13

In this email provided by Wikileaks, it appears that Hillary Clinton asks Rothschild to:

Let me know what penance I owe you.

Was this email written by Hillary Clinton?

Christian
  • 33,271
  • 15
  • 112
  • 266
Fiksdal
  • 1,414
  • 1
  • 14
  • 32
  • 4
    Hi, welcome to Skeptics SE. You don't need to justify yourself or explain how you're not the one making the claim. You can go straight to the point : explain what the claim is and give at least one link to your source(s). – Babika Babaka Jul 27 '16 at 09:45
  • 5
    I don't see how we have an answerable question here. Unless we are asking if the emails are genuine, then obviously Clinton did write those words. Giving a definitive interpretation is beyond the scope of this site. – DJClayworth Jul 27 '16 at 13:28
  • @DJClayworth Yes, I'm asking if they're genuine. What do you mean by different interpretation? Is there any standard interpretation? – Fiksdal Jul 27 '16 at 13:31
  • @CPerkins Sorry, I must have misread your comment, I thought it said "different" rather than "definitive". So are you saying that it's impossible to be sure about what HC really meant, but the most likely option seems to be what user568458 said? – Fiksdal Jul 27 '16 at 13:51
  • 3
    @Fiksdal If you are asking if the emails are genuine, can you rewrite to ask that, rather than focussing on this one specific phrase in one specific email. – DJClayworth Jul 27 '16 at 13:54
  • @DJClayworth Which emails? I haven't read any of the others, and I don't know whether they all come from the same source. – Fiksdal Jul 27 '16 at 14:25
  • 2
    Then ask about that email. You can remove all the stuff about the meaning of 'penance' and focus on the provenance of the email. – DJClayworth Jul 27 '16 at 14:27
  • 1
    @DJClayworth I've noticed on this site, when the conclusion in an answer seems a bit weird (The literal meaning of penance here seems a bit weird, IMO.) it's natural to add some small explanation in the answer. I feel it's natural to encourage such an explanation. (Rather than just "Yes.") This is why I did include that last sentence in OP. – Fiksdal Jul 27 '16 at 14:33
  • 4
    We can't tell you what Hilary meant by 'penance', so if you insist on asking that then the question will be closed. If you are only asking if the emails are genuine, then please remove all the explanation of the word 'penance'. Them meaning of the word is irrelevant to the question of whether the emails are genuine or not. – DJClayworth Jul 27 '16 at 14:43
  • 1
    I've done the edit for you. – DJClayworth Jul 27 '16 at 14:46
  • 1
    @JClayworth I feel that your edit did not reflect the intent of OP. I've rolled it back. Please don't take it the wrong way, I appreciate your assistance, and I don't mean to be rude as a new user. I realize you know the site and its guidelines much better than me. I won't object if the question is closed/downvoted. – Fiksdal Jul 27 '16 at 15:05
  • 3
    Then I recommend the question be closed. We can't answer what Hilary meant by 'penance', and you seem focussed on the interpretation of that word rather than whether the email is genuine or not. – DJClayworth Jul 27 '16 at 15:25
  • @DJClayworth Sure, I won't complain if you and others vote to close it. BTW, I'm focused on both. Anyway, no issues if it's closed. Thanks for trying to help. – Fiksdal Jul 27 '16 at 15:27
  • 2
    @Fiksdal questions don't need to explain *why* they are interesting or make guesses at answers. They should just state a claim that is widely believed and ask if it is true. If more comes out in an answer, that is fine, but questions can't ask for that. –  Jul 27 '16 at 16:34
  • @Dawn Thanks for trying to help, but I've already discussed this with DJClayworth. If this question is unsuitable, I suggest you vote to close it. – Fiksdal Jul 27 '16 at 16:37
  • @Fiksdal we can also edit it to make it better suited for this site. Did you object to 100% of my edit? Or just parts? I can make smaller ones. –  Jul 27 '16 at 16:39
  • @Fiksdal I tried again, making it clear what part is the core question and what part is just what you would be further interested in. –  Jul 27 '16 at 16:44
  • @Fiksdal I also moved your speculation about meaning to the footnote. It isn't needed, and would be better if fully removed, but this way, it is clear that it isn't central to the claim. –  Jul 27 '16 at 16:46
  • @Dawn This edit is fine with me. – Fiksdal Jul 27 '16 at 16:47
  • @Fiksdal and finally (I think), I removed a sentence that explained why you think this quote would be interesting to some people. Interestingness isn't a prerequisite here and often distracts somewhat by introducing a particular framing of a claim. –  Jul 27 '16 at 16:49
  • @Dawn Fair enough. No big deal. – Fiksdal Jul 27 '16 at 17:00
  • 1
    I've removed the off topic bit from the question, please don't put it back. – Sklivvz Jul 27 '16 at 19:50
  • 1
    @Sklivvz I would prefer if the question was closed instead. – Fiksdal Jul 27 '16 at 20:03
  • 3
    @Sklivvz I think the putatively off-topic bit is entirely on topic, and further it has been answered (quite conclusively, I would say) by tim. – Charles Jul 28 '16 at 08:50
  • 1
    All this talk about "We can't tell you what Hilary meant by 'penance'", only to be proven wrong by the accepted answer. How can anyone decide beforehand that a question cannot be answered? The second part of the question was interesting and answerable, and the answer has value for readers. – donquixote Dec 03 '16 at 08:51

