that were in a private account. What questions does this raise in your mind?

EC: I think it raises serious questions. There’s a federal law there. It’s a federal law that’s really important. It’s how we assure that matters are public record, and that they’re available at the time and also for history. And I think there needs to be some good explanation for why she violated the law here. Continue Reading

Very sobering conversation, both on the Hillary email scandal front as well as what options we have with Iran.

The audio:

03-04hhs-diamond

The transcript:

HH: I’m joined by senior fellow, Larry Diamond, whose work is familiar with any of you who have followed foreign affairs for the last 20 plus years. Larry, welcome, it’s great to talk to you.

LD: Thank you, Hugh.

HH: What’s your reaction to the Hillary Clinton emails story?

LD: I find it troubling. Until we know more, I don’t want to render a stronger opinion, but it’s troubling in two obvious respects. Number one, it doesn’t sound like it was the most secure way to conduct business as secretary of State, and number two it sounds like the complete and total failure to use a State Department email address at all sounds like it may have been a deliberate strategy for evading ultimate accountability or transparency in her conduct of the role.

HH: Now looking abroad at foreign intelligence services, both hostile and friendly, they’re pretty good at this, right? They can find unencrypted emails, and they can follow them, and they would never tell us, right? I mean, even our allies who might have known that she was using unencrypted email wouldn’t necessarily tell us, would they?

LD: No, you can be sure of that. And one thing I can say is that the development of intercept technology for electronic communications in general, and that means not only phone and cell phone, but obviously email, the development of this capacity has been very impressive. And nobody’s better at it than the Russians and the Chinese. Continue Reading