Free Markets, Free People

Heads they win, tales we lose

A link at Insty pointed me to an excellent panel discussion on the illegality of Hillary Clinton’s email shenanigans.

“This is just staggering in the brazenness of evasion of the legal duty by everybody at the State Department, and especially the secretary,” [diGenova] said. “It is simply staggering; it’s unbelievable.”

No, it’s not unbelievable. Many of us have followed politics since the media shamelessly chose to take sides with Bill Clinton during his scandals. We know the dynamic:

  • A scandal or obvious lie comes out: Bill Clinton’s perjury, Hillary’s Whitewater papers disappearance, Juanita Broderick’s rape accusations, Vince Foster’s suicide, Obama’s terrorist mentor, Fast and Furious gun-running, Harry Reid’s amazingly profitable “investments”, the IRS targets Tea Party groups, Benghazi, “if you like your doctor, you can keep him”, etc. ad nauseum.
  • If the media can get away with it, they completely ignore the story.
    If not, they do cursory, biased, and distorted reporting on it, minimizing and excusing the perp(s).
  • If someone (e.g. Sharyl Adkisson at CBS or Lisa Myers at NBC) steps outside the bubble and actually finds something to report on, her superiors in the media spike the story, and ruin the reporter’s career if they can.
  • After a few days or weeks, any attempt to raise the scandal is declared old news.
  • During a Democratic administration, any illegality is studiously ignored. A faux investigation at DoJ drags out things for a few months, and then ponderously declares that there’s nothing further to investigate and no charges of consequence are ever filed. In egregious cases, someone might lose a job, but not their pension, and certainly not their liberty.
  • Any attempt by a later Republican politician to re-open the investigation and really try to get to the bottom of it is declared by Democrats and the media to be “off limits”, “vindictive”, “mean spirited”, “a partisan witchhunt”, and other semantically meaningless but highly negative descriptions.
  • The Republican politician is then punished by the media through a series of unflattering and often downright distorted feature and opinion pieces. This attempt to marginalize that politician forever often works, at least to the extent of shutting them up and cowing them for their rest of their term.

The choices for those wanting to punish illegal and intolerable behavior such as Hillary’s email project come down to:

1. Make some noise but don’t really do anything (heads, they win)

2. Once they have the power, push for legal punishment, be pilloried in the media for it, and probably never get enough allies to do anything because no one else wants to be pilloried (tales, you lose)

The Democrats have learned this lesson well. They can treat the media the way a perverted stepfather abuses his stepdaughter, and the media will never offer more than token protest. The media is determined to further their own leftist vision of justice and right, and that means backing the Democrats no matter how illegal or disgusting their behavior might be.

Hillary implemented her email plans knowing that she would almost certainly never pay a price for it. She knew the press and the rest of the Democrats had her back.

Our political system has devolved to the point that major players on the left know they can break the law in any number of ways, smear opponents, cover up past misdeeds, and lie outright as needed in every news conference. They can indeed “brazenly flout” laws and ethics. I don’t know what you call this system, but it’s certainly not the one they described to me in 8th grade civics class.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

30 Responses to Heads they win, tales we lose

  • I think Jonah Goldberg had it right; Liberal Fascism . Or soft tyranny.

    I don’t think anyone can make a cogent argument that we are “a nation of laws, not men” under the present circumstances. And, as I pointed out last week, you don’t have to be a Clinton or an Obama to enjoy immunity from outlawry. Just a GS something at the IRS, or the EPA, or the Do(racial)J, or etc.

  • Its why relativism was introduced and critical thinking were dismantled in schools. To make people on board with violating due process if the objectives aligned with their desires and ignore the consequences of how such a system could end up far worse than getting their desires satisfied.

    The other problem is that if the GOP had the guts and integrity they would make a push and not care about getting ‘the treatment’. If politician after politician got ‘the treatment’ and the rest spoke openly about what was happening even the thickest voter would eventually figure it out. Instead they are concerned about their own careers as a priority. To the point they sell out (like McCain or Christie) and hope any republican potential opponents get ‘the treatment’.

    My last comment is that we’ve pretty much lost the war and people fascinated with the moral high ground and settling this with marquess of queensberry rules eventhough the otherside dispensed with them long ago are going to be buried on that high ground. Not just figuratively but eventually literally.

    My real last comment is that we might try a new party next as a way out and when that fails and it will, bullets after that. The bullets will be a long while after that but when the new party attempt is destroyed with relish from Democrats, Republicans and the Media, it will be ordained. .

  • Or it could be that the right wing likes to manufacture faux scandals and make small ones seem bigger than they are. Then when the scandals don’t go anywhere, they like to play the victims and blame the media. That way you can claim that you know the obvious truth and it’s those dishonest liberals and the media that’s duping the country. That way you can dismiss different perspectives rather than taking them seriously.

    • I don’t think anyone can make a cogent argument that we are “a nation of laws, not men” under the present circumstances. And, as I pointed out last week, you don’t have to be a Clinton or an Obama to enjoy immunity from outlawry. Just a GS something at the IRS, or the EPA, or the Do(racial)J, or etc.

