Pixel Tracker

Monday, March 18 , 2019, 7:36 am | Fair 51º


Diane Dimond: Who Does Hillary Clinton Think She Is?

So wait just a darned minute. A congressional committee wants to schedule testimony from Hillary Clinton, and she refuses the request, laying down certain conditions?

That’s not the way our system is supposed to work! If Congress calls a citizen to the witness chair, that citizen is supposed to automatically comply.

That’s how it would be for you or me. Why not for Clinton?

A select committee of the House of Representatives is investigating two matters: the 2012 attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya, in which four Americans died, and the more current scandal swirling around Clinton’s lost emails from her tenure as secretary of state.

No matter whether you think those subjects need investigating, that is the committee’s agenda. If a regular citizen thumbed their nose at a request to appear, they’d be held in contempt of Congress faster than you could buy cattle futures.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., the committee chairman, received a letter from Clinton’s lawyer saying there is “no basis, logic or precedent for such an unusual request.”

What? Cabinet members testify on Capitol Hill all the time, on various different subjects.

Why is asking Clinton to testify on two of the most serious issues swirling around her tenure as secretary of state such an unusual request?

Lawyer David Kendall further declared to the institution his client used to be a part of that Clinton would be available only after the week of May 18 and that she would only sit for one session, not the two requested. But that’s not all.

In March, Kendall said there was no need for Clinton to give the committee the private server she used to house her emails during her time as secretary of state because the server had already been wiped clean of that correspondence.

Really? She was supposed to turn her email traffic over to the government upon leaving her post.

Why were those emails erased? Beyond some glib response at a news conference about the emails being about her daughter’s wedding and yoga lessons, Clinton has never answered that legitimate question.

Since when does a civilian (albeit one running for president) get to dictate the date or the duration of her congressional testimony? Since when do civilians get to tell Congress what it can and cannot inspect? Yes, Clinton has certain rights under the Constitution, but she does not have extra-special rights.

A Clinton campaign official quickly reacted after news of her refusal to comply with the committee’s request went public. He told The New York Times that the candidate has already testified about the Benghazi attack and factions at the Capitol were trying to “exploit a tragedy for purely political gain.”

The truth is, this kerfuffle has been going on since late last year. True, Gowdy could have put his foot down and demanded an appearance long ago, but he didn’t. So here we are with the presidential campaign clock slowly ticking away. Whose fault is that?

The Clinton camp surely knew months ago that she was going to run for the presidency. They surely knew this appearance was on the horizon. Why did they drag their feet on a problem that was sure to come back to bite their candidate?

More important, is this a sign of how a Clinton presidency would work? Ignore a problem and hope it will go away?

Look, this column is dedicated to crime and justice issues. Frankly, there’s nothing I could write to change the paralytic political mess in Washington. What I care about is a system that’s unequal. I’m angry that someone with wealth and political heft can laugh off an official government request. I wonder why more of the media don’t point out this obvious travesty.

But mostly, I wonder: If Hillary Rodham Clinton is as righteous, influential and deserving of the nation’s highest office as she wants us to believe, then why doesn’t she march herself to Capitol Hill and give clear-cut answers to the questions a lot of American citizens have been asking?

The Clinton political endgame seems evident to me — get through one day of congressional testimony, and then declare that the matter is “over.” Any reporter who asks another question about either Benghazi or Clinton’s mysteriously missing emails will be told they are pursuing “old news.”

I can just hear the words that will be used. “What difference, at this point, does it make ... ?”

I think it makes a lot of difference.

Diane Dimond is the author of Be Careful Who You Love: Inside the Michael Jackson Case. Contact her at [email protected], follow her on Twitter: @DiDimond, or click here to read previous columns. The opinions expressed are her own.

Support Noozhawk Today!

Our professional journalists work tirelessly to report on local news so you can be more informed and engaged in your community. This quality, local reporting is free for you to read and share, but it's not free to produce.

You count on us to deliver timely, relevant local news, 24/7. Can we count on you to invest in our newsroom and help secure its future?

We provide special member benefits to show how much we appreciate your support.

I would like give...
Great! You're joining as a Red-Tailed Hawk!
  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.