I almost thought George had morphed into Chuck, but reading the transcript was easier than watching it. I am sick of the email questions, Kerry started out with his private email server and switched along with the rules becoming clearer. The only rule she broke was not making paper copies of each email at the time, and they were all required to do that, also applied to the clunky and slow and often down government server, and it was a crazy rule that wasn't changed when phones were used in the field, where a printer was unlikely and where secure filing would be impossible. There are rules like that, that can't be followed to the letter. When asked she immediately complied and seems she's the only one that did. Rice didn't use email regularly but her aids remembered there were some and she didn't print them out when asked, she just claimed there were none. And Powell just blew it off, he's a grown-up man and expects to be treated like that, he didn't bother. Albright used the telephone, and Rice mostly did too, (and I think email is a better way to go, not for the long-term record part, there are no long-term phone records and if a few were lost so what, if Sidney had written her a letter it would not have been part of any public record, given it wasn't solicited, unless she passed it on for comments, and then it would have been in the record, but for reference at the time) and telephone conversations aren't retrievable. I suppose many mail or email government employees unsolicited information and advice, that ends up in the circular file. (and baseball team owners, and columnists). The report should have addressed that circumstance, but didn't. That only she is singled out for 'should have asked for permission' and for the lost first few months in transition is plain weird. Far far far more emails were lost in the government server, and Kerry didn't ask for permission either, and he came after her, he switched when the clear rules were written. But George's question about the tax of 25% was interesting, it isn't what she's now proposing, but she got to explain the reason, the costs associated with gun-related psychological trauma, injuries and deaths is usually born by the victims, who should be liable? And why not a fund?She now thinks gun manufacturers and careless gun sellers should pay those costs, but there should probably also be a set-aside fund for when they get out of it by filing bankruptcy or whatever their fancy lawyers come up with, that may delay paying.Or requiring liability insurance to get a gun license, or to post a bond during hunting season for hunters who store their guns off season, could easily lead to gun-owners being more careful. It if had a high deductible it would be cheap for responsible gun owners and they'd know the most they'd have to pay if they screwed up.