      OK, Erp. You have the floor (before we wipe it with you). Make the argument. Cogently.

      (Rolls eyes. I sure hope he’s better read on THIS than last time. Chuckles.)

    • That way you can dismiss different perspectives rather than taking them seriously.

      Name a few that “right-wingers” have “dismissed” rather than “take seriously”.

      How’s that ScamWOW “legacy” looking to you now? Which part of the “frame-work” do you put your kids to bed with?

    • And the grocer’s bill gets run up a little more….

    • Or it could be what it is. Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?

    • Nice example of projection.

    • Or it could be all those scandals are real, the media coverups are real and that the twisted alliance between the Dems and the media is very real. Unfortunately, you’re too obtuse, stupid, and beholden to your liberal orthodoxy that you refuse to see it even when the evidence punches you in the face repeatedly.

    • So you are saying that what Hillary did was legal despite bing explicitly and unambiguously illegal?

    • Tell us, which part of what Hillary just recently did as Sec State with regard to her mail server, and the contents, was legal Scott.

      We’ll wait.

      Or should we just consider this more of those regulation thingies that no one knows or cares about eh?

    • “That way you can dismiss different perspectives rather than taking them seriously.”

      I confess. You got me with that one. I dismiss the perspectives of those with their head up their ass.

    • “Dismissing perspectives rather than taking them seriously.”

      Did you really say that as a dismissive answer to the concern that the media ignores illegality committed by certain people like the Clintons?

      Project much?

      • I know, right? And how many times has Erp been punked over the whole “self-parody” deal?

        One measure of intelligence is the ability to learn. Hmmmm….

        • Well in this case I’m sure this server/email thingie was accidentally mishandled by interns from some office in Cincinnati or something.
          It’s all just an unfortunate mix up.
          But what difference at this point does it make eh?

          Let the electioning begin so that Hillary may ascend her throne at the appointed hour.

    • Ok, explain something.

      Only three kinds of people have personal mail servers. Super-nerds, Criminals, and hyper-paranoid.

      Why did Hilary have a personal mail server and was conducting business with it in in a manner that was an extreme violation of Government law. And on the day she was informed the server was subject to disclosure to appropriate bodies in the government she deleted everything?

      Why should this go unpunished or uninvestigate vigorously by everyone, from Congress to the Media?

  • Yo, Erp…!!!

    Tick-tock, man. Where’s your response to my three (for a start) questions?

  • Erp, I’m trying to engage you in a “dialog” here. You always claim you want that.

    C’mon, man. You made assertions…or broad, dark hints of bad-faith creation of “faux scandals”. You claim that “right wingers” use these to avoid dealing with “perspectives” “seriously”. Let’s explore these together. You aren’t afraid of answering a few direct questions, are you?

    Or was your post just a drive-by poo smearing by an apparent troll?

  • Democrats destroying subpoena’ed evidence = OK.
    Not making blasphemous wedding cakes = NOT OK

    Everything is illegal, except crime.

    • Not to mention hypothetically not providing pizza catering for a hypothetical gay wedding.

    • We’ve gone from, “The love that dare not speak its name”, to…

      The love that you’d BETTER publicly declaim as “normal”, or you’ll be burned!

      • The funny part is that commissioned work gets rejected all the time, even over gayness. It’s a non-issue because even gay people shop around. The Holier-Than-Thou Left has manufactured a worldview where this doesn’t routinely happen and everyone should status-rage when it does. Baudrillard would be laughing at them.

        • What are you saying? Are you implying there was MORE than one maker of cakes in a state, county, city or neighborhood that could accommodate such a commission to make such a cake?

          Noooooooo! can’t be! there had to have been only 1 bakery that could do this job!

          • Andres Serrano was thinking too small making “Piss Christ” — should have commissioned it instead for great social justice.

        • Because you’re a slave. “Going Galt” is not allowed.

      • “The love that dare not speak its name” is now the love of God. The former holder of that title just can’t shut up now. Logorrhea is now a gay venereal disease.

  • Hey, Erp, why don’t you give us your “perspective” on Barracula’s VAPORWARE deal…framework…thingie…with Iran? We don’t want to “dismiss” it.

  • “They [the Democrats] can treat the media the way a perverted stepfather abuses his stepdaughter, and the media will never offer more than token protest.”
    I don’t think this is a good, or productive analogy. The media (or a very large portion of it) are complicit in the abuses performed by the Democrats. The Democrats aren’t abusing the media. The two of them are collaborating to further gaslight, denigrate, assault the freedom loving people of this country. A better analogy would be a the Democrats and the media are like Ottis Toole and Henry Lucas, teaming up to rape and murder.

  • I’ve been toying with this idea of a “carbon tax” for Presidents.
    If a politician is found to be lying, we ground Air Force One for a month.
    I think this could made to work for Secretary of State, too.

  • Getting the feeling We are the Red-Headed Stepchild?

    What we are not taking advantage of is we outnumber the abusive stepfathers.

    Silent No More.