email from Senator Blumenthal to Hilary

[detbuch]

Jim, one of the reasons you have a difficult time trying to convince Spence about anything is that each of you exists in a different philosophical, existential, or moral universe.

You're a Catholic absolutist. Spence is a relativist.

You can claim and believe according to your ethics that Lerner acted immorally. Spence can say with conviction that "Lerner didn't do anything immoral or illegal. Get over it."

I can understand you because I understand your system of "moral" beliefs. I sort of think I kind of have an inkling about Spence's "perspective" on political morality which seems to range from his version of pragmatism to an ability to be shocked by an array of common place foibles. Rather than being grounded by fundamental principles, he has a sort of situational ethics, shifting from case to case, using slippery enough language to create the air of plausibility if not certainty. If he is, apparently, in favor of an ad hoc policy or judicial decision, or person, and there is no irrefutable proof of illegality or "wrong doing," he will defend what he favors to the last drip of pragmatic sophistry if necessary. But if he disapproves of what someone does or says but there is no irrefutable proof of wrong doing, he will convict that person's action of not passing the "smell test."

If you want to argue with him on the basis of morality, consider before doing so, that you will be up against moral relativism. So don't even try. At best, merely consider the audience. Do your best to convince those who read your argument and "get over" trying to persuade Spence. That ain't gonna happen.

You might, for the fun of it, list the trail of scandals and controversies involving Hillary from the early days of her unethical work in the Nixon impeachment, to whitewater, to covering up her husbands infidelities while claiming to be a champion of women's rights, to travelgate, to the cattle futures bonanza, to the vast right wing conspiracy claim, and on and on, to the sniper thing, to Benghazi incompetence and questionable claims about a video and going after the video maker, and her wild accusations about Republican wars on women and children and minorities, and her railing against the rich and income inequality while she has done her best to be rich, and on and on . . . and ask Spence if the totality of it all passes the smell test.