Behind Closed Doors, Media and Government Buzzing about Hillary’s Emails

 

Morning-JoeConservatives often complain about media bias. While it’s true that the press often skews the news of the day to promote their own ideology, a far more damaging practice is when they decide not to report the news in the first place. On Monday’s “Morning Joe,” the panel finally pulled back the curtain on what is being discussed in newsrooms across the country.

While analyzing the Democratic primary, panelist Mike Barnicle said, “There’s an undefined element in the campaign that will impact the campaign sooner or later and that’s what’s going to happen in the Justice Department. I mean, you can just sense among Democrats … they’re right on the edge of their seats trying to figure out what will happen and what determining factor that’s going to play in the nomination process.”

The Justice Department? Whatever could he be referring to?

Mark Halperin of Bloomberg Politics agreed, saying that even if Bernie Sanders loses the Iowa caucus he “can go forward with lots of money, with debates on the schedule and see are there are developments in the legal front that allow him to start to win even after tonight if he doesn’t win.”

The legal front? Wait — is he referring to Hillary Clinton’s email scandal? But we’ve been assured by Democratic flacks that Hillary has little to worry about.

That’s when host Joe Scarborough let in the audience on the conversation among elites. “A couple people held their breath when we talked about it the other day,” he said. “Everybody in the government, everybody in the media, everybody that runs anything is talking about how advanced this investigation is. And nobody’s telling the American people about it. So I had an executive at another network ask ‘is it safe to talk about it now?’”

Barnicle agreed, saying, “There’s just too much buzz around it from all different levels of government, media, and everything to ignore it, and Bernie is no longer ignoring it.”

You can watch the video here.

There are 53 comments.

  1. 1
  2. 2
  1. Member

    Kind of reminiscent of Van Jones. At the time he resigned, the NYT had never mentioned the situation. Their readers were left to wonder why he was resigning out of the blue.

    • #1
    • February 1, 2016 at 9:48 am
    • Like
  2. Member

    Clearly MSNBC is part of the vast right wing conspiracy.

    • #2
    • February 1, 2016 at 9:50 am
    • Like
  3. Thatcher

    Release the kraken modified limited hangout!

    • #3
    • February 1, 2016 at 9:56 am
    • Like
  4. Member

    Jager:Clearly MSNBC is part of the vast right wing conspiracy.

    More importantly, you’re not hearing about it on CNN, et. al. Everyone accepts that MSNBC is a wing of the democratic party, but those same people deny that CNN is anything other than 100% objective and fair.

    Problem is, you’re not hearing about this anywhere.

    [in fairness, I have not listened to NPR, lately, and I do remember hearing a few email scandal stories many months ago. They’re clearly not covering it to any great extent, but it might not be “radio silence,” either.]

    • #4
    • February 1, 2016 at 9:59 am
    • Like
  5. Listener

    The magnitude of her carelessness with national security has become impossible to ignore. Anyone who knows anything about the IC world knows Hillary should be in deep, deep doo-doo. My folks would be rotting in federal prison if they’d pulled one hundredth of these stunts.

    • #5
    • February 1, 2016 at 10:00 am
    • Like
  6. Inactive

    My local Philly tv news station reported it days ago in their morning newscast – 6ABC, the one with the most viewers – and they laid it out briefly but correctly, in my opinion. I was a bit surprised to hear bad news for Hillary there. Unfortunately it probably means that, with Philly’s new Mayor Kenney, the Philadelphia elites are in the bag for Bernie.

    • #6
    • February 1, 2016 at 10:12 am
    • Like
  7. Inactive

    I’ll believe there are consequences only after sentencing.

    We know three things:

    1. She’s guilty.
    2. The Justice Department has all the evidence it needs to indict Hillary.
    3. The Justice Department has not yet indicted Hillary.

    She’ll get away with it because the alternative is Bernie ’16.

    • #7
    • February 1, 2016 at 10:13 am
    • Like
  8. Inactive

    What’s interesting is that her campaign is suffering even while the only network doing any real reporting is Fox. Sooner or later, they will all need to report it. The impact on her campaign will get worse over time as those who only get their news from liberal outlets will be introduced to it.

    • #8
    • February 1, 2016 at 10:16 am
    • Like
  9. Inactive

    I think it is Ok the networks are not making this a priority right now.

