As the Leftwing goes through their inevitable rant about whether President Trump got involved in the handling of the imminent Roger Stone sentencing, we wondered…
…why nobody complained when Obama weighed in on the Clinton email probe?
Compare Stone’s process crimes, mixing up dates of tweets and conversations, to the Hillary Clinton crimes of illegal use of personal emails WHILE Secretary of State that included unlawful handling of classified info and purposefully deleting subpoenaed data.
While the FBI was deliberating how to deal with Hillary, Obama came out on national tv and specifically said she shouldn’t be held accountable as her crimes were unintended.
Where was media condemnation of Obama’s ‘obstruction of justice’?
‘Intent’ wasn’t needed to prosecute, but even if it was, her crimes were intentional:
- Nobody ‘unintentionally’ sets up a private server to use email for gov’t business;
- Nobody ‘unintentionally’ violates instructions on handling of classified material;
- Nobody ‘unintentionally’ deletes subpoenaed computer communications…
…she did set-up the system, she did mishandle classified data, she did delete emails.
Classified data was compromised; lives were lost overseas (Benghazi, anyone?).
Not only did Obama lie about statutory necessity of ‘intent’…he also lied about whether she committed those acts intentionally…to obstruct justice by letting her off the hook.
Roger Stone was not convicted of election meddling, tampering, or foreign collusion. He was railroaded because he had the temerity to work on the Trump campaign briefly.
And, let’s not forget the Democrat dream-team within Mueller’s group came up with the unfortunate (to them) determination NO foreign collusion or vote tampering occurred…
…the DoJ determined there should’ve been no Mueller probe in the first place…
…which means Stone (& others) were indicted based on non-crime harassment.
The ‘panties-in-a-bunch’ crowd need to get some proper perspective.
(And the DoJ needs to take a hard look at FBI mishandling of Hillary’s Emailgate.)