Could your emails stand up to scrutiny?

As there continues to be a leak of emails from Hillary Clinton’s staffers and previously the Democratic National Convention as supplied by WikiLeaks, it begs the question could your emails stand up to scrutiny? Irrespective of the source of the hack, with the Russians being accused as the perpetrators, we are learning of various internal machinations of a political marketing engine.

These emails are on top of the emails she released to the FBI from her personal servers while Secretary of State. From the folks who have taken the time to go through the emails, they have found them to be monotonous, as most emails are. There is quite a bit of pedestrian stuff. In fact, one reporter who was not a fan of Hillary Clinton’s, said she became one by witnessing how organized she was and how much she devoted to planning.

Yet, with any mountain of emails, there are various things that come out, which range from sales messaging to, in the case, of her state emails, emails she should have noted and handled differently. She has admitted she has made a mistake in using your own servers, and has compounded them by not being transparent from the get go. That is due to an Achilles Heel of hers which is to be close-vested. I am sure a large part is due to being protective, as she has been vilified over time, in part because she is a strong woman.

But, back to my question. Would your emails stand up to scrutiny? If you were shown an old email or several that showed you at your worst, where you sent an email you should not have, would that make you a bad person? I once asked “who told someone years ago that it was OK to do something that turned out later to be unwise?” It turns out I was that someone, but had no recollection whatsoever.

Further, what if we saw the emails of a few more contentious legislators? What would Senator Ted Cruz, who is not known for collaboration, have to say in his emails? What about those of former Speaker John Boehner, who had to herd cats on the majority side to keep things from falling apart in Congress and could only get major things through when he involved enough moderate Republicans with the Democrats? What about Senators Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid, the poster children for how Washington cannot get things done?

But, what about those of Presidential candidate Donald Trump or RNC Chairman Reince Priebus? Now, those would have some quite interesting exchanges about the candidates and his campaign tactics. Priebus would have several on “what do we do about what Trump said?” What bothers me about WikiLeaks, is the emails are one-sided. Clinton is far from perfect, but is it fair to pour through her sausage making and not her opponent’s? I find this interesting as he is the one saying the election is rigged.

Just think about this as we see more stories from her emails. I am sure there are more less than flattering emails therein, but maybe we should just set them aside, unless and until we can see others from her opponent. I am open to comments.


13 thoughts on “Could your emails stand up to scrutiny?

  1. If we could see complete emails from both candidates, we’d get a more complete picture of their mindsets. Fortunately there are other ways of doing that by looking at their histories of political and personal actions and business dealings, checking what is on public record and what close associates have to say about them. In my workplace we are reminded that, as part of city government, everything in our emails is part of the public record and can be accessed through the Access to Information Act. It is good to keep that in mind since it helps keep work emails formal and business related. We use email to document things and not to gossip. However, we have no restrictions on deleting emails, unless they are part of a formal Access to Information request.

    • Dar, very complete answer. Since Trump touts his business experience as the reason to vote for him, my last post condenses a variety of articles on how he made his money and how he treated people, neither are exemplary. Keith

  2. You bring up some excellent points, Keith! Some things I really hadn’t thought about, as I have basically ignored the whole e-mail scenario from the beginning. But yes, wouldn’t it be interesting to see da trumpeter’s emails? I think that, in all fairness, if we see one, we should see the other! As for whether my emails would withstand scrutiny? Sigh … yes, I fear nobody would find any scandal or juicy gossip in any of mine. Wikileaks is welcome to peruse them. Now my text messages … that’s a different story! 🙂 Great post, my friend!

    • Thanks Jill. Seeing Reince Priebus’ email would be interesting, as well. Things like “You are not going to believe what Trump said now?” would be common. Then, there would be the primary season emails in the GOP of how to stop Trump.

      I can’t tell you the number of emails I have deleted after editing and editing, thinking this needs to be said in person. Keith

      • Yes, and Paul Ryan’s as well! Why isn’t WikiLeaks ‘leaking’ anything from anyone other than Clinton? Surely these others have at least as many skeletons in their closets. Never mind … it was a rhetorical question. 🙂

      • Jill, Paul Ryan’s would be interesting, as well. I would like to see Trey Gowdy and Darrel Issa’s who chaired the eight Benghazi hearings, as they discussed the real purpose of their continuation. Keith

  3. Dear Keith and friends,

    Senator Rubio has been the first republican to publicly stated that he is ignoring the stolen emails of democratic campaign workers by Russia and then leaked by WikiLeaks. He said, today, it is the democrats and tomorrow, it could be the republicans.

    My emails are pretty mundane but like anything else, some could be open to interpretation.

    Ciao, Gronda

    • Gronda, very interesting. My wife and I watch Jeopardy. Earlier this week, the answer to a column on “What Politician said this?” was “Hillary Clinton is a very smart woman.” The right question which no one provided was “Who is Marco Rubio?” I wish she would do a commercial about all of the Republicans who said she did a terrific job a Secretary of State after she left that position, but before the election. I am discussing with a friend who takes issue with her competence on anything. When I say she got high marks as a Senator, he does not believe me. Keith

      • Dear Keith,

        I am wondering if Senator Rubio’s comments about the stolen emails has anything to do with his being a member of the intelligence committee and what information has been shared with him.

        Your friend is not alone. The republican talking points that HRC is a congenital liar, criminal who should be jailed, is baked into the ether that the republicans breathe. It is the high level of vitriol that tells me that these folks will not be easily moved with facts.

        Ciao, Gronda

      • Gronda, from what I read, Rubio’s presence on that committee seemed to be the rationale. But, his point that the next time it could be Republican emails has merit. With the ongoing party civil war going on, the GOP certainly does not want more of their dirty laundry shared.

        This may be the most statesman thing Rubio has done since he helped on the bipartisan immigration bill that passed the Senate. He missed his chance in the primary season to take advantage of his youth and lead the GOP down a new path. He should have embraced climate change and LGBT issues and told others in his party, we need to accept these and move forward. Instead, he punted and he was punted,

        As for my friend, he will not admit she is competent. He will only yield she has experience. He gets frustrated when I say she is not perfect, but there is a clear light of day between she and Trump. Thanks for your comments, Keith

      • Dear Keith,

        I totally agree. Senator Rubio needs to stand for things he really believes in and not try to please his party. A leader influences others and not vice versa.

        This is one thing that DT has demonstrated. You can stand v your party on issues and still win.

        Ciao, Gronda

  4. Note to Readers: The worst email mistake I have made is forwarding an email chain that has an imbedded email deep in the chain that should not have been forwarded. A colleague may have shared a frustration with another, but it is buried eight emails down and it finally gets forwarded to someone who need not see the frustration.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.