    This is a huge deal and so far all indications are that the FBI is being very professional and discrete about the investigation. Nothing is being leaked. The email releases we get on Fridays are horrible and well documented on Ricochet.

    If/when the FBI recommends an indictment this is a binary event and it will spell the end of Hillary, the Clinton foundation, etc. and probably ensure a Republican sweep of the federal gov’t. This isn’t going to be some small deal.

    If the press talks about this incessantly now then it becomes ‘old news’ when the recommendation does happen.

    • #9
    • February 1, 2016 at 10:16 am
    • Like
  10. Member

    BrentB67:

    If the press talks about this incessantly now then it becomes ‘old news’ when the recommendation does happen.

    It’s a guarantee that the Clintons will call it old news whenever the story comes out. One, it’s part of their standard playbook (lie until proven to be lying, then call it old news), and two, she’s already doing it.

    • #10
    • February 1, 2016 at 10:21 am
    • Like
  11. Inactive

    Judge Mental:

    BrentB67:

    If the press talks about this incessantly now then it becomes ‘old news’ when the recommendation does happen.

    It’s a guarantee that the Clintons will call it old news whenever the story comes out. One, it’s part of their standard playbook (lie until proven to be lying, then call it old news), and two, she’s already doing it.

    I think to a degree she is already doing that. FBI recommending an indictment is a different level.

    Additionally, at some point the press and Obama’s advisors are going to have to make choice about his legacy. The emails released are too damaging to be ignored.

    FBI can’t sweep this under the rug and I don’t think Obama wants his last great act to be ignoring a crime so obvious. Think back to Bill Clinton and the Mark Rich pardon this is that level of scandal raised to the 10th power.

    • #11
    • February 1, 2016 at 10:27 am
    • Like
  12. Contributor

    Media suppression is nothing new and they permit the administration to play the media timing game very well. The media ‘does their job’ and reports on Friday night and Saturday morning and it’s forgotten by the time folks get home from their kids soccer games.

    Best example is the night before Thanksgiving has now become the annual release of another massive batch of government regulations. The NIGHT BEFORE THANKSGIVING.

    • #12
    • February 1, 2016 at 10:29 am
    • Like
  13. Member

    BrentB67:

    FBI can’t sweep this under the rug and I don’t think Obama wants his last great act to be ignoring a crime so obvious. Think back to Bill Clinton and the Mark Rich pardon this is that level of scandal raised to the 10th power.

    You gave me an excellent example for my counter argument on Obama’s legacy. You and I already think he’s a failure and that won’t change regardless of what he does here. Democrats think he’s the bestest president ever, and deciding not to charge won’t change that either.

    The proof is that the most revered figure in Democratic politics is that same Bill Clinton. At this point it is reasonable to assume that Democratic voters see lying and corruption as qualifications. Bill, Hillary, Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Kerry… each of them a proven liar, minimum.

    • #13
    • February 1, 2016 at 10:35 am
    • Like
  14. Inactive

    Quesiton for Ricochet: Is this scandal considered ‘part of the administration’? My opinion is that the Clinton’s are an entity unto themselves and that there isn’t much love lost between team Obama and the Clintons.

    Do we think it possible that Hillary gets thrown under the jail and the media does its duty to ensure not so much as a speck of dust on the Obama administration?

    It may cost dems the White House, but that can be a price to pay preserving the legacy of The One.

    • #14
    • February 1, 2016 at 10:40 am
    • Like
  15. Member

    BrentB67:Quesiton for Ricochet: Is this scandal considered ‘part of the administration’? My opinion is that the Clinton’s are an entity unto themselves and that there isn’t much love lost between team Obama and the Clintons.

    Do we think it possible that Hillary gets thrown under the jail and the media does its duty to ensure not so much as a speck of dust on the Obama administration?

    It may cost dems the White House, but that can be a price to pay preserving the legacy of The One.

    The media and bureaucracy so unscrupulous as to repeatedly hide the truth from the American people in the interests of getting their preferred candidates elected will find a way both absolve Felony and preserve Obama’s “legacy,” such as it is.

    The media are Soviet Democrat propagandists, cowards, and traitors. Other than that, they serve a purpose, just not as useful as if they were hanging on the end of a noose. Pour encourager les autres.

    Bastards.

    • #15
    • February 1, 2016 at 10:55 am
    • Like
  16. Inactive

    Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk,talk, talk, talk, talk.

