The Main Stream Media Coverage of Hillary Clinton’s Growing E-mail Problems Has Been “Incremental” BUT NOT Proportional

[The slightly new & improved edition at @ 3:30 PM Sunday]

NY Times’ & Washington Post’s editorials hammered Hillary Clinton  ---  But under the circumstances, it was the LEAST that they could do  

The liberal/ progressive MSM still hasn’t gotten to the essence of Hillary Clinton’s E-mail “mistake” ---  In the exercise of her duties as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s E-mail practices violated the law & damaged U.S. national security

Also ---  EVERYBODY in the media needs to realize that when Hillary talks about concerns that she had about the "privacy" of her "personal" E-mails, she really means the "secrecy" that she wanted for all her of E-mails, "personal" AND "official"

This morning on the Howie Kurtz media show on Fox News, one of Kurtz' guests said that the main stream media has been on the Hillary Clinton E-mails story from the beginning ( with Kurtz pointing out that it was the NY Times that first broke the story).  That panelist then said that the MSM has been on top of the story in an incremental way, to the extent that as the E-mail and private server story grew, the MSM's coverage and criticism of HRC's hand in it grew.  

I completely disagree for reasons that are stated at the back-end of this post;  but in any case, here's where some of the main stream media is on Clinton's E-mails and private server problems lately.

THE WASHINGTON POST & NY TIMES

According to the WaPo’s editorial board --  “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….” (See “Clinton’s inexcusable, willful disregard for the rules” by Washington Post  Editorial Board, 5/25/16,  Washington Post/ The Post's View [https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/clintons-inexcusable-willful-disregard-for-the-rules/2016/05/25/0089e942-22ae-11e6-9e7f-57890b612299_story.html]).

Then even the New York Times Editorial Board spoke up with this:  “Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the presidency just got harder with the release of the State Department inspector general’s finding that “significant security risks” were posed by her decision to use a private email server for personal and official business while she was secretary of state. Contrary to Mrs. Clinton’s claims that the department had “allowed” the arrangement, the inspector general also found that she had not sought or received approval to use the server….”  ( See “Hillary Clinton, Drowning in Email” by NY Times Editorial Board, 5/26/16, New York Times/ The Opinion Pages/ Editorial [http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/27/opinion/hillary-clinton-drowning-in-email.html?_r=1]).

Even liberal columnists like Dana Millbank jumped onto the Hillary Clinton E-mails pille-up [See “Why the new report on Hillary Clinton’s email is so damning” by Dana Millbank, 5/27/16, Washington Post/ Opinions [https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-the-new-report-on-hillary-clintons-email-is-so-damning/2016/05/27/e02d4f3a-2402-11e6-aa84-42391ba52c91_story.html]).

A POUND SHORT & A DAY LATE

All of the above hand-wringing is essentially a day late and a pound short….    At this stage, the reports, observations and critiques by the MSM, like those shown above, are but a MILD censure of the Democratic Party front-runner.

They still don’t get it.

Even without any finding of criminal fault or punishment  ---  if the Main Stream Media had any sense of “proportionality” whatsoever  ---  they would already be like a national media chorus shouting aloud that  Hillary Clinton is completely DISQUALIFIED for any further public service  ---  and  ---  HILLARY CLINTON IS ABSOLUTELY UN-QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

It is already obvious that ---  in the exercise of her duties as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s E-mail practices violated various rules, and arguably even the law itself; and in so doing she damaged U.S. national security.

WHEN HILLARY SAYS "PRIVACY" SHE REALLY MEANS "SECRECY"

As for HRC's serial excuses for her E-mails & private server "mistake"  ---   forget any of her talk about "convenience" --- there was never anything convenient about how Hillary had arranged her E-mails and other had-held communications while she was Sec/State.  And when HRC talks about her "privacy" what she really means is that everything that she does is HER business only; and it really doesn't matter whether it was government business, private business or monkey business.  As far as Hillary was concerned, it was all "private"; and for her that means "secret."

In Hillary-world,  national secrets aren't important, but her own personal secrets are very, very important. And that's another reason why she should be DIS-qualified to ever be president or anything else involving the public trust.