Posted on 07/24/2015 6:00:05 AM PDT by maggief
How much pull does Hillary Clinton have with the press?
Politico's Dylan Beyers noticed a subtile, but monumental change to an article in the New York Times this morning that altered the entire thrust of the piece. The State Department's inspector general is requesting a criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton's outside email accounts because he suspects that hundreds of classified documents were stored on the server. Without explanation or notice, the Times changed the focus of the article.
The New York Times made small but significant changes to an exclusive reportabout a potential criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton's State Department email account late Thursday night, but provided no notification of or explanation for of the changes.
The paper initially reported that two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation "into whether Hillary Rodham Clinton mishandled sensitive government information on a private email account she used as secretary of state."
That clause, which cast Clinton as the target of the potential criminal probe, was later changed: the inspectors general now were asking for an inquiry "into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state."
The Times also changed the headline of the story, from "Criminal Inquiry Sought in Hillary Clinton’s Use of Email" to "Criminal Inquiry Is Sought in Clinton Email Account," reflecting a similar recasting of Clinton's possible role. The article's URL was also changed to reflect the new headline.
As of early Friday morning, the Times article contained no update, notification, clarification or correction regarding the changes made to the article.
One of the reporters of the story, Michael Schmidt, explained early Friday that the Clinton campaign had complained about the story to the Times.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Legal action might involve (1) an FBI investigation, and, (2) the US DOJ---both in the grip of Obama so political hijinks loom. (3) a congressional committee, with subpoena power.
Here's a fourth option: a six-month investigation: indicated the Clintons diverted tens millions of dollars that they solicited for specific Foundation charitable purposes (that were found to have been diverted to the personal enrichment of themselves and their close associates).
THIS IS CONSIDERED MAIL FRAUD Raising money for a specific cause that was diverted elsewhere is considered mail fraud.
REPORT MAIL FRAUD HERE:
https://postalinspectors.uspis.gov/contactUs/filecomplaint.aspx
If the FBI, DOJ and IRS won't shape up to nab the conniving Clintons, the US Postal Inspector has been known to lock-up many crooks for using similar scams.
New York Slimes at work providing defending “progressive” Democrats (and socialists - Bernie) while sliming conservatives of any kind.
<<< “the Clinton campaign had complained about the story to the Times.” >>>
The fix is in.
This way they can indict the server and call it good.
Yes, it approves the release of illegal alien murderers, rapists, and drug dealers back into our midst and no one calls them on it in the press. No Democrat, no Mainstreamers.
Is that wacky or what?
The deliberate misfeasance, if not malfeasance, of the GOP-controlled Congress to bring the Traitorobama regime and the renegade SCOTUS majority to justice, starting with impeachment, leaves the clear indication that the GOP-controlled Congress willfully aids and abets such traitors.
When the three branches of the federal government are steeped in treachery and demonic corruption, it does not bode well for the United States.
Captain Obvious Option: Hillary’s stooges instructed the NYT to put the story in passive voice to weaken the impact.
Option 2: Hillary is laying the groundwork to support an “I’m a victim” defense if Obama sufficiently hates her to have DOJ pretend to investigate. Well meaning subordinates gave her bad advice. She don’t know nothin’ bought birthin’ no server. There’s not a shred of evidence. It wasn’t her. She doesn’t even know how to delete e-mails and has “people” for that so she can spend all her time saving women and minorities