Is Hillary Above the Law?

hillary_rays1We are a nation of laws, not men.  When there are legitimate suspicions regarding illegality or impropriety at the highest levels of government, we have mechanisms in place to ensure at least an appearance of objectivity during an investigation.  One of these would be the Attorney General referring matters to the the Office of Special Counsel.  Appointment of a Special Counsel to investigate Executive Branch officials shields the Administration from accusations of a cover-up.  Why hasn’t this occurred in the investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her use of a private email system and server during her tenure at the State Department?

We all remember the fury over the leak of Valerie Plame’s name and CIA status to columnist Robert Novak.  Rumors and suspicions that the leak came from Vice President Dick Cheney were rampant.  President Bush declared that “If there’s a leak out of my Administration, I want to know who it is.”  Attorney General John Ashcroft handed the matter over to Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald.  Fitzgerald’s investigation eventually determined that Richard Armitage was the source of the leak.  While no one was charged with the leak itself, Lewis “Scooter” Libby (Cheney’s Chief of Staff) was convicted of obstruction of justice, perjury, and making false statements to investigators.

Earlier this month, the Department of Justice had the FBI seize Hillary’s server from the private firm that was tasked with its storage (in a bathroom, as it turns out).  They claim to be intent on recovering any information that has survived deletion.  We’ve been told that the server has been wiped clean, but the FBI forensic investigators say that they will be able to recover data.  So it would seem that the Justice Department has this well in hand and will find out if Hillary Clinton mishandled classified information by routing it through her private system.  But is it really safe to assume that?

Why has no Special Counsel been appointed?  If what we think we know so far is even partially accurate, the presumptive presidential nominee of the Democratic party may be (at a minimum) guilty of mishandling classified information.  Mrs. Clinton could wind up being indicted and convicted (like General Petraeus) for mishandling classified material.  How is it that this matter hasn’t been handed over to a Special Counsel?  Could it be that an independent investigation might uncover more potentially criminal activity on Hillary’s part?  Is this a case of the Justice Department circling the wagons around Mrs. Clinton, or could it be even more complicated than that?

What if there’s evidence of bribery regarding Bill Clinton’s high-priced speaking fees paid by countries and companies who dealt with Mrs. Clinton while she was Secretary of State?  What about the theory (that I’ve mentioned) that the Obama Administration might be trying to take Hillary down as payback for old scores?  I still think it’s very likely, but why no appointment of a Special Counsel?  Why would Attorney General Loretta Lynch be so intent on maintaining control over this investigation?  What if there’s information on that server that could harm people other than Hillary?  What if the White House believes that the server may have information damaging to the President himself?  That could be reason enough to not want to hand this matter over to a Special Counsel.

If the White House didn’t want these types of pesky and troublesome questions asked, they would have appointed a Special Counsel.  They seem to think it’s better not to.  I wonder why?

  • Troy Brito

    This article wreaks of desperation. This is a whole lot of faux outrage about a lot of meaningless nothingness, in an embarrassingly transparent (and typically Republican) attempt to distract potential voters from focusing on the ISSUES THAT MATTER to the well being and advancement of our country!!
    At worst, Hillary may have been guilty of being too recklessly overconfident that any information she may have been emailing on her private server was “secure enough!” Was this “REALLY” a threat to our national security?? Do you think that our nuclear missile launch codes were being chatted about in her emails? Were our spies abroad all captured, tortured, and murdered because she chatted about their names and locations to her buddy Jon Stewart?? Do you think that Seal Team 3 and Seal Team 6 were in danger of losing their lives because she chatted about the when and where’s of our military strategies and attacks?? Or do you think she was setting up and confirming lunch dates with politicians, and telling people what a Douchebags she thought all Republican politicians are?? YEAH… THAT’S more likely what you’ll find in those deleted emails. National Security, My ASS!!!
    You ask… “What if there’s evidence of bribery and corruption??” Are you kidding me?? OF COURSE there is evidence of bribery and corruption! She’s a corporation bought, and corporation indebted politician. And the evidence against her is the same amount of evidence you’ll find from EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN POLITICIAN in Washington!! Pointing to Hillary and shouting… “Look, Look… bribery and corruption” is tantamount to singling out and demonizing Barry Bonds for cheating baseball by using steroids, when nearly everyone in baseball did the same, and baseball authorities KNEW DAMNED WELL they did so!!
    I think you’re better than this! So how about you rise above the cheap character assassination, and fear mongering attempts (aka – the typical Republican/Corporation Party, campaign strategy/propaganda machine media tactics… because they CANNOT POSSIBLY WIN based on the merits of their IDEAS of moving our country forward in the best interest of the overwhelming majority of Americans), and how about you talk about why any of YOUR Republican candidates should be elected. Maybe focus on why your candidate’s ideas make the most sense, and why and how those ideas benefit the MAJORITY of Americans, rather than the Top 1%. That’s A LOT Harder to do, isn’t it?? Good luck with that!!

