Tuesday, February 9, 2016

How Emailgate Could Become Watergate (Part 2)

Is President Obama's dislike of the Clintons serious? One indication is that David Axelrod, Obama's senior advisor and chief strategist during his successful White House bids in 2008 and 2012, used Twitter Monday to suggest Hillary Clinton's campaign problem is Hillary herself. Axelrod's tweet read : "When the exact same problems crop up in separate campaigns, with different staff, at what point do the principals say, "Hey, maybe it's US?" — David Axelrod (@davidaxelrod) February 8, 2016. So, we can only guess how swiftly Obama would have allowed an FBI Emailgate indictment recommendation to be followed up by Attorney General Loretta Lynch and her Justice Department -- if there weren't complications. ~~~~~ Classified information in the thousands of email pages transmitted through and stored on Hillary Clinton’s unsecured private server is so pervasive that the court-ordered disclosure process at the State Department and intelligence agencies is behind the court's release schedule. Reviewing the emails and redacting the portions whose release could harm national security is more complex than anticipated. Thousands of remaining emails, and any embarrassments they contain, will not be released until well into primary voting season. ~~~~~ So, why -- instead of using this scandal to scuttle Hillary for Joe Biden -- has President Obama insisted that Hillary's private email system did not pose a national security problem? Because the State Department recently admitted that 18 emails between Mrs. Clinton and President Obama have been identified, and the government is refusing to disclose them. The Obama administration explanation is based on confidentiality, similar to early Nixon White House arguments for withholding information -- releasing the 18 emails, the Obama White House and State Department say, would compromise “the President’s ability to receive unvarnished advice and counsel” from top government officials. This leads to the conclusion that Obama knew : (1) Hillary was conducting government business on her private e-mail account, (2) the exchanges he engaged in with her over the unsecured system necessarily involved sensitive classified policy issues, and (3) he was asking her for “advice and counsel” about matters the White House judges too sensitive to release. The FBI should have access to these emails for review. Have the emails been turned over to the FBI? Has the FBI requested them? Has the White House refused to turn them over? If or when the White House refuses, the obvious conclusion then would be that the 18 emails somehow incriminate the President or his senior advisors -- because the FBI already has thousands of Hillary emails whose trail must have led to the White House, and the FBI would be seeking to confirm this trail by reviewing the 18 emails. ~~~~~ Thus, it's likely that Clinton has now entangled the President in her email scandal, with constitutional implications. Obama can't ethically continue to preside over this investigation (which he does as President). But removing himself would potentially expose him to criminal liability at the hands of a special prosecutor. The situation would be very similar to Watergate at that point, since government officials would have hidden or erased potentially damaging documents, and President Obama, knowing that, would be presiding over investigations that could subject him, aides, and former aides, to criminal liability. ~~~~~ Dear readers, FBI Director James Comey’s situation is difficult. He knows Attorney General Loretta Lynch is not free to objectively evaluate the FBI evidence. He could ask for a Hillary Clinton criminal prosecution now. But he hesitates -- although he must know he's holding a political time bomb. If he decides to act, putting pressure on Lynch and Obama because he knows there is evidence leading to Obama, then he also must know the administration would simply delay. Comey would then have only one means of pressing his case against Hillary Clinton. Resign. His senior staff might follow. At that moment, Emailgate becomes Watergate.

1 comment:

  1. Hillary Clinton’s legacy has lead ordinary Americans to conclude that there’s no reason to follow the law if they can get away with breaking it since the people in charge of enforcing the law clearly regard it with contempt and break it at every turn. The actions of the Obama administration with respect to Hillary Clinton is solid proof of this.

    We need to be aware and warned of the coming middle-class anarchy, when ordinary Americans decide to be no more lawful than they have to be.

    There are plenty of nations that work that way — where both the ruling class and the ruled view the law with contempt and obey it only when forced to. Such places are, generally, not as nice as places where the rule of law pertains. But avoiding that kind of outcome requires principles and self-discipline on the part of the ruling class, something that contemporary America conspicuously lacks. Welcome to the era of hope and change.

    ReplyDelete