PD Editorial: Hillary Clinton needs to come clean on emails

It may be true, as Hillary Clinton’s defenders are quick to note, that in using a private nongovernmental email account during her days serving as secretary of state, she did nothing illegal.

But maintaining that one’s conduct is just this side of the law is hardly the definition of innocence.

At the least, Clinton violated the spirit of federal transparency laws and may have broken administration guidelines, including those within the State Department itself, that direct officials to use the official government email system for government business.

In using a private account exclusively, as reported by the New York Times last week, Clinton also appears to have violated a federal requirement that all correspondence used by federal officials be retained as part of the agency’s record.

There’s also little evidence that Clinton was in a hurry to comply with federal guidelines until recently.

Only two months have passed since she handed over 55,000 pages of emails as part of a State Department effort to comply with federal record-keeping practices. But these were emails that Clinton’s own advisers had reviewed and approved for release. What about the others?

She has said she would like all of the emails to be released to the public, but the State Department has a reputation for going at glacial speed in responding to such directives.

We agree with a number of Democratic leaders, including California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, that Clinton needs to come clean with the emails. She “needs to step up and come out and state exactly what the situation is,” Feinstein said on “Meet the Press” Sunday. “From this point on, the silence is going to hurt her.”

True enough.

Clinton, who is considered the front-runner for the Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nomination, would not be the first high-ranking administration official to have a private email account. But, as noted by the New York Times, she appears to be the first to use a personal account for transacting all government business. Why? And what assurances do the American people have that Clinton’s private account wasn’t hacked during that time, potentially compromising state secrets?

More troubling, Clinton, by her use of private email, set herself apart, leaving the impression that there are rules for her and then there are rules for everyone else - and never the twain shall meet.

It’s hardly the dedication to openness and government transparency that voters would come to expect from a potential candidate for president of the United States.

Email guidelines and other rules are set up to protect the public’s interests and ensure that their representatives are acting on their behalf. In treating these rules as a work-around, Clinton shows contempt for that responsibility and should be called to task.