    I hope I’m wrong but I don’t think Clinton or any major player (e.g. Abedin, Blumenthal etc) will ever suffer any meaningful consequence.

    • #16
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:00 am
    • Like
  17. Coolidge

    They are talking about it. But they are making it out to be nothing. If anything, they use it make it look like Hillary Clinton is just a regular person, doing her thing.

    No doubt should any legal action be taken, it will be portrayed as a Republican hit job.

    • #17
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:03 am
    • Like
  18. Inactive

    BrentB67: Additionally, at some point the press and Obama’s advisors are going to have to make choice about his legacy. The emails released are too damaging to be ignored.

    I agree with this. I have been a contrarian on this issue. I think that eventually Obama realizes he has to take action to preserve his legacy and won’t be able to have the Justice Department just ignore it. My guess is that he cuts a deal with Hillary to let her off with a slap if she agrees to drop out, he then holds a press conference with Biden and puts him forward to be the candidate.

    It would be classic Obama, seeing himself as the savior all the while getting rid of Clinton. No long lost love relationship there.

    In the end, he cares about himself. And pushing this under the rug will be seen as a bigger problem for his legacy than rolling the dice on having her go through an election tainted with a chance that she loses AND he ignored the issue. That’s worst case.

    • #18
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:04 am
    • Like
  19. Inactive

    BrentB67: Quesiton for Ricochet: Is this scandal considered ‘part of the administration’? My opinion is that the Clinton’s are an entity unto themselves and that there isn’t much love lost between team Obama and the Clintons.

    Last year I developed the theory that Valerie Jarrett, with Obama’s approval, was playing rope-a-dope with Hillary and at just the right moment (last November was my prediction) Valerie would turn the dogs loose.

    Obviously that didn’t come to pass, but I just can’t believe Obama, and especially the two ladies in his life, will allow his legacy to be sullied by Clinton. I just can’t help but think at some point he will turn the dogs loose, or at least refuse to bail her out.

    In my view, her actions are separate from the administration. Hillary made the decision to violate the law, she instructed her minions to remove classification notes, this is all on her.

    • #19
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:06 am
    • Like
  20. Member

    Red Fish, Blue Fish:

    In the end, he cares about himself. And pushing this under the rug will be seen as a bigger problem for his legacy than rolling the dice on having her go through an election tainted with a chance that she loses AND he ignored the issue. That’s worst case.

    I think worst case would be if she decides to take him down with her. We don’t know what dirt she has on him. But knowing her as well as we do, it seems likely she has something and she would use it.

    • #20
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:09 am
    • Like
  21. Inactive

    Other part of this that I keep thinking about is what happens if he sweeps it under the rug and Clinton loses the election. In that case, isn’t it possible that the entire Obama presidency is interpreted as some dirty period, culminating in Obama letting Hillary off the hook? Even Democrats would be saying that, no? I mean, elections have consequences on the losing party. And it’s very likely that in a case where the FBI recommends indictment, Obama sweeps it under the rug and then Hillary loses, wouldn’t a lot of Democrats blame the loss on that?

    They aren’t going to blame it on the problems with their ideology, right? All those Bernie fans would be screaming the day after Hillary lost about all of the corruption, and that would be the new consensus on Obama as seen from after the end of his presidency, right?

    I think he knows this.

    • #21
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:12 am
    • Like
  22. Member

    Another reason to belong to Richochet, we have been talking about it for more than a year.

    • #22
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:12 am
    • Like
  23. Inactive

    Judge Mental: I think worst case would be if she decides to take him down with her. We don’t know what dirt she has on him. But knowing her as well as we do, it seems likely she has something and she would use it.

    Obama is immune on this issue, except to the extent that he covers it up for her. He has done much worse and it has not stuck. No doubt the Clintons would try to do him some harm. That wouldn’t be effective at all against him. He is the President. That matters a ton.

    • #23
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:15 am
    • Like
  24. Thatcher

    Judge Mental:I think worst case would be if she decides to take him down with her. We don’t know what dirt she has on him. But knowing her as well as we do, it seems likely she has something and she would use it.

    That fits my working theory. I’ve always assumed that Clinton knows enough about the Obama administration’s inner workings that she can hold Obama’s reputation–or more–hostage, “If I’m going down you’re going down with me.” This means that Obama will search for a way to keep his Attorney General from indicting her.

