Clinton Cover-ups Could Constitute Collusion So why a Trump special counsel with so little evidence and no Clinton counsel with so much?

Home  »  Conspiracies  »  Clinton Cover-ups Could Constitute Collusion
Print This Post Print This Post
Apr 24, 2018 No Comments ›› admin

By Lynn Woolley

Conservatives all over the country are not happy that President Trump is dogged by an overzealous special counsel, and yet Hillary Clinton walks free. If you’re asking why that is – that’s an excellent question. The evidence that the Hillary Clinton campaign pulled various shenanigans – some having to do with Russia – seem far more credible than allegations against Trump.

Part of the problem is that two distinct groups desperately want Trump out of office.

That would be the Swamp and the Media, both wanting to preserve the status quo that works for them. Hillary Clinton would have been no threat to corruption and conflict-of-interest in Washington – but Trump is.

Hillary Clinton making her concession speech. Photo: Jewel Samad/AFP via Getty Images

Russia mania has been the vehicle to demean Trump, but now it seems possible that the preponderance of facts shows a different campaign that has engaged in cover-ups.

If the Media dug into the Clinton Campaign, here’s what they could cover.

When you start making a list of items that might be considered cover-ups that have been perpetrated by the Clinton Campaign, and add other little factoids that might be relevant, the list grows rapidly. Here are a few items that come to mind – some coming from an excellent column by Michael Barone.

• The Clinton Campaign colluded with Debbie Wassermann Schultz and the Democratic National Committee to prevent Bernie Sanders from obtaining the Democratic presidential nomination.
• The FBI, under Director James Comey, soft-pedaled the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s illegal home server.
• Attorney General Loretta Lynch suggested to Comey that the FBI refer to the server investigation as a “matter” rather than an “investigation.”
• Clinton aides were allowed by the FBI to keep her emails and delete 30,000 of them.
• Prosecutors declined to convene a grand jury in the server case.
• A potential defendant, Cheryl Mills, was allowed to sit in as an attorney, thus being granted attorney-client privilege.
• Bill Clinton almost certainly colluded with sitting Attorney General Loretta Lynch in reference to the server case on a plane at Sky Harbor Airport in Phoenix on June 27, 2016.
• On June 5, 2016, Comey usurped power from Lynch to declare that Hillary was “extremely careless” but not “grossly negligent” – so there would be no prosecution.
• It is reported that the decision to exonerate Clinton in the server matter was made prior to FBI interviews with her.
• Comey and the Justice Department almost certainly used a Clinton-funded “Steele Dossier” as a justification for obtaining FISA warrants to investigate Trump associate Carter Page and his Russian connections.
• Comey notified Trump of the Dossier in January 2017 but neglected to inform him that the Clinton Campaign and the DNC had paid for the research, possibly colluding with the Russians in the process..
• The Clinton Campaign filtered payments for the Dossier through Washington law firm Perkins Coie to create an attorney-client buffer.
• Comey, after being fired, leaked four memos (one classified) to a law professor so that he could leak them to the media.
• Comey’s intent in leaking was to push the appointment of a special counsel against Trump who turned out to be his friend and mentor Robert Mueller.
• Comey’s Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe hid the fact that Clinton emails had been found on the home computer of sex-crazed ex-congressman Anthony Weiner, then-husband of Hillary’s aide Huma Abedin – causing Comey to re-open the server investigation.
• An Inspector General’s investigation found McCabe guilty of “lack of candor” (lying) leading to his firing.
• Throughout this entire episode, media outlets – usually the New York Times, the Washington Post, or CNN) have been bombarded with leaks, all of which are heralded as the final straw against Trump, but never have been.

This list doesn’t include the Uranium One scandal – or the selling of access to what was considered a sure thing: the Hillary Clinton presidency. In fact, there is probably more dirt to be found regarding the Clinton Foundation than in the entire list above.

So why a Trump special counsel with so little evidence and no Clinton counsel with so much?

The answer is that the Clintons are a protected class of two that commit crimes but never face consequences. Perhaps the Democrats have made an error of judgment that will chance that. Last Friday, the DNC announced that it is suing the following entities, alleging an illegal conspiracy with the Russian government:

• The Trump Campaign
• Roger Stone
• Paul Manafort
• Wikileaks

Please don’t laugh; this IS serious.

Already, Stone’s lawyers have announced with glee that they intend to use “discovery” to obtain and probe the DNC’s servers to see if they can find this fabled Russian hacking. They might find lots of stuff.

So if we can’t get a special counsel to investigate Hillary Clinton, this DNC lawsuit will work in the meantime. If I had to guess, I’d say the DNC will never allow that lawsuit make it to court.

lynn@BeLogical.com

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

%d bloggers like this: