It ought to be one of the key questions Americans ask themselves during the 2016 presidential election: “Do you like government secrecy?”
It’s always a good question, but it will be an especially relevant one if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic Party’s nominee.
After all, she has a track record of conducting official government business far from the prying eyes of the public.
She did it during her husband’s administration when she wrote the first draft of what would become known as “Obamacare” – literally working in secret while acting like she was simply a community organizer rather than an official appointee of the one who was sometimes referred to as her “co-president.”
She was an unofficial part of an administration that used every dirty trick imaginable to go after its “enemies,” by which they meant critics, inconvenient sexual partners, at least one rape victim and pesky journalists like me.
As secretary of state in Barack Obama’s administration she did it again, illegally using an insecure, private email server to conduct official government business of a highly sensitive national security nature as well as to shake down foreign donors to the Clinton Foundation.
Why did she do the latter?
No. 1: Because she wanted to keep her communications away from the prying eyes of the public in the event of a congressional subpoena.
No. 2: Because she didn’t expect to get caught.
But she did get caught – red-handed.
Unfortunately, to date, she hasn’t paid a price for her secret, dangerous activity. That’s because Barack Obama’s administration was never likely to hold her accountable any more than Bill Clinton’s administration was likely to hold itself and Hillary accountable.
You may not know, however, that last year the Congress passed a law to keep presidents from doing the same thing Hillary did.
But laws are only as good as the willingness of an administration to enforce them, as we learned during the Obama administration. It has set records for ignoring the highest law of the land – the U.S. Constitution. If you think Hillary will be any different, think again.
Can you imagine a Hillary Clinton attorney general holding her accountable to the law?
Don’t make me laugh. Think about the kind of attorney general she helped select in in the 1990s. Do you remember Janet Reno? Do you remember Waco? Sadly, too many voters in 2016 will be too young to remember. And it’s unlikely the media will ask her any questions about the innumerable scandals of the Clinton years. It was an administration marked by the targeting of political enemies. They illegally used Internal Revenue Service audits, harassment, public humiliation and all of the power of the White House and the Democratic Party to make us pay and shut us up.
Do you think another law will change Hillary’s behavior and nature?
That’s just one reason the 2016 election is so important.
America has, indeed, been “fundamentally changed” during the last eight years.
It’s no longer governed by the rule of law.
That’s why presidents should be of good character and people who respect America’s traditions of government of the people, by the people and for the people. If they’re not, they can do a lot of damage, especially when the primary checks and balances are a Congress that lacks courage and good character itself and a press that thinks government, especially Democrat-dominated government, can do no wrong.
That’s why a key question in 2016 should be, “Do you like government secrecy?”
If you do, I have the perfect candidate for you – Hillary Clinton in 2016.
Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact [email protected].