This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Monday, July 28, 2015:
Being mentored by one of the masters in deflection, neutralization and obfuscation certainly hasn’t hurt Hillary Clinton in her run for the White House. Time after time, something that should have penetrated the steel hull of her battleship and sunk it into the pages of history has just bounced off it instead, leaving believers awestruck and opponents gnashing their teeth.
She’ll need every skill learned at the feet of her husband, Bill Clinton, who navigated his way through a political career pockmarked with potential career-ending incidents. She polished them during a Clinton-friendly interview at CNN on July 7, with partisan Brianna Keilar:
Everything I did was permitted. There was no law. There was no regulation. There was nothing that did not give me the full authority to decide how I was going to communicate. Previous secretaries of state have said they did the same thing…. Everything I did was permitted by law and regulation. I had one device. When I mailed anybody in the government, it would go into the government system.
Notice that she didn’t say “proper,” just “permitted.” Dick Morris, once a confidant of the Clintons, came in from the cold in 2009 to write Because He Could built around the cardinal Clintonian principle that pragmatism ruled the day and that rules, regulations, and guidelines could be avoided, ignored, or, if caught, explained away.
She had some help from the kept media, including the New York Times and the once moribund and now comatose Newsweek magazine. They faced off in a duel last week that distracted attention from the key issues in the Clinton email controversy. First the Times announced on Wednesday that two inspectors general, one from the State Department (where she used to work) and one from the Office of National Intelligence, had filed what appeared to be a request for a “criminal referral” to the Department of Justice to look into Hillary’s emails for possible exposure of national security secrets. Two days later Newsweek journalist (who used to work at the Times) took umbrage at the Times article, claiming that it was far too accusatory, that it had misstated the facts, and when it got the facts right, it drew the wrong conclusions. In closing his diatribe against his former employer, Newsweek journo Kurt Eichenwald assumed a “holier than thou” attitude:
[A note] to other reporters: Democracy is not a game. It is not a means of getting our names on the front page or setting the world abuzz about our latest scoop.
It is about providing information so that an electorate can make decisions based on reality. It is about being fair and being accurate.
This despicable Times story was neither.
This from Newsweek that spiked Michael Isikoff’s scoop on the Lewinsky-Clinton affair, giving Matt Drudge the opportunity to expose not only the story but Newsweek’s willingness to let the scandal slide.
This was just the opening that Hillary and her people needed to brush aside the real issues and focus instead on the froth and fringes around the edge. Hillary opened the bidding when theTimes’ article hit by claiming that it “contained a lot of inaccuracies” which she blamed on the intemperate weather:
Maybe the heat is getting to everybody. We all have a responsibility to get this right.
We are all accountable to the American people to get the facts right and I will do my part, but I’m also going to stay focused on the issues … the big issues that really matter….
After Eichenwald conveniently entered the fray, the main issues were lost altogether. TheTimes’ “reskinned” Wednesday’s article on Friday, claiming that it wrote its initial report “using information from senior government officials, [which] misstated the nature of the referral to the Justice Department … the referral addresses the potential compromise of classified information in connection with [Clinton’s] personal email account. It did not specifically request an investigation into Mrs. Clinton.”
There is just enough persiflage in that statement to derail anyone trying to follow the story. If Ms. Clinton isn’t the target of the investigation requested by the IGs, then just who is?
The staffs of the IGs didn’t comb through all 30,000 of Hillary’s emails, though, just enough to get a flavor of what’s out there. After looking at 40 of them, they found four – 10 percent – contained classified state secret information, enough to launch the request to look into the matter further. Since Hillary released more than 30,000 emails, simple math would hold that more than 3,000 of them contained some form of state secrets. Couple that with experts’ opinions that Russia and China hackers were most certainly capable of reading every one of them (as her server wasn’t secure), and Hillary might be accused of treason, defined in the Constitution in Article III, Section 3 as consisting “only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”
All of this bantering and bickering back and forth is Hillary’s attempt to hide the real issues, hoping that once again her Teflon-coated battleship will survive and fight another day. Here are the main issues the mistress of deception and distraction is trying to hide:
- Clinton violated State Department rules concerning using her personal email accounts for State Department business;
- She violated Federal laws and regulations governing recordkeeping requirements, including the removal and destruction of government property;
- Experts are just short of certain that hackers located in China and Russia have had full and complete access to all of her emails, business and personal, from the very beginning; and
- Her continued unwillingness to be forthright in the matter, illustrating a distinct air of elite superiority, claiming that others in her position also violated those same rules with impunity.
It is posited that even if Hillary were jailed, her supporters – deaf, dumb, and blind to her deceptions – would still vote for her, just like investors in Charles Ponzi’s scheme continued to send him money while he was in jail.
Wall Street Journal: Hillary Clinton Says She Didn’t Use Personal Email Account to Send or Receive Secret Data
Newsweek: How ‘The New York Times’ Bungled the Hillary Clinton Emails Story
Hillary Clinton’s email controversy
NBC News: Hillary Clinton: Emails Were Not Marked as Classified
NBC News: Hillary Clinton: Report of Email Probe Has ‘a Lot of Inaccuracies’
Yahoo.com: Clinton emails contained classified material: U.S. inspector
Director of National Intelligence
Freedom Index rating of Elijah Cummings: 22 out of 100
Because He Could, by Dick Morris 2009