I was surprised to see non-partisan watchdog groups are speaking out against Clinton's use of private email for business as Secretary of State. I'm also surprised the media is giving it more than a passing mention. I'm also surprised that some people on internet forums are concerned.
1. The media usually refuses to cover anything negative about a fellow leftist, so it's strange they'll make an exception now.
2. The online folks who are concerned are right to be concerned, but it's weird to see because I didn't see the same levels of concern over much more serious problems from Obama. The Reddit Marxist Army downvotes any criticism of Obama, no matter how valid, but they're not too happy with Hillary right now. Obama's problems, which are ignored online, include using the IRS to attack political enemies and also members of the press who were unfavorable to him. There's hard evidence for both. And there are many other controversies that are much more serious than anything Hillary is alleged to have done. None of these got much traction online, which is disturbing, but it's doubly disturbing when you consider the double standard -- the hard-left Obama is untouchable, but the slightly more moderate Hillary is not.
If anyone remembers, one of the items on the list of crimes committed by Richard Nixon -- which got unlimited coverage for 40 years -- was using the IRS against political enemies, the same thing Obama did. This is included in the official list that was going to be used when he was charged with the crimes. He only avoided answering the charges when he resigned and got Ford's pardon.
What's worse, when legislative committees (all Republicans) subpoened the IRS for emails, which is their legal right to do, IRS officials lied, saying tens of thousand of emails were permanently lost due to "a hard drive" failure -- singular. Does anybody believe a massive government institution, with a massive IT infrastructure, had all of their emails on a single hard drive, with no RAID type system, and that the IRS doesn't backup its data? Anyone who believes that, which the IRS claimed, is beneath my notice. I wouldn't acknowledge the existence of any human being who believes the IRS is telling the truth. And that brings us to the question, why did they lie? There can be only one explanation -- Obama would be in so much trouble, the press wouldn't be able to shield him.
To consider the double standard -- in the press, with watchdogs, and the general online public -- is shocking because none of these groups care -- ever -- when other Democrats are involved in more serious forms of corruption. That's reserved for Republicans. Just this one Democrat is under fire. Why?
My belief is that Obama doesn't like her and doesn't want her to become president. I have no concrete proof for this, but it seems obvious. He didn't make her Secretary of State because he liked her. That was an agreement during Obama's first campaign for the presidency -- she bows out of the race and supports Obama in exchange for the appointment. That's how these things happen.
I think Obama doesn't want Hillary to become president, and the news stories we're seeing now are just the first in a series of attacks against her, instigated by Obama. It will be interesting to see who he publicly supports for president, if he campaigns for anyone at all.