We were right about the news cycle being dominated by the hysteria about crying children at the border for yet another day; hardly anyone other than FOX News covered the Inspector General’s testimony before congressional committees on Tuesday. (CBS gave it a tiny bit of coverage.) The timing of this immigration story –- which is not new information –- has to be a deliberate distraction from the shocking revelations in the IG report, because they shed too bright a light on the roaches infesting the Obama DOJ and FBI.
Obviously, we can’t look to the mainstream media for information about what has turned out to be the worst scandal in memory: the intentional weaponizing of the federal law enforcement bureaucracy to try to fix the outcome of a presidential race and, later, to bring down a duly elected President. It’s been gratifying to see respected legal analysts such as Andrew McCarthy confirming in legal terms what we’ve been saying in layman’s terms for two years.
OTHERS ARE READING: Horowitz hearing was Tuesday's REAL news story
Consider the “matter” (Loretta Lynch’s term) of Hillary’s email server. My readers know that for a long time, we’ve maintained that her setting up of a personal server to handle all her business as Secretary of State had “intention” written all over it. That seemed even more important than any particular document that might have done through it, because the only conceivable motivation for setting it up that way was to keep her official correspondence out of reach of subpoenas and Freedom Of Information Act requests. It had to have taken some foresight and planning. Hillary got it done on Day 1 of her new cabinet job.
Now, only one of two things is possible. 1) Hillary Clinton intentionally disregarded the training she had received in document classification and security and put all her State Department business on a nonsecure server because hiding what she was up to was more important than following the law, in which case she is far too unethical to be President, or 2) Hillary Clinton is such a clueless ninny that she really thinks you wipe a server “with a cloth” and that the 33,000 subpoenaed emails she deleted really were about yoga and Chelsea’s wedding plans, in which case she is far too stupid to be President.
Now, Hillary Clinton may be a clueless ninny about some things --- why she lost the election certainly comes to mind --- but when it comes to hiding information, she is a master, so I’m going with 1) unethical. She has practiced hiding information since she was in the White House; remember the missing Rose Law Firm time sheets and Vince Foster’s office files that were carted off after his suicide? She’s also quite practiced at hiding the truth by telling lies; remember Benghazi? Remember “the vast right-wing conspiracy” to accuse her husband? Through the years, she has shown herself over and over to be secretive and dishonest. (Hillary, THAT’S why you lost the election.)
When Hillary ascended to the State Department, she had to know that, by definition, much if not most of her work would deal with classified matters. The rules were clear. Everybody who works with classified materials knows them. Hillary HAD to know how vulnerable her information was to foreign agents (in fact, we’ve learned from the IG report that they hacked it), and she HAD to know she was breaking the law, big-time, but she didn’t care. It’s just astonishing.
This is the Elephant In The Room that the Justice Department and FBI had to find a way around if they weren’t going to indict her. (McCarthy explains how they did this.) And why would they contort the law in such a way? Even Horowitz, in his report, doesn’t really focus on this, opting to give them the benefit of the doubt that their conclusions weren’t based on political bias.
But what else could they possibly have been based on?