May 27, 2016

With Release Of State IG Report, Editorial Boards Sharply Criticize Hillary Clinton

The State Department’s IG report on Hillary Clinton’s email practices as Secretary of State has been a non-stop headache for her campaign. The report has been front page news throughout the country, and has also been a painful reminder for the Clinton campaign that her massive trustworthy problem is not going away. As the New York Times put it the IG report plays to one of Clinton’s biggest weakness:

“It is not just that the inspector general found fault with her email practices. The report speaks directly to a wounding perception that Mrs. Clinton is not forthright or transparent.”

Reporters have not been the only group that have highlighted the many problems the Inspector General’s report has caused for Clinton’s campaign. Editorial boards across the country have hammered Clinton since the report came out. See below for some key excerpts from the many critical editorials on Clinton’s email scandal:

Wall Street Journal: “All of this should bear on the FBI’s email probe and whether Mrs. Clinton understood the security risks she was running. On the IG’s extensive evidence, she clearly did—and then she lied about it. Voters should understand that this is precisely the kind of governance Mrs. Clinton would return to the White House.”

New York Times: “This defensive posture seems at play in the email controversy, as well as her refusal, for that matter, to release the lucrative speeches she made to Wall Street audiences. The reflex she is revealing again now — to hunker down when challenged — is likely to make her seem less personable to many voters, and it will surely inflame critics’ charges of an underlying arrogance.”

New York Daily News: “She screwed up big-time, and none of her shifting explanations passes the smell test. Those are the honest conclusions to be drawn from the State Department inspector general’s review of former Secretary Hillary Clinton’s email habits.”

Washington Post: “Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of state from 2009 to 2013 has been justifiably criticized as an error of judgment. What the new report from the State Department inspector general makes clear is that it also was not a casual oversight. Ms. Clinton had plenty of warnings to use official government communications methods, so as to make sure that her records were properly preserved and to minimize cybersecurity risks. She ignored them.”

Union-Leader: “This week’s report from the State Department Office of Inspector General will make it harder for apologists to explain away the Clinton email fiasco, but they’ll keep trying. The internal investigation shows that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton never bothered to get approval to conduct official business using a personal email address, and that staffers felt pressured to shut up about their security concerns.”