The Post chases Clinton around: In this morning’s Washington Post, it was the same olf story.
Another day, another Hillary Clinton scandal!
Hillary Clinton failed to sign the form that Fox has been talking about! Anne Gearan, a highly suspect performer, started her news report like this, hard-copy headlines included:
GEARAN (3/18/15): Clinton didn’t sign State Dept. exit form/Hillary Clinton didn’t sign her exit form! The exit form she was supposed to have signed!
Paperwork certifies that employees have returned all documents
The State Department has “no record” that former secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton signed a form certifying that she had returned all department paperwork when she left her job, spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Tuesday.
Psaki said department officials are “fairly certain” that Clinton did not fill out the OF-109 form, a standard document certifying that departing employees have “surrendered to responsible officials” any classified and unclassified documents and other work-related material.
The form is at issue because of the revelation this month that Clinton maintained a private e-mail system separate from government e-mail systems, and did not turn over communications to and from that account until more than a year after she left office in early 2013. Clinton is expected to launch her bid for the 2016 presidential race as early as next month.
Republicans have seized on the form as an example of Clinton’s allegedly cavalier attitude toward transparency and regulations.
Fox has been having a nervous breakdown about this question for the past week. The channel has been promising viewers—this may be the illegality that sinks the S.S. Clinton!
Yesterday, Psaki made it official at State—Hillary Clinton didn’t sign the OF-109 form. At the Post, Gearan swung into action. It was scandal time all over again! Republicans see this as an example of Clinton’s cavalier attitude!
Surrounding the Clintons with plenty of scandal has always been fun for the press corps. Yesterday, we saw Amy Chozick playing this game in the glorious New York Times. Today, it was Gearan’s turn.
But uh-oh! In this morning’s New York Times, Michael Schmidt reported this same thrilling story. Below, you see the way he began.
Can you spot a tiny fact that Gearan somehow postponed?
SCHMIDT (3/18/15): The State Department said Tuesday that it had no record of Hillary Rodham Clinton, or the two secretaries of state before her, signing a form stating that they had no government records in their possession when they left office.Say what? Condoleezza Rice didn’t sign the OF-109 either? Neither did Colin Powell?
That seems to put a whole different cast on this exciting “scandal.” Schmidt reported this basic fact right in his opening paragraph. Gearan made you read all the way to the end of her piece before she stuck it in.
Can we talk? If the last three secretaries of state didn’t sign the OF-109, it starts to look like this is a form such people aren’t asked to sign! Schmidt was right to include that basic fact right at the start of his brief report.
Gearan, who is highly suspect, took the “scandal train” out for a spin.
Hillary Clinton isn’t our idea of a perfect candidate. That said, liberals tolerated this type of thing every single step of the way when people like Gearan waged their two-year war against Candidate Gore in 1999 and 2000.
Our silence sent George Bush to the White House. By all indications, we're ready to let the Gearans and Chozicks perform this service again.
Will this go on every day for two years? Yes it will, as long as we liberals continue to sleep in the woods, dreaming our dreams of some more perfect candidate.
We gave the world George Bush this way. Are we planning to do it again?
Way back in the last days before Bush: Back in 2001, did Secretary Albright sign the OF-109 when she left State?
Yesterday, Psaki said she still doesn't know.