Media to nation: Pay no attention to G-Men tailing Hillary Clinton

Why would the FBI look at Hillary Clinton if there was nothing to see?

Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton is under federal investigation.

WASHINGTON, Aug. 15, 2015 – The Clinton spin machine, of which the mainstream media is an essential piece, implies it’s not nice to assume guilt by association. It’s not Hillary Clinton that is under FBI scrutiny, they insist, it’s her wayward email server, the one that took secret government documents to its home in Chappaqua, N.Y., for safekeeping.

“Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is giving the U.S. Justice Department her private email server and a thumb drive of work-related emails from her tenure as secretary of state,” said the New York Times.

Are we to understand that Hillary suddenly woke up one morning and said, “It’s such a beautiful day, I think I’ll invite Hoover’s G-Men over for coffee and give them my email server. You know, the one I had scrubbed.”

Answer me this: when was the last time you were paid a visit by the FBI and required to surrender a crucial piece of evidence if you were not the target (prime suspect) of a federal investigation?

It was the government’s inspector general for intelligence, Charles McCullough III, who notified the feds concerning his discovery of at least two “top secret” government documents stored on Clinton’s home computer server.

“It remained unclear whether this was in response to a government request, or even came as the result of a subpoena,” said the Times of the FBI inquiry. It’s fascinating that the nation’s “newspaper of record” failed to find an “unnamed source familiar with the investigation” to provide deep background and maybe a few quotes.

But Denver’s CBS affiliate, KCNC, filled in a few missing gaps to the Clinton email story. They say Platte River Networks, the company that maintained Clinton’s home email server, “could have backup copies of Clinton emails that were deleted. Classified information has reportedly been found on the private server in her [Hillary Clinton’s] home.”

Dick Morris, a former political strategist for the Clinton White House, told Newsmax, “When they [federal investigators] go through all 30,000 [Hillary State Department emails], the evidence is going to be so overwhelming that I believe she will be indicted.”

But Media Mattters, the Clinton family’s personal media watchdog, informs us that the “State Department is still working with the Intelligence Community to determine whether the information in the two emails should in fact be labeled as classified.”

I suspect an ex post facto declassification of secret U.S. State Department documents will save Hillary from having to face tough questioning before a federal grand jury – again.

The New York Times admitted that “aides to Mrs. Clinton contacted” one of their reporters “ to dispute” the notion that she is under FBI investigation.  “After consultation between editors and reporters,” said the Times, “the first paragraph [of the Times’ story] was edited to say the [FBI] investigation was requested ‘into whether sensitive government information was mishandled,’ rather than into whether Mrs. Clinton herself mishandled information. That type of substantive change should have been noted immediately for readers; instead, a correction was not appended to the article until hours later.”

A few days ago, the National Security Agency acknowledged that Chinese hackers accessed the email accounts of top government officials regularly since 2010. “The hacking coincides with Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email account as secretary of state from 2009 to 2013,” said NBC News.

U.S. intelligence officials code-named communist China’s cyber intrusions “Dancing Panda.”

But it’s an ever-compliant media that is the toothless bear dancing to Hillary’s tune.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 Communities Digital News

• The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or management of 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.