    • #24
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:20 am
    • Like
  25. Member

    Red Fish, Blue Fish:

    Judge Mental: I think worst case would be if she decides to take him down with her. We don’t know what dirt she has on him. But knowing her as well as we do, it seems likely she has something and she would use it.

    Obama is immune on this issue, except to the extent that he covers it up for her. He has done much worse and it has not stuck. No doubt the Clintons would try to do him some harm. I mean, he is the President. That matters a ton. That wouldn’t be effective at all against him.

    I’m not talking about email. The email scandal grew out of Benghazi. If Hillary is going down for something to do with Benghazi, she might just start talking about Benghazi. Remember the 10pm phone call from Obama to Hillary? What did he say in that call, and how can she spin it against him? It doesn’t matter what is true. Hillary is vindictive, and I can totally see her torpedoing him out of spite if nothing else. But it’s more effective as a threat against him.

    Plus, who knows what else she could say? Being a liar comes in handy in these situations.

    • #25
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:22 am
    • Like
  26. Member

    I figure that whoever replaces Hillary will get a sympathy vote, not as big as LBJ’s but bigger than zero and more than Hillary would get on her own, but not Sanders. He’s insane. As to the DOJ, most of the Federal Attorney’s and staff lawyers hired in the last 7 years are left wing ideologues and would be dismissed by a strong conservative the new administration has done its home work and if it has courage. So the Obama cabal want a friendly elected. It’s how this cabal in and around the White House believe they must play or not play the indictment and its timing. That is all they care about.

    • #26
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:46 am
    • Like
  27. Member

    Judge Mental:

    Red Fish, Blue Fish:

    In the end, he cares about himself. And pushing this under the rug will be seen as a bigger problem for his legacy than rolling the dice on having her go through an election tainted with a chance that she loses AND he ignored the issue. That’s worst case.

    I think worst case would be if she decides to take him down with her. We don’t know what dirt she has on him. But knowing her as well as we do, it seems likely she has something and she would use it.

    I’m having a hard time understanding how this would be the “worst case,” unless you mean for the Dems. I would be delighted if Obama allowed the DoJ to indict Clinton, and Clinton responded by releasing a bunch of dirt on Obama. Am I missing something?

    • #27
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:48 am
    • Like
  28. Member

    Arizona Patriot:

    I’m having a hard time understanding how this would be the “worst case,” unless you mean for the Dems. I would be delighted if Obama allowed the DoJ to indict Clinton, and Clinton responded by releasing a bunch of dirt on Obama. Am I missing something?

    Worst case for his legacy, not us. For us it’s more like this:

    Bring your popcorn!

    • #28
    • February 1, 2016 at 11:55 am
    • Like
  29. Inactive

    Whatever happens, being a writer for House of Cards Season 5 just got a whole lot easier. Watching this mess unfold in the meantime is placating (somewhat) the anticipation of season 4’s release in just over a month.

    I’ll be starting an R> support group for similarly-afflicted binge watchers.

    This is a safe place. Admitting it is our first step to recovery….

    • #29
    • February 1, 2016 at 12:01 pm
    • Like
  30. Member

    A lot hinges on Hillary’s motivation for the private server.

    Case 1. It was just Clinton arrogance, not wanting to bothered with security regulations. Evidence for: Her notorious attitude toward the SS during Bill’s admin. She wanted her own system, her cronies followed the boss. Outcome: Probable large scale intel spill, cronies prosecuted for security violations, Hillary an ‘unindicted co-conspirator’.

    Case 2: It was a cover-up of a pay-to-play influence peddling scheme where foreign governments and others bought favorable treatment in return for donations to the Clinton Foundation. Evidence for: Notorious Clinton corruption, rumor of FBI/IC investigation in this direction. Outcome: Large scale intel spill plus blackmail opportunities then and now on US SOS and potential president. I don’t think this one could be covered up – there are still conscientious and patriotic rank and file in FBI & IC, regardless of their crony political bosses.

    Be assured the FBI knows which case is true. Sounds like those who ‘scrubbed’ the server were incompetents who didn’t know that deleting a file or e-mail directory doesn’t actually remove data from the hard drive. Entire files or fragments can be recovered long after, even without hard core forensics.

    • #30
    • February 1, 2016 at 12:02 pm
    • Like
  1. 1
  2. 2