  • You claim that my article “[reeks] of desperation” but what is it that I’m so desperate to do? Bring down Hillary? Ensure her defeat? Get “my guy” elected? I’m not desperate at all…

    It’s the Obama Administration that’s leaking Hillary’s violations of federal law.

    It’s the Obama Justice Department that has publicly said that they’re investigating Hillary for mishandling classified material.

    And it’s the FBI, which is controlled by Obama’s Justice Department (and Attorney General Loretta Lynch) that has seized her server and has been leaking details of an ongoing investigation.

    If you’ve got some issue with these accusations and this investigation, don’t blame me, I didn’t leak it. Nor have I started a very public criminal investigation of Hillary. If you’ve got some problem with these events you need to take it up with the White House, Baby… not me.

    But what concerns me the most about your screed is that you seem to think that this article is about the guilt or innocence of Madame Hillary. It’s not. This article is a public questioning of the Obama Justice Department’s choice to NOT appoint a Special Counsel.

    This isn’t a hit-piece on Hillary, it’s a hit-piece on Obama.

    Try re-reading the article, this time without the Johnny Walker Red.

    • Troy Brito

      I’m strictly Johnny Walker Black or better! Red might suffice as a shot to be immediately washed down with some good quality beer, or to maybe be used to disinfect an open wound, but certainly NOT a scotch to be savored!

      Thanks for your spelling correction on “reeks.” I was aware of the misspelling after I posted, but there’s no way to edit after posting on your blog. Kudos to you on your use of the word “screed” also! Perhaps the thing that makes my writing a screed to you, is that you’re forced to listen to the uncomfortable truth, knowing that you’ll have to go to that uncomfortable place in your mind where you have to knowingly lie to yourself about your cult-like devotion to America Destroying Republican ideology!!

      I went back and reread your screed! I paid special attention to the title. Did you mis-title your article? No, you didn’t! The intention behind your article is clear. And your attempt to follow the strategies of the Fox Republican Propaganda Machine, where you “claim” that your intention is one thing, when it’s clearly intended for something else, simply won’t work on me or other Americans as wonderfully as it has worked for the last 30 years or so! Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and Bill Maher have done a pretty good job at exposing Oz behind the curtain of deception and bullshit!!

      Plain and simple… Hillary is on top of the polls. Your Republican party candidates, with all sorts of sage ideas similar to “Trickle Down Economics,” are a poor sell to the American public nowadays, because you can’t put a bikini on a pig and try to tell us it’s Heidi Klum. Even the stupidest of Republicans who simply swoon over the Republican mantra… “smaller government and lower taxes,” can tell the difference between a pig and Heidi Klum! So your best chance of success is to demonize and vilify your opponent (Hillary)!

      I know, I know… “Obama is sabotaging Hillary, but not enough to where Hillary goes to jail, otherwise he’d have appointed Special Counsel, because he wants Biden to become the top Democratic candidate” Yeah, Yeah… Republicans want Biden over Hillary too, because they feel more confident that Cruz (or any other of the Republican American sell-outs) would have more of a chance to beat Biden compared to Hillary!

      I must’ve lost something in your response to me? What was it that you said was so appealing about Republican Ideology that only benefits the Top 1% again??

      • Oh. You are mistaken, Troy. I’m not your dancing monkey. I do not exist to only write about the things that you want me to write about. If you don’t like what I’m presenting feel free to write your own articles where you can focus exclusively on your obsession with class-hatred.

        I’m not the one that’s targeting Mrs. Clinton, that would be the Obama Administration. I’m just a lone blogger asking the White House:

        “Why is there no Special Counsel?”

        Now… did I mislead you (and everyone else) with a picture and title that implies that this is an article solely about Hillary? Yes. You’ve caught me. I’m a lying, misleading, and manipulating SOB. So what? Will I now be shunned by polite society? I’ll deal with it.

        None of this arguing between us changes the point of my article…

        Why is there no Special Counsel?

        • Troy Brito

          You say “class hatred” as if it’s a bad thing!

      • mlebauer

        You’re a piece of work. No room in your mantra for consensus or consideration of alternative ideas. Why bother? Such an absolutist approach repels and will persuade nobody. Your choir are already believers, you’d be better spouting your hostility in the echo chamber with them.

  • James Rhodes

    HRC in the White House would be more of the same BHO secrecy, cover-ups, and abuses of power, but it’s hard to imagine that it would be any worse.