Hillary Clinton, in a move that isn’t likely to tone down criticism of her trustworthiness, has asked for 27 additional months to release emails that a federal judge has demanded to be released by July 21.
The move comes in response to a lawsuit raised by conservative group Citizens United after it was revealed that Clinton used a private server to conduct State business while serving as Secretary of State during the first term of the Obama administration.
“This is totally unacceptable; the State Department is using taxpayer dollars to protect their candidate Hillary Clinton,” said Citizens United President David Bossie in comments to Politico. He continued:
“The American people have a right to see these emails before the election. If transparency is truly important to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, they will order the production of all of these records as ordered by the court by July 21, 2016. The conflicts of interest that were made possible by the activities of Hillary Clinton’s State Department in tandem with the Clinton Foundation are of significant importance to the public and the law enforcement community.”
U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras set the original date of July 21 and has been critical of the Clinton campaign for perceived foot-dragging with regard to the emails’ release.
Nevertheless, the State Department has said that there are potentially thousands more emails relevant due to the large number of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests made by Citizens United and that it essentially needs more time to redact information in preparation for releasing emails to the public, UPI reports.
Critics of this line of logic — particularly those working closely with Citizens United — have decried the explanation as an excuse and noted how the request for a 27-month extension conveniently gets Hillary Clinton past the November election — one that it looks like she will likely win if current polling trends against Republican frontrunner Donald Trump hold up to scrutiny at the ballot box.
This is not the first time that Clinton’s trustworthiness has been called into question. A Quinnipiac University poll last year found that most voters found Hillary Clinton to be untrustworthy.
As recently as Friday, news outlets like PBS News Hour were poring over the question of whether Hillary can convince voters to trust her in November. What PBS found is that the trustworthy factor isn’t confined to Republicans and groups like Citizens United.
An interview with Bernie Sanders supporter William Marshall last November revealed that even on the far left wing of the party, people think she is lying about Benghazi and her emails.
Next, an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released this week found that 69 percent of America’s likely voters found Clinton’s “record of being dishonest” to be “serious enough to be a concern,” the poll’s findings read.
With numbers this concerning, some have wondered whether she can beat Donald Trump in November. Fortunately for Clinton’s campaign, the GOP leader continues to say things that alienate minority groups and make those within his own party question or outright withdraw their support.
In fact, poll aggregator Real Clear Politics finds that Clinton has a comfortable five-point lead over Trump at this juncture, though there is admittedly with a large margin for error (around 15.6 percent).
FiveThirtyEight blogger and data guru Nate Silver came out this week stating that Hillary Clinton had an 80 percent chance of beating Trump in November, though he was also quick to point out that candidates so heavily favored have lost before — see the landslide blowout of Democrat Michael Dukakis at the hands of George H.W. Bush in 1988.
But what do you think, readers? Will Hillary Clinton and the lack of trustworthiness claim keep her out of the White House? Sound off in the comments section below.