A buried lede in the Associated Press story about Hillary Clinton's use of a private, home email server:
“Operating her own server would have afforded Clinton additional legal opportunities to block government or private subpoenas in criminal, administrative or civil cases because her lawyers could object in court before being forced to turn over any emails. And since the Secret Service was guarding Clinton's home, an email server there would have been well protected from theft or a physical hacking.”
A GOP source emails, "Granted taxpayers pay for government servers too… but we literally are paying to protect hillary from public records. That’s insane."
More from the Associated Press report:
The computer server that transmitted and received Hillary Rodham Clinton's emails - on a private account she used exclusively for official business when she was secretary of state - traced back to an Internet service registered to her family's home in Chappaqua, New York, according to Internet records reviewed by The Associated Press.
The highly unusual practice of a Cabinet-level official physically running her own email would have given Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, impressive control over limiting access to her message archives. It also would distinguish Clinton's secretive email practices as far more sophisticated than some politicians, including Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin, who were caught conducting official business using free email services operated by Microsoft Corp. and Yahoo Inc.
Most Internet users rely on professional outside companies, such as Google Inc. or their own employers, for the behind-the-scenes complexities of managing their email communications. Government employees generally use servers run by federal agencies where they work.
In most cases, individuals who operate their own email servers are technical experts or users so concerned about issues of privacy and surveillance they take matters into their own hands. It was not immediately clear exactly where Clinton ran that computer system.
Legendary investor Warren Buffett was asked this morning in an interview whether he'd still bet money on Hillary Clinton being the next president of the United States. Yes, he said, he still think it's "very likely" she'll be the next president. But he warned in the CNBC interview: "things could always happen in politics, including illnesses or something of the sort."
Democrats have not had to answer for the actions of Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz (who offered to change a policy position in exchange for not being criticized, and threatened to paint President Obama as anti-Semitic and anti-women). Or for the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation (which accepts foreign donations). Or for Joe Biden (who said last week he knows Somalis because "there’s an awful lot driving cabs").
The enemies of Israel are the greatest beneficiaries of campaign against Israel prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu's scheduled address to a joint session of Congress, say William Kristol, speaker here as chairman of the Emergency Committee for Israel, and Gary L. Bauer, chairman of Christians United for Israel Action Fund, in a written statement.
The Huffington Post’s Jeffrey Young and Jonathan Cohn declare that “putting together a real Obamacare alternative will take more time — and more genuine interest — than Republicans have.” In truth, such Obamacare alternatives are already available to Republicans. These include the 2017 Project’s “Winning Alternative to Obamacare,” which helped Ed Gillespie almost pull off a huge upset victory in last year’s Virginia Senate race, and the newly released Burr-Hatch-Upton alternative, an updated version of last year’s Burr-Coburn-Hatch proposal.
Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was spotted in the background of the Red Carpet show leading up to tonight's Grammys. She was joined by Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas.
They were no doubt fighting for President Obama's so-called middle class economics plan.
The politicians were first spotted by Jacqueline Alemany of CBS.
Democrats have moved to the left in the Obama era. And if the party’s base, President Obama, and Senator Elizabeth Warren have their way, they will move even further to the left in the next two years. Liberals will rejoice, but there’s a downside. The Democratic nominee will have a considerably harder time winning the presidency in 2016.
Our perceptions of current events are so conditioned by the 24/7 news cycle that we are wont to think of political time in tiny increments. For instance, Barack Obama is up in the polls over the last few weeks, so he is “winning,” in some ephemeral sense. Congressional Republicans are struggling to coordinate on issues like immigration and abortion, so they are “losing.”