ELDER PATRIOT – The Rockefeller Mediacracy was hard at work this weekend reporting…nothing. Nothing of significance about Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration role in the most significant breach of national security in decades, that is.
For years we have heard the mantra “if it bleeds it leads” to explain why every scandal, no matter how minor, attached to a conservative became the major headline or news lead of the day. Now that Hillary Clinton and the entire Obama administration, including the president himself, violated or knew a violation of the Espionage Act was being committed there is silence.
It’s not as though Mrs. Clinton isn’t in the news. She’s still being trumpeted as the Democratic Party’s front-runner for their presidential nomination. Hard news about her direct and egregious violation of the Espionage Act? Nada. Unless, you consider hard news trying to determine what the definition of “is” is.
To understand how the Espionage Act was violated let’s turn to Andy McCarthy who explained it in the National Review: In fact, the espionage act—which regulates the handling of intelligence by government officials — does not refer to classified information; it refers to information relating to the national defense. Moreover, it does not prohibit solely the transmission of such information; it criminalizes the communication, delivery, or transmission of that information; causing communication, delivery, or transmission of that information; permitting the removal of that information from its proper place of custody through gross negligence; permitting that information to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed through gross negligence; or, failing to make a prompt report to superiors in the government when an official knows that the information has been removed from its proper place of custody, communicated to someone not authorized to have it, lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed. See also Title 18 United States Code Section 2071 (prohibiting destruction of records).
It matters little whether Hillary Clinton passed top-secret information knowingly. The use of a private email server to communicate official State Department documents is, in and of itself, a gross violation of federal law. That the president who received countless emails from Mrs. Clinton did nothing to prevent or stop it is also a gross violation of federal law.
Adding to Mrs. Clinton’s offenses was using a non-approved contractor to manage her server and who had no security clearances. Still worse was her decision to destroy as much evidence as possible by having the server scrubbed before handing it over to federal investigators. Tampering with evidence is, in and of itself, a federal offense.
President Obama’s silence on this matter speaks loudly about, at worst his complicity, or at best his acceptance of this breach of our nation’s security. Perhaps this is what Obama meant when he accidently said to Russian President Medvedev before an open microphone, “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”
Under any circumstances these events deserve much greater scrutiny than the mainstream media wants to provide. This certainly qualifies as bloody enough to lead every major news outlet’s reporting so why are they avoiding it?
For another piece of evidence let’s turn to a member of the Council on Foreign Relations who explained how and why the Rockefeller Mediacracy exits:
“Equally important is CFR’s influence in the mass media …. They control or own major newspapers, magazines, radio and television networks …” -Admiral Chester Ward (CFR and USN, Retired)
Both Rockefeller and the CFR advocate a one-world government under a new world order. The destruction of the sovereignty of all nations is fundamentally important to their movement.
We have witnessed this abroad with the formation of the European Union where member nations have become awash in debt to bankers and find themselves powerless to do anything but deal with the decisions coming from foreign capitals.
Virtually everything Obama and Clinton advocate and believe in – increased debt, open borders, and increased subservience to the United Nations – has moved us closer to abidance of international law and the rulings of international courts.
The sovereignty of The United States is under assault by a president who swore to protect and defend it, and by his party’s leading candidate to succeed him. The fact that the mainstream media has been parsing Mrs. Clinton’s guilt and avoiding implicating President Obama in any way puts us all at an increased risk of someday answering to an even more distant and detached government.