Sunday, June 11, 2017

Dianne Feinstein calls for an investigation into Obama Admin's Attorney General Loretta Lynch covering for Hillary Clinton.

Dianne Feinstein. AP

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D, California) has called for an investigation into former Obama Administration Attorney General Loretta Lynch's actions in the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation. Politico.  Feinstein was referring to former FBI Director James Comey's testimony where he was told by Lynch that he should call the e-mail investigation a "matter" rather than in investigation. Feinstein said that Comey was correct in feeling "queasy" about that and that the Judaical Committee should look into the accusation. She also said that any investigation into Lynch should be separate from the Trump/Russia investigation. 

My Comment:
While the left focused on Jim Comey's personal opinion on the president, the biggest thing to come out of the Comey testimony by far was the fact that he claimed that Loretta Lynch pressured him to downplay the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation. That was shocking and showed quite a bit of malfeasance on the part of the Justice Department. 

Indeed, one of the reasons James Comey made his highly unusual move to explain why he was dropping the case against Clinton after Loretta Lynch had her infamous tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton just days before  Though I don't trust Comey's motives in the case, it's clear that at the very least the tarmac meeting looked corrupt as hell. I personally think that Comey used that speech to provide further cover for Hillary Clinton, but it is possible that he legitimately understood that he had to do something to make it look like there was some manor of justice going on. 

It seems very clear to me that the investigation into Hillary Clinton was mishandled from the start. Her actions were, at the very least, criminal. Comey's rational that she didn't intend to break the law did not matter at all, the laws she broke don't require intent. The only reason she didn't get charged is because of who she was. 

But even more concerning than Clinton's actions were the Obama administration's interference with the case. The tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton was at the very least a huge break of protocol. That's the most charitable interpretation. Much more likely is that Bill Clinton confirmed that Hillary would be keeping Lynch on when she won the presidency but only if she made the e-mail investigation end. Comey knew this and knew that if he recommended charges he would be out as FBI director and nothing would come from it because Lynch wouldn't charge anyone. 

I will leave how much of this is legal and how much of it isn't an exercise to the reader. Even if it was legal though, and the quid pro quo between Lynch and Clinton would not be under any circumstances, it would be a huge scandal that could greatly damage the Democratic Party. Even more than the various Hillary Clinton scandals have already hurt the party.

Enter Dianne Feinstein. I am no fan of her, but it seems she understands what's about to happen. More evidence of collusion and impropriety will come out and he needs to tamp down on it before it destroys her party. She understands that she needs to distance herself and her party from not only Hillary Clinton but the very worst parts of the Obama Administration as well. 

Opening an investigation into Lynch will give the Democratic Party some much needed credibility. Doing it now before the rest of the bad information gets out not only helps Dianne Feinstein personally, it also starts the process of distancing the party away from the Clinton and Obama families and could give them a chance to reform the party into something that can actually win elections. 

I also think that doing this shows that there really is more evidence of malfeasance under the Obama Administration. Remember that Feinstein is part of the "Gang of Eight" bipartisan congressional group that is briefed on intelligence matters by the Executive Branch, not to be confused with the immigration Gang of Eight. As a member of the Gang of Eight, I am guessing Feinstein has seen more evidence than the average person on the street on the Democratic Party. Freinstein has been relatively quiet compared to other Democratic leaders with the Russian investigation and I think her comparative silence is due to being provided evidence of something terrible. 

Most likely, she has been shown evidence that Lynch was the one that ordered the unmasking of Donald Trump and his associates. That unmasking was based on the phony "pissgate" dossier and the unmasking was most likely illegal. Feinstein knows that information is going to come out and when it does, there will be hell to pay. But now when it does she can say that, at the very least, she was concerned about Loretta Lynch. 

No comments:

Post a Comment