if average voters turned on the tv for five minutes this week, chances are they know that donald trump made lewd remarks a decade ago and now stands accused of groping women. but even if average voters had the tv on 24/7, they still probably haven<u+2019>t heard the news about hillary clinton : that the nation now has proof of pretty much everything she has been accused of. it comes from hacked emails dumped by wikileaks, documents released under the freedom of information act, and accounts from fbi insiders. the media has almost uniformly ignored the flurry of bombshells, preferring to devote its front pages to the trump story. so let<u+2019>s review what amounts to a devastating case against a clinton presidency. start with a june 2015 email to clinton staffers from erika rottenberg, the former general counsel of linkedin. ms. rottenberg wrote that none of the attorneys in her circle of friends <u+201c>can understand how it was viewed as ok/secure/appropriate to use a private server for secure documents and why further hillary took it upon herself to review them and delete documents.<u+201d> she added: <u+201c>it smacks of acting above the law and it smacks of the type of thing i<u+2019>ve either gotten discovery sanctions for, fired people for, etc.<u+201d> (after this article was published, ms. rottenberg released a statement saying the views expressed in her email were not hers but were those of individuals who planned to attend a campaign event. see below.) a few months later, in a september 2015 email, a clinton confidante fretted that mrs. clinton was too bullheaded to acknowledge she<u+2019>d done wrong. <u+201c>everyone wants her to apologize,<u+201d> wrote neera tanden, president of the liberal center for american progress. <u+201c>and she should. apologies are like her achilles<u+2019> heel.<u+201d> clinton staffers debated how to evade a congressional subpoena of mrs. clinton<u+2019>s emails<u+2014>three weeks before a technician deleted them. the campaign later employed a focus group to see if it could fool americans into thinking the email scandal was part of the benghazi investigation (they are separate) and lay it all off as a republican plot. a senior fbi official involved with the clinton investigation told fox news this week that the <u+201c>vast majority<u+201d> of career agents and prosecutors working the case <u+201c>felt she should be prosecuted<u+201d> and that giving her a pass was <u+201c>a top-down decision.<u+201d> the obama administration<u+2014>the federal government, supported by tax dollars<u+2014>was working as an extension of the clinton campaign. the state department coordinated with her staff in responding to the email scandal, and the justice department kept her team informed about developments in the court case. worse, mrs. clinton<u+2019>s state department, as documents obtained under the freedom of information act show, took special care of donors to the clinton foundation. in a series of 2010 emails, a senior aide to mrs. clinton asked a foundation official to let her know which groups offering assistance with the haitian earthquake relief were <u+201c>fob<u+201d> (friends of bill) or <u+201c>wjc vips<u+201d> (william jefferson clinton vips). those who made the cut appear to have been teed up for contracts. those who weren<u+2019>t? routed to a standard government website. the leaks show that the foundation was indeed the nexus of influence and money. the head of the clinton health access initiative, ira magaziner, suggested in a 2011 email that bill clinton call sheikh mohammed of saudi arabia to thank him for offering the use of a plane. in response, a top clinton foundation official wrote: <u+201c>unless sheikh mo has sent us a $6 million check, this sounds crazy to do.<u+201d> the entire progressive apparatus<u+2014>the clinton campaign and boosters at the center for american progress<u+2014>appears to view voters as stupid and tiresome, segregated into groups that must either be cajoled into support or demeaned into silence. we read that republicans are attracted to catholicism<u+2019>s <u+201c>severely backwards gender relations<u+201d> and only join the faith to <u+201c>sound sophisticated<u+201d>; that democratic leaders such as bill richardson are <u+201c>needy latinos<u+201d>; that bernie sanders supporters are <u+201c>self-righteous<u+201d>; that the only people who watch miss america <u+201c>are from the confederacy<u+201d>; and that new york mayor bill de blasio is <u+201c>a terrorist.<u+201d> the leaks also show that the press is in mrs. clinton<u+2019>s pocket. donna brazile, a former clinton staffer and a tv pundit, sent the exact wording of a coming cnn town hall question to the campaign in advance of the event. other media allowed the clinton camp to veto which quotes they used from interviews, worked to maximize her press events and offered campaign advice. mrs. clinton has been exposed to have no core, to be someone who constantly changes her position to maximize political gain. leaked speeches prove that she has two positions (public and private) on banks; two positions on the wealthy; two positions on borders; two positions on energy. her team had endless discussions about what positions she should adopt to appease <u+201c>the red army<u+201d><u+2014>i.e. <u+201c>the base of the democratic party.<u+201d> voters might not know any of this, because while both presidential candidates have plenty to answer for, the press has focused solely on taking out mr. trump. and the press is doing a diligent job of it. write to kim@wsj.com. editor<u+2019>s note: the following statement was issued by erika rottenberg after the publication of this column: there have been a number of recent news reports<u+2014>including ms. strassel<u+2019>s column on october 13, 2016<u+2014>regarding documents released by wikileaks that contain statements and questions that are attributed to me, including my alleged views and questions about secretary clinton<u+2019>s email practices. these reports are wrong. unfortunately, i was not contacted before publication of these reports which have erroneously attributed these statements to me. apparently, they stem from an email in june 2015 that i sent to representatives of the hillary clinton campaign in connection with a campaign event. the statements and questions were not mine. rather, they were statements and questions i received from individuals planning to attend the campaign event. i aggregated and passed along these statements and questions to the campaign in connection with their preparation for the event.
the press buries hillary clinton<u+2019>s sins - wsj
noauthor