Big News in Clinton-Obama Corruption; Will We Hear About It?

justin-katz-avatar-smiling

Even accounting for my bias about what ought to be considered Big News, it seems as if the subject of this story is either a complete fabrication or a match that ought to set off a news firestorm for the rest of the presidential election cycle:

A March 2015 email chain released by WikiLeaks Tuesday is further proof that President Obama lied to the American people when he said he found out about Hillary Clinton’s private email server from news reports.

“Jen you probably have more on this but it looks like POTUS just said he found out HRC was using her personal email when he saw it in the news,” Clinton spokesman Josh Schwerin wrote to Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri, press secretary Nick Merrill, and others.

Merrill then forwarded Schwerin’s email to longtime Clinton confidante and attorney Cheryl Mills, who sent it to campaign Chairman John Podesta. “We need to clean this up,” she wrote to Podesta. “He has emails from her — they do not say state.gov.”

“Clean this up,” eh?  Guns don’t get much more smoky than this.

Now add in a massive political contribution made on behalf of the spouse of a high-ranking FBI official working on the Clinton email case.  Andrew McCarthy, who has directly relevant professional experience with the processes involved, doesn’t think the donation is evidence of a direct payoff, but rather that people within the Obama administration and the FBI knew the Clinton case would never be prosecuted (because it implicated the president directly) and were therefore willing to be somewhat careless with their appearances of impropriety.

The calendar doesn’t resolve the question.  Here’s the Wall Street Journal:

Mrs. McCabe announced her candidacy the same month (March 2015) as the news broke about Mrs. Clinton’s private email server. Mr. McCabe was running the FBI’s Washington field office at the time, and he was promoted to the No. 3 FBI slot not long after the formal FBI investigation began in July 2015.

The FBI said in a statement that none of this is an issue because Mr. McCabe wasn’t promoted to the No. 2 position until February 2016, months after his wife lost her race, and only then did he assume “for the first time, an oversight role in the investigation into Secretary Clinton’s emails.”

If the Obama administration, the Clinton camp, and all of their interwoven cronies were working together to “clean [the email scandal] up,” it would hardly be a challenge to arrange the timing of events to make payoffs only appear improper and even to have contingency plans to ensure the collusion plan worked whether or not Mrs. McCabe won office.

Whatever the case, the story emits enough smoke, with enough loose ends, that it ought to be a giant journalist beacon.  Any outlet covering the national campaign that doesn’t front-page it will look like little more than a propaganda outlet.



  • Guest

    Well I’m not going to be pro or con about this
    story but walk down the center line because there are way too many variables
    intertwined in this story that can lead a person to “assume” way too many credible or non-credible
    or maybe tainted facts. Too many non-U.S.A. people had their hands on these so
    called documents before they were released to the public to possibly affect the
    outcome of a U.S.A. Presidential election.

    • Justin Katz

      That’s fine, but if we had a real news media, this would be front page news and journalists would be racing each other to nail down details about whether the emails are genuine, what the president really knew, and, if the emails are genuine, what they’re ultimately trying to cover up. It’s astonishing that we have yet to hear (or at least I haven’t heard) a single person included in these emails claim that they aren’t genuine.
      But we don’t have a real news media. We have an abusive, corrupt government and a compliant propaganda industry so caught up in its own corruption and blinded by identity politics that it doesn’t even play a neutral role in our society, but a negative one.

      • Guest

        Justin, this story was printed in my local newspaper today in relation to an Associated Press account linked to a New York Times news release. Basically it is indicating my same feelings that too many hands outside U.S.A. we’re in possession of these emails before release to U.S.A. news media.

    • Joe Smith

      Read Cheryl Mills deposition and related direct source material/Congressional hearing testimony. Add the fact four others got some immunity, that Podesta et al don’t deny the emails (at best you get a lack of ability to confirm), that the President himself used a pseudonym email…Pretty sure the Russians didn’t tamper with the depositions or witness statements.

      You would find it adds a lot of credibility. What will be interesting is a HRC appointed Attorney General and a stacked DOJ that won’t have any interest in pursuing these issues with a likely GOP house that won’t have much else to do given the gridlock you’ll have in the Senate and the items of bi-partisanship (Trade deals for example) have been walked back by HRC due to pressures from her primary run.

Quantcast