Skip to 6:20 of this morning’s interview with Salem’s Mike Gallagher for the key bit. Trump meanders a bit but he nails the key point: The Lynch/Clinton huddle is indeed splashy evidence that “the system is rigged” and that no one enjoys the rigging as much as the Clintons do. There’s no way to explain the attorney general agreeing to schmooze with a former president whose spouse is under federal investigation apart from them both being blinded to the appearance of impropriety by the arrogance of their own power. It’s freakishly stupid since it creates a gift-wrapped excuse for Trump to challenge the outcome of the feds’ investigation if, as everyone expects, Hillary ends up not being indicted. It’s not that she didn’t do anything wrong, Trump will say, it’s that she has powerful liberal cronies at the highest levels of government willing to subvert justice to protect her. Lynch meeting with Clinton is proof that they’re not even embarrassed enough about it to try to hide it. If you’re a middle manager in the federal bureaucracy and you mishandle classified information, you go to prison; if you’re Hillary Clinton, you go to a dinner party with Loretta Lynch. Trump can and should hang that around Hillary’s neck every day from now until November.
William Jacobson makes a good point too that shouldn’t go overlooked. Neither Lynch nor Clinton volunteered information about the meeting after it happened. Lynch acknowledged it seemingly only because a local news crew had gotten a tip and asked her about it. There’s every reason to think they were going to conceal this, which stands to reason since the whole point of the schmoozing on Clinton’s end obviously was to build some goodwill with the AG while the DOJ is mulling charges. Both of them knew that the meeting was improper and both of them knew that it would look improper to the public. Undermining faith in the fairness of the judicial system, one would think, is near the top of the unofficial list of “Things Attorneys General Should Never Do.” Lynch did it anyway. How come?
This is also stupid:
From the standpoint of legal ethics, Lynch did nothing wrong, said New York University law school professor Stephen Gillers. Gillers said he didn’t think the attorney general needed to recuse herself from overseeing the email probe. But Gillers took a sterner tone with Bill Clinton.
“It was the height of insensitivity for the former president to approach the attorney general,” Gillers said. “He put her in a very difficult position. She wasn’t really free to say she wouldn’t talk to a former president,” after Clinton boarded her plane in Arizona.
She wasn’t? If Bill had handed her an envelope filled with cash, would she have been free to refuse that?
I served on the jury of a murder/rape/torture case in LB a few years back.
On the way in the courthouse every morning we all had to merge into one line to get through security.
I was next to one of the lawyers in the case and, as we were merging, and he went ahead of me, I acknowledged his existence with a mere nod.
He put his finger to his lips and motioned to me to not speak even a ”Good morning” to him.
He was a lousy lawyer, he lost the case, BUT he knew this much.
Don’t tell me lawyer Bill and lawyer Loretta didn’t.
They both just thought they could get away with it.
Nobody was supposed to know about it, even out in public like that.
That she is lying about it instead of recusing herself and tendering her resignation as of Inauguration Day is astonishing.
@Nanny G: Bill just needed some love and understanding.
@Nanny G: All that is surprising is that they did not have their meeting on the set of Good Morning America and Lynch announced there that she would not force the release of Hillary’s emails on the Clinton Foundation. Eventually, we WILL see such a scene unless the rule of law and ethical standards are forced to be re-instituted in this administration.
Republicans Randomly Bring Up Monica Lewinsky When Questioning Loretta Lynch About Hillary Clinton
Sure, Monica Lewinsky is relevant to the matter of Clinton’s emails. Assuming that you’re a total idiot, of course.
@Greg: @Greg: It goes to lying and cover up! Bill lost his law license over it because he was prosecuted. Lynch will not prosecute Hill for anything. She has compromised her integrity.
The Monica Lewinsky scandal had nothing whatsoever to do with the matter presently under investigation. What this “goes to” is House republicans once again abusing their investigative powers to attack their political opponents at the expense of the taxpayers—at this point with the intention of putting a totally unqualified and possibly mentally imbalanced snake oil salesman in the Oval Office. They’re so far gone that they don’t even care about his lack of qualifications or complete unsuitability. They don’t even care that he’s making promises that none of them believe he can keep.
Mexico will pay for his Great Wall? Sure they will. He’s going to slap around China? Does he know they hold $1.2 trillion in U.S. currency, notes, and bonds? And then there’s his tax plan, which multiple independent analysts project would quickly add another $10 trillion to the national debt. Trump says how GREAT the Trump economy will be; he says he’ll eliminate the debt; he also says the entire economy is a bubble that will pop no matter what, and that it’s going to be MUCH MUCH worse than what happened 2008-2009. Which story do you want to believe? Here’s a theory: The man just says whatever happens to pop into his head. Truth isn’t relevant. And neither is consistency.
