Hillary Clinton, under pressure from the media and all but the most devoted Democratic lackeys, will be answering questions in response to the e-mail scandal, Hillaryworld has let it be known. The press should demand answers — and not merely about why she set up her own private server and how we will ever know what was contained in e-mails not turned over to the State Department, or e-mails turned over but not released by the State Department.

Do you find it objectionable to take money for your foundation from countries whose human rights record regarding women is so poor,  thereby giving these countries good PR?
How can the American people be sure you would not give special treatment or be biased in favor of countries that helped fund your foundation?
Will you return all foreign money?
Why are you still giving paid speeches?
Aren’t business interests such as Goldman Sachs trying to ingratiate themselves with you in the event you become president?
How would the American people ever be assured your judgment has not be influenced by all that money?
Specifically, do you think Menendez-Kirk legislation providing for conditional sanctions against Iran is wise? Didn’t you oppose  congressional sanctions in the past but later claim they brought Iran to the bargaining table?
Do you think Congress is entitled to an up-or-down vote on an Iran deal? If Congress does not approve a deal and pass legislation lifting sanctions, how could they ever be removed?
Should we allow Iran to keep thousands of centrifuges under any circumstances? If so, what are they?
Should we lift restrictions on Iran after 10 years under a deal even if Iran is still supporting terrorism, vowing to destroy Israel and subverting neighbors? Isn’t the president’s approach in effect containment akin to the North Korea deals?
If you were president, would you be bound by a deal between the president and a foreign leader that was not ratified as a treaty? If so, why did you not acknowledge and abide by the agreement on settlements arrived at between President George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon?
Did the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq and the failure to act swiftly to remove Syrian President Bashar al-Assad contribute to the rise of the Islamic State?
Is Russia’s occupation of Ukraine a failure of U.S. policy and a violation of our commitment to defend Ukraine’s sovereignty?
Our intelligence community has stated that the outlook for terrorism is the bleakest ever. Is this a failure on behalf of the Obama administration? What should we have done differently?

The reason for asking these additional questions is simple: Clinton refuses to tell the American people what she thinks about critical issues of the day, which is both highly unusual and entirely inappropriate for someone who presumably wants to run for president. The press should take whatever opportunity it can get to quiz her on topics of importance. If she refuses to answer these, the public can judge for itself whether this is appropriate. But the media cannot allow candidates to dictate what questions they can ask. You see, it is not simply her e-mails that are being hidden from the public; it is virtually anything of interest and importance.