I always thought the United States was a country with some limitations on political corruption. I believed there were at least some restrictions regarding the influence of power and money on politicians. Now I must admit I was wrong. The United States is no exception to the sway of money and greed. Politicians are dishonest and political corruption is happening all around us.
Not every politician has good intentions. There are many who seek certain positions simply for political, social or economic benefits. There are others who go beyond selfishness and are willing to do the unimaginable to secure their political future. Hillary Clinton belongs to this last group.
The exposed facts about the Clinton email scandal have been alarming. During an FBI report, director James Comey revealed how severe Mrs. Clintonâs lies were to the American People. The report showed that the Secretary of State lied to Congress and the American people repeatedly for years. She also claimed that she didn’t send or receive classified information and that she had used only one server. All these assertions were proved to be false by the FBI. James Comey even called Hillary “negligent and extremely carelessâ.
Despite the FBIâs reportâs extensive detail, Hillary Clinton rejected the idea that she was “negligent” in her actions as Secretary of State.
Despite the revelations exposed in the report, director James Comey recommended not to bring legal charges against Hillary Clinton. According to him, Clinton did not act “intentionally”. That was the only reasoning of James Comey to not press charges.
Comey’s recommendation surprised the American people. How James Comey reached such a decision despite the exposed lies of Hillary Clinton was unimaginable. Some critics think that Comey simply didn’t want to be the person to put Clintonâs candidacy at risk. Others believe that James Comey gave in to Clintonâs political power.
For many experts, the âintentionalâ factor was not a legal excuse to exonerate Clinton. Apparently, James Comey changed the federal statutes and the interpretation of the law to protect Hillary Clinton.
Another notable suspicion in the investigation of Mrs. Clinton was the private meeting held between the Attorney General (Loretta Lynch) and Hillary’s husband Bill right before the FBI reached its verdict. According to Lynch, they talked about golfing and grandchildren during the meeting.
How could the spouse of a person being investigated by the FBI meet in private with the nation’s Attorney General right before the verdict?
The liberal press downplayed the suspicious Bill Clinton-Loretta Lynch meeting. It was not surprising that shortly after the FBI report was made public, Loretta Lynch said that she would abide by the recommendations of James Comey.
Loretta Lynch had the opportunity to adopt an impartial position or to suggest the formation of an independent investigation team. Lynch washed her hands, declared that the case be closed and gave Hillary the green light to continue her presidential race.
A few days later James Comey testified in Congress about the FBI report. The questions from the interrogation panel were direct and concise. The testimony from Comey revealed the same lies from Hillary Clinton . During Comeyâs testimony another important detail came to light. The interview of Hillary with the FBI was not sworn or recorded, something extremely unusual, especially when it comes to matters of national security. Up to the time of writing this article, the FBI director has been unable to explain why the interview took place under such circumstances.
Despite the statements of James Comey before the Congress, the Attorney General has maintained her position to exonerate Clinton. I wonder if Loretta Lynch would have adopted the same attitude if the person under investigation were Donald Trump instead of Hillary Clinton.
Hillary Clinton violated federal law as Secretary of State by obstructing the investigation, wiping out thousands of emails, and lying to Congress and the American people. However, according to Loretta Lynch, the case must be closed.
Obviously, the rule of law does not apply to the privileged class of the Clintons. Any citizen under similar circumstances would suffer consequences for their actions. In fact, this has been the case with several people investigated in the past, both civilians and those in the military.
Hillary’s case is unique in the country’s history. Never has a Secretary of State used their personal email account to handle matters of vital interest and national security for 4 consecutive years.
The negligence of Clinton constituted a risk and a potential threat to the national security of the country and the American people. Moreover, the cover-up on the part of the Obama Administration is embarrassing for the United States. Mrs. Clintonâs email scandal and the stance of the Administration reminds me of political corruption found in third world countries. It’s unfortunate that someone like Hillary Clinton has become the representative of the Democratic Party for the presidency.
Sadly, the case of these emails is just another example of the multiple scandals in the political life of Hillary Clinton.
Donald Trump was correct when he said: “the system is rigged”.