1 Answers1

40

Was this email written by Hillary Clinton?

There is no reason to believe that it wasn't.

As Wikileaks states:

The emails were made available in the form of thousands of PDFs by the US State Department as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request.

You can see the original PDFs at Wikileaks as well.

The Freedom of Information Act request was made by Jason Leopold.

If you want a different source than Wikileaks as confirmation, the Wall Street Journal also has a database of the released emails, which does contain the same sentence you quote.

Of course it is possible that the Email wasn't actually written by Clinton herself, but just by someone with access to her Email account. But as Clinton hasn't denied writing any of the released Emails, it's unlikely.

What does Clinton mean

Whenever any Rothschild is mentioned in a context such as this, the implication is often that something nefarious is going on, for example that the Rothschilds - often a stand-in for Jews in general - are the truly powerful behind the scenes who use politicians like puppets.

To see that this quote is not a sign of a conspiracy - where Clinton owes the Rothschilds for some supposed misstep -, it's important to look at the whole context of the quote:

I was trying to reach you to tell you and Teddy that I asked Tony Blair to go to Israel as part of our full court press on keeping the Middle East negotiations going. He told me that he had a commitment in Aspen w you two and the conference, but after we talked, he decided to go and asked me to tell you. He is very sorry, obviously, but I'm grateful that he accepted my request. I hope you all understand and give him a raincheck.
[...]
He should land around Sam Aspen time. Let me know what penance I owe you. And pls explain to Teddy. As ever, H

What Clinton is saying here is that she scheduled a meeting with Blair at the same time as a meeting Blair had with Rothschild, and she wants to apologize for that - because that is the polite thing to do, not because Rothschild is secretly controlling her.

Conclusion

Yes, Clinton did write this to Rothschild, to apologize for a scheduling conflict.

tim
  • 51,356
  • 19
  • 207
  • 177
  • 22
    Why, when put in context, that quote seems downright non-nefarious. – Reinstate Monica -- notmaynard Jul 27 '16 at 22:20
  • 1
    It strikes me as a deliberately formal expression. I'm not cognizant enough with Jewish traditions or religious writings, but by deliberately invoking a phrase that way you're basically adding sincerity to your apology -- "I wronged you, and wish to make amends, and couch this in the traditional terms of your culture to demonstrate that I understand how I transgressed." People forget how powerful sincerity can be, mostly because we see less and less of it lately. – Shadur Jul 29 '16 at 12:56
  • 15
    @Shadur I think there's also a twinge of humor to it from the exaggeration. – user2752467 Aug 17 '16 at 22:39
  • @iamnotmaynard - amazing how that works. No wonder the media keeps pulling things out of context and cropping images. It helps push their narrative and sell newspapers. – Mayo Dec 19 '18 at 14:02