@Greg: Obama and Hillary have cost the taxpayers millions by their corruption, stonewalling And lies.
The Bush administration’s Middle East foreign policy blunders will ultimately cost taxpayers an estimated $4-6 trillion. Republicans seem to have given themselves a pass on that.
So far as millions of taxpayer dollars go, Republicans have run up a bill in excess of $7 million on their 8 Benghazi investigations alone.
Have you forgotten all about Jack Abramoff? How about the institutionalized corruption of K Street lobbying firms? Have you forgotten which party the phrase “the culture of corruption” was coined in connection with?
K Street has made a big recovery with republicans back in control of Congress. From K Street bouncing back in 2015:
All of which makes it difficult for me to take all of the outrage over “Clinton corruption” seriously. Particularly since none of the claims of gross impropriety ever seem to stand up to close inspection in court, or anywhere else. What we’re actually talking about regardimg the Clintons are negative public perceptions, cultivated and encouraged by a decades-long negative propaganda campaign. The time, energy, and money thrown into that would probably be sufficient to convince a lot of people that the sky is green.
Are you referring to the invasion of Iraq, which was based on Bill Clinton’s foreign policy and intelligence gathered? That which, had Clinton not sought sex away from the shank he married and did his job, would not have even been necessary?
Liberals ALWAYS create the mess and leave it for someone else to clean up, blaming everyone but themselves all along the way.
All due to, first, Obama and Hillary’s incompetence then their lies, THEN their stonewalling. A waste indeed since, in the end, everything we suspected they did wrong, they DID wrong.
Remember Obama’s promise NEVER to have lobbyists in his administration? That turned out to have the same value as all his other promises… ZERO.
I don’t doubt you don’t take Clinton corruption (which involved selling strategic assets and mishandling classified information) seriously. She’s a liberal. You’re a liberal. Liberals excuse lies and corruption of other liberals and lie about it for everyone else.
Obama’s final two years in office are certainly going a lot better than those of his predecessor. Unless you like skyrocketing unemployment rates, a near collapse of the banking system, stock market crashes, 31 percent increases in bankruptcy filings, and a national financial crisis that’s teetering on the brink of global catastrophe. Then I suppose you might think of those as the good old days, and imagine the Obama administration to be a disaster.
I’ll choose Clinton with her flaws before Trump, with the possibility that he’ll blow the whole thing up and give himself a VERY VERY BIG Certificate of Appreciation for doing so.
@Greg: Unlike Bush, Obama has no thriving economy to crash. Unlike Bush, the Community Reinvestment Act has already done its damage.
I understand the DOW Jones Industrial Average and the S&P 500 both reached their highest points in history yesterday. And what’s the current unemployment rate? 4.9 percent? And the rate of inflation is around 1 percent?
Things could be worse. As we might soon see. Trump predicts a MASSIVE MASSIVE recession. Maybe it’s one of those self-fulfilling prophecies. Moody’s analysts are saying that adoption of his policies could be just the thing to bring that about.
@Greg: You don’t understand much. Do you see the bloated exchanges translating into a growing economy or good paying jobs (there’s a very practical reason why the left is pushing a mandated $15 and hour wage; they have KILLED the job market)? The unemployment stats don’t mean much when the labor participation rate is at an all-time low; creating so much discouragement about EVER finding a job again so that they quit looking and fall off the unemployment radar is hardly anything to brag about. But, I guess when you have NOTHING to brag about, you have to work with what you’ve got.
It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that domestic wages are low because U.S. corporations have exported 3.2 million jobs since 2001 as a means to boost profits. American workers are competing with foreign workers who are paid anywhere from $0.50 to $3.00 per hour. Corporations also avoid employee benefit costs, and don’t have to worry so much about worker safety or trashing the environment.
This also has the effect of undercutting worker-supported retirement programs, such as Social Security. Not that the republican base should worry about that. It’s a socialist program for moochers. The republican base all rely on their savings and investment income to provide old age security.
@Greg: As a means to survive, Greg. Government regulation, taxation, EPA and now the wonderful Obamacare has made doing business anywhere but here attractive. Why have liberal cohorts GM & GE moved so much manufacturing overseas? Don’t they want Americans to have good jobs, regardless of what it does to their bottom line?
I wouldn’t expect a leftist that has been indoctrinated to believe that money comes from the printing press and all losses are just moved to the debt column and life goes on to understand, but in the real world it is impossible for a company here to compete and survive with a company outside.
If all those things you mentioned actually bothers you as wrong (as opposed to simply being blaming points) then stop voting for the liberals that continually and repeatedly wreck the economy.