Democrats benefit from the destruction of evidence

Jack Hellner:
It is amazing how so many government officials under investigation conveniently lose or destroy things that would be helpful to determine guilt.

Robert Mueller's office wiped information off Lisa Page's and Peter Strzok's phones when they obviously knew that Congress and others would like to see the messages. I am sure that Mueller would be congenial if his targets wiped off stuff he wanted to see and said, Don't worry! There was nothing important to see.

Lois Lerner's computer conveniently crashed when she was being looked at for violating first amendment rights of Obama opponents.

Hillary's computer was completely wiped clean, but she didn't have to worry because she knew that Comey was there and would forgive Hillary's violations of the law by saying essentially that she wasn't smart enough to follow the law so she didn't have to.

The DNC claimed that the Russians hacked its computers and wouldn't allow the government to see them. They didn't even have to wipe their computers clean to hide the information. Government agencies and the media just repeated over and over again, with no questions asked, that the Russians hacked. I believe that the next time a bank is robbed, the staff should not give access to investigators or regulators and tell them they should just take their word. That should work.

A big story that has just come out is that federal prosecutors are now investigating Trump's inaugural to see if donors got access.


One source familiar with the matter says the investigation is in the early stages and investigators are generally focused on whether any inauguration money was misspent. ...

Citing conversations with people familiar with the investigation, which is being handled by the US Attorney's office in Manhattan, the [Wall Street] Journal reported that prosecutors are also looking into whether the committee accepted donations from individuals looking to gain influence in or access to the new administration.

I don't recall any investigation into either Obama inaugural to see if he sold access. He obviously did.
...
There is more, including a list of those who contributed to Obama and allegedly benefited from it.  These attacks on Trump are a part of a bad faith effort by Democrats to criminalize opposition political figures for doing the same things they do.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more

Bin Laden's concern about Zarqawi's remains

James Robbins: ... Bin Laden suggests that President Bush should allow Zarqawi’s body to be returned to his family in Jordan, but this is a matter that is up to the Jordanian government, which so far has not shown much interest in facilitating a homecoming. Bin Laden mocks King Abdullah II, calling him a Coalition minion, and asking “w hat scares you about Abu Musab after he’s dead? You know that his funeral, if allowed to happen, would be a huge funeral showing the extent of sympathy with the mujahedin.” A large crowd would definitely turn out, though most people would be on hand to demonstrate their anger and disgust. Last November’s hotel bombings in Amman , masterminded by Zarqawi, are still fresh in people’s memory, and mentioning them to Jordanians has the same visceral impact as memory of the 9/11 attacks does here. Jordan has adopted a zero-tolerance policy towards those who choose to mourn the country’s least favorite son, and four opposition members of parliament who paid con
Read more