Secure Servers? Coverup!

It is not news to anyone who reads this site that the Democrats have gone around the bend. But their latest attack on the Trump administration, based on the fact that transcripts of Trump’s conversations with foreign leaders have been kept on a secure server, is perhaps the most insane yet. Conversations between our president and foreign heads of state on a secure server? I should hope so! Where else would they be kept?

Susan Rice has acknowledged that the Obama administration did the same thing, one of the few sensible actions we can attribute to Rice and her crew. But there is a difference: President Obama didn’t have to worry about hostile, embedded bureaucrats leaking everything they could get their hands on to the New York Times or the Washington Post. But that is the world in which President Trump, sadly, lives. So, all the more reason why his conversations with foreign leaders should be kept on a secure server, so that they might possibly remain confidential.

I want to be scrupulously fair here, however. It is not necessary, strictly speaking, for sensitive foreign communications to be maintained in a secure and confidential manner. There is an alternative: Trump could have hired some random IT person to set up a server in the bathroom of his house. He could have conducted foreign policy off the books–off our books, that is, since the Chinese, the Russians and anyone else would have quickly figured out how to camp on his “private” server and monitor all incoming and outgoing communications.

Why would anyone do anything so stupid? To avoid FOIA requests and thereby keep official communications secret from the American people, if not from the Russians and Chinese. But no senior U.S. official, sworn to protect the interests of Americans, would ever do anything so selfishly devious. Right?

Well, President Trump wouldn’t, anyway.

Responses