- The question remains how many might have voted another way had they known then what they know now?
Gulf News
Linda S. Heard
The FBI’s announcement that the probe into Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s email server has been reopened just 11 days prior to the election has placed American voters into an invidious position where they are forced to choose between bad and worse. Granted, the newly discovered emails weren’t those of the candidate. The trove has yet to be studied.
But if they were found to be classified material forwarded to the estranged husband of Clinton’s closest aide Huma Abedin, that would be judged a serious criminal breach impacting national security. Clinton sounded confident that there was no wrongdoing, but given they aren’t her own emails and she has yet to be appraised of their subject matter, she is undoubtedly putting on a brave face with a smile appearing even more fixed than usual. “The American people deserve to get the full and complete facts immediately,” she said.
Polls indicate that on the issue of trust, her rival comes up trumps. Whichever way this goes, voters as yet undecided could well be swayed. She is right to demand transparency from FBI Director James Comey, who ironically took flak from Republicans for what they claimed was a backhanded investigation that we put to bed too early.
Comey was accused of playing politics then and now faces similar accusations from furious Democrats who believed they the election results were in the bag. That said, he was obliged to report to Congress as soon as new evidence came to hand whether or not such evidence turned out to be significant. US Attorney-General Loretta Lynch also had to fend off criticism for huddling with former US president Bill Clinton at a private ‘impromptu’ meeting on her aeroplane at Phoenix Airport a short time before her examination of Hillary’s case came to a close. If nothing else, that was a breach of judicial etiquette opening the pair to accusations of collusion.
Unless the FBI issues a clarification in Clinton’s favour during the coming days, an extremely unlikely prospect, surely voters can’t be expected to cast their ballots for a person under a serious criminal investigation involving state secrets. Senior Republicans are already demanding that Clinton be barred from receiving intelligence briefings in the interim. Americans are unfairly caught between a rock and a hard place; theirs is a ‘Hobson’s Choice’ between two major party nominees involved in legal wrangles. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is so gleeful that he can hardly contain himself. With poll results narrowing — some showing the duo were running neck-and-neck in certain states — he was enthused to pump another $10 million (Dh36.7 million) into his campaign.
Even so, almost every political analyst predicted his chances were so slim they were almost out of reach… until the FBI handed him a great gift, one he’s milking for all its worth He joked that the election should be cancelled and he named president. “I think it’s the biggest story since Watergate… I think this changes everything,” he said, adding, “I have great respect for the FBI for righting this wrong”. Lest we forget though, Trump is just as vulnerable. An anonymous woman has filed a case in a federal court accusing him of raping her when she was just 13 years old. Add to that the steady flow of women who claim they were victims of his sexual abuse — whom he asserts are all fame-seekers or Clinton supporters — and his own reputation can hardly be seen as being squeaky clean. The problem is untold millions of votes have already been cast in states permitting early voting. The question remains how many might have voted another way had they known then what they know now?
In the worst case scenario, what if Clinton gets to the Oval Office and is later judged guilty! She would be impeached making Watergate look like a misdemeanour by comparison. Should America’s first woman president fall on her face, the chances of future female candidates could be hobbled. Trump’s suggestion that the election be cancelled was, of course, tongue in cheek. But he has a point. Neither of the front runners is fit for the job. Both are missing the likeability factor. No amount of big money, whether from special interest groups, Super PACs or straight-out-of-wannabe’s own bank account, can be a substitute for innate character.The fact that the system produced such unsuitable candidates with closets stuffed with skeletons means it’s broken.
