Via Ace, we have this illuminating tidbit:
Newly released emails from Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary of state raise questions about the nature of the department's relationship with the Clinton Foundation.Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, released 296 pages of emails from the Democratic presidential nominee, including 44 that Judicial Watch says were not previously handed over to the State Department by Clinton. The emails, many of which are heavily redacted, raise questions about the Clinton Foundation's influence on the State Department and its relations during her tenure.
In one instance, top Clinton Foundation official Doug Band lobbied Clinton aides for a job for someone else in the State Department. In the email, Band tells Hillary Clinton's former aides at the department -- Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin -- that it is "important to take care of (redacted)." Band is reassured by Abedin that "Personnel has been sending him options."
Looks like a clear attempt to use favoritism in a hiring decision, eh what? Of course, the Clintons’ spokesdroid attempted to brush it off:
"Neither of these emails involve the secretary or relate to the Foundation's work," said an emailed statement from Clinton campaign spokesman Josh Schwerin. "They are communications between her aides and the President's personal aide, and indeed the recommendation was for one of the Secretary's former staffers who was not employed by the Foundation."The Clinton campaign said Wednesday that Chagoury only wanted to offer insights on the then-upcoming Lebanese election and was not looking for any specific action from the State Department.
"The right-wing organization behind this lawsuit has been attacking the Clintons since the 1990s and no matter how this group tries to mischaracterize these documents, the fact remains that Hillary Clinton never took action as secretary of state because of donations to the Clinton Foundation," Schwerin said in a statement.
Needless to say, the law as written is supposed to apply to all, high and low alike. However, if you want to see a Democrat high-liner live by the same laws as the rest of us, you must be a nasty right-winger. Probably hate old people and minorities. Whatever your particular disease is, there must be something wrong with you.
The “foundation” dodge is one of the hoariest. Tax-free foundations are a vehicle through which the very wealthy can shelter their true income against IRS predation, while they continue to have the de facto use and benefits of that income as if it had flowed directly into their pockets. And wonder of wonders: Nearly every such foundation labors to pull public policy further to the left.
Ace is livid about it:
America is being divided, before your very eyes, into those castes with Juice and those without Juice. It's devolving into a fucking organized crime family.We are not equal under the law -- far from it. And every day this corrupt gang makes this more and more normal and more and more acceptable to the public....
Anyone who says they're for Equal Treatment Under the Law and then who supports someone who has been, is, and will continue to be Above the Law is simply a liar or hopelessly confused.
But let’s get back to partisanry. This is supposed to be a piece about partisanry, isn’t it?
Partisans – of the “strong” and “absolute” varieties, at least – will automatically incline toward the support of a co-partisan in any contretemps with an “outsider.” When the co-partisan is of high stature, there are sometimes other factors in play, such as the possibility of a tangible reward. But even in the absence of such rewards, shared partisan allegiance can be a powerful determinant of courses taken.
The Department of Justice is part of the executive branch of the federal government. Just now (as if you needed to be told), the executive branch is under the control of the Democrats. Hillary Clinton is the jackasses’ sole hope of perpetuating that control. Bill Clinton is their most admired past president. Partisan discrimination in the Clintons’ favor is easy to suspect, albeit (in the nature of the federal government and its murky innards) difficult to prove.
The patterns of the past few years are striking. At every turn in Hillary Clinton’s quest for the Oval Office at which she came under scrutiny for dubious or illegal actions, Democrats in high office have looked the other way. Some of this can be explained by fear of the Clinton Death Machine, whose body count has risen rather high over the years. Some of it might be “purchased” with job offers or outright payments. But a good part of it – perhaps the greater part – comes from partisan allegiance.
Republicans have done this too, of course. Democrats have had more success at getting away with it, owing to their allies in the media and the enormous “permanent government.” In either case, it’s what our British brethren would call the “Not A Member Of My Club” syndrome. It’s gotten deeper and more flagrant as the political divisions between Left and Right have hardened into unconcealed hatred.
And it should be quite clear that it’s the exact opposite of a Rule of Law.
Sentiment among the Founding Fathers was against political parties. Much of the Constitutional machinery was intended, at least in part, to inhibit their formation, and, should they emerge even so, to impede their hijinks. The Founders were far clearer-sighted about such things than anyone of the current age.
Partisanry is nothing but a form of collectivism. “The party” doesn’t really exist outside the minds of those who voluntarily pledge their allegiance to it. Every party will have a hierarchy, however well disguised, with a pinnacle group that directs the rest of the mass by means both overt and covert. Moreover, that pinnacle group is likely to be utterly amoral and as ruthless as any totalitarian oligarchy. This is implicit in the nature of an organized group.
The demonstrations have been many, these past five decades. Yet there remain many “strong” or “absolute” partisans who reflexively defend “their people” under all circumstances. Their guy could be discovered at midnight with one hand caught in the till and the other on a twelve-year-old’s genitals – you pick the sex – and they’d still insist he was being framed. Their ultimate fallback, of course, is that “the other side does it, too.”
This is politics in these United States in this year of Our Lord 2016. It’s the reason so many Americans have clapped their hands over their ears, tuned out every source of political exhortation, accusation, or blather, and resolved to sit utterly still until election season is well and truly behind us.
Pray.
No comments:
Post a Comment