[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Media React to Comey on Clinton Media React to Comey on Clinton by Stephen Lendman Justice isn’t blind. It works one way for privileged figures like Clinton, entirely another way for ordinary people. Media reaction was mixed - despite clear criminality demanding indictment, prosecution and stopping her nomination as Democrat party standard bearer. US law requires documents and other information pertaining to national security and defense not be removed from their “proper place of custody.” Nor may they be tampered with, altered, destroyed, concealed, stolen or improperly transmitted. Pro-Clinton New York Times editors reacted as expected to Comey’s announcement, saying his refusal to recommend criminal charges is “undoubtedly correct.” Hard facts prove otherwise. Comey passing off her criminality as simply extreme carelessness undermines justice, obstructing it, making him complicit in her law-breaking - things rigged to assure her party nomination and likely November election, a known criminal to succeed Obama. Washington Post editors agreed with their Times counterparts, calling Comey’s conclusion “sound,” absolving Clinton of crimes too serious to ignore, passing them off as poor judgment. Los Angeles Times editors concurred, dismissively “hop(ing) that this episode has taught her a lesson about the importance of accountability” - rule of law principles be damned. Wall Street Journal editors were less forgiving, saying “(o)ne standard exists for a Democratic (sic) candidate for President and another for the hoi polloi.” “(W)hat a depressing moment this is the American rule of law. No wonder so many voters think Washington is rigged for the powerful.” The Chicago Tribune highlighted “(t)he FBI’s damning non-indictment,” saying “(h)ere’s the campaign bumper sticker you won’t see: ‘Clinton in ’16 - Because No Charges Were Recommended.” Hillary violated State Department rules and US statute laws - serious criminal offenses. “Would Americans trust her as their president,” asked Tribune editors? Will they choose a known criminal - a neocon hawkish one with her finger on the nuclear trigger, perhaps eager to squeeze it? Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
[Register]
|
||