We’ve all been wondering whether Hillary would face justice. And now we can all stop wondering.

Many of us who love the Constitution like to believe that our nation is governed by the rule of law, not the rule of man. Most civilizations in human history have been governed by kings and queens whose word becomes law.

The American experiment is wonderful because everyone must follow the same laws. So as information continues to drip out day-by-day, week-by-week about Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail server which probably compromised thousands of e-mails with classified information (and 22 with high-level “top secret” information) and could have violated numerous federal laws, many of us hoped that the DOJ and FBI would carry out an impartial investigation.

Many of us like to believe that justice will be served. But many of us also know that our bureaucracy is corrupt and fear that whatever President Obama wants is what will happen.

When President Obama spoke about the investigation this past weekend, he gave us no reason to trust that justice will be served.

Independent Journal reports:

During an interview with Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday,” President Obama did his best to praise former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, but he couldn’t avoid one truth:

WALLACE: “Can you still say flatly that [Hillary] did not jeopardize American secrets?”

OBAMA: “I’ve got to be careful because as you know, there have been investigations, hearings, congress has looked at this… Here’s what I know. Hillary Clinton was an outstanding Secretary of State, she would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy…

Now, what I’ve also said is…”

What Obama said next was definitely unexpected…

The President called Clinton’s handling of the infamous email situation, “careless.”

As the Wall Street Journal editorial page pointed out, this word choice is loaded. As an attorney, President Obama fully realizes this.

But even more notable was Mr. Obama’s use of the word “intentionally” regarding Mrs. Clinton’s actions. As a lawyer, the President knows that intent is often crucial to determining criminal liability. And he went out of his way—twice—to suggest that what Mrs. Clinton did wasn’t intentional but was mere “carelessness, in terms of managing emails.”

Why would Mr. Obama discuss the emails in those terms? He certainly isn’t helping Attorney General Loretta Lynch or FBI Director James Comey, who must decide how to assess Mrs. Clinton’s actions. If they now decide not to prosecute based on a judgment that Mrs. Clinton was merely careless, President Obama has opened them up to reasonable criticism that they were publicly steered by his comments.

Mr. Obama was at pains to “guarantee” to Fox’s Mr. Wallace that there will be “no political influence” from the White House over the email probe. But if you’re trying to send a message to the FBI or Justice, it’s probably shrewder to do it publicly by apologizing for Mrs. Clinton’s “carelessness” than it is to say something specific in a private meeting that could leak to the press. Mr. Obama can say he never said a word to either one, while those two take the heat if they give Mrs. Clinton a legal pass.

This is how the bureaucracy works. This is how corruption evades justice. This is how the President of the United States tells the Attorney General and the Director of the FBI what to do without technically breaking the law. And his spokesperson claims that everything the President knows he has learned through news reports.

And meanwhile, our national security remains unsecured. A supposed investigation continues. Hillary Clinton gets one step closer to the Democratic nomination.

And the American people remain cheated out of true accountability, representation, and justice.

Join the only movement that can stop government overreach. Click the button below to support a Convention of States team in your state.

button-sign-petition

 

About The Author

Mark Meckler

Mark was a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, and served as the national coordinator. He left the organization to work more broadly on expanding the self-governance movement beyond the partisan divide. Mark appears regularly on television in outlets as diverse as MSNBC, ABC, NBC, Fox News, CNN, Bloomberg, Fox Business and the BBC. He’s highly sought after for the tea party perspective from print and electronic media outlets, from the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, L.A. Times, Washington Examiner, Politico and the The Hill. Mark blogs at MarkMeckler.com, and his opinion editorials regularly run in many of the leading political newspapers both on and offline. Mark has a BA in English from San Diego State University and graduated with honors from University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law in 1988. He practiced real estate and business law for almost a decade. For the last eleven years of his legal career he specialized in Internet advertising law. When not fighting for the future of our nation, Mark is an avid horseman, and lives in rural northern California with his wife Patty and two children.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

twelve − six =