President Obama is now protecting Hillary telling the DOJ she did "nothing wrong" - a liberal play on putting lipstick on a pig.
WASHINGTON, Sept. 14, 2015 – Obama’s DOJ and the media seem to be coordinating to put lipstick on a pig.
Last month political commentator Monica Crowley predicted Obama was targeting Hillary for political destruction. Just days ago, major political pundits believed Hillary would be indicted for the growing email scandal. And Bernie Sanders’ recent poll numbers suggest the issue is hurting Hillary badly.
But something significant shifted on Thursday, the eve of 9/11.
Moreover, the DOJ argued that neither the federal court nor the DOJ has the legal power to demand that Mrs. Clinton turn over any more emails. The DOJ is attempting to shield Hillary from prosecution under 18 USC Section 1924 by asserting she “had authority” to delete personal emails (ignore classified emails, judge). Nothing to see here.
Two days after Obama’s DOJ mysteriously absolved Hillary from her server sins, the Washington Post also gave its blessing, trumpeting a tech company’s conclusion that Hillary’s server has not been wiped: “The revelation that Clinton never ordered the server wiped could bolster her statements that her actions have been aboveboard, suggesting that she did not take active steps to hide her e-mails.”
Translation: Hillary is no Nixon. The fact Hillary didn’t wipe the server is retroactive proof of innocence. Because she didn’t think she was doing anything wrong by deleting irrelevant emails, she’s clean. Never mind the law. Case closed.
It’s a one-two PR punch. DOJ argues Hillary’s actions are legal. Washington Post suggests Hillary’s intent is pure.
Why? Why should the DOJ suddenly declare that Hillary followed the law by deleting emails from her private server? And why is the Washington Post taking the lead concerning Hillary’s motivation and state of mind with regard to deleting classified emails?
Rush Limbaugh called it over a month ago: Is the DOJ doing email damage control for the Obama Administration?
It is fair to assume the DOJ wouldn’t so precipitously exonerate Hillary without Obama’s approval. So why the reversal from a few weeks ago? What has been happening in those few weeks? Well, thousands of emails have been produced under court order, and thousands more are in the pipeline to be revealed. What revelations are contained in emails that haven’t been made public? Is there a sudden rush to shut down the investigation connected to any revelations in still-hidden emails?
In coming weeks, watch for media to parrot Washington Post’s “Hillary didn’t mean to” narrative in an attempt to rehab her image as a liar. And look for the left websites and social media to advance the DOJ’s incomplete exoneration of Hillary, echoing her infamous line “What difference at this point does it make?” And there you have the “Lipstick on a pig.”
Perhaps it means the DNC and Obama are circling the wagons around Hillary to protect against Bernie Sanders, the DNC’s version of Donald Trump. Or it could mean something much more damaging for the Obama legacy.
The only question is what? Based on what you do know, the possibilities are staggering. Can you say Benghazi?Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 Communities Digital News
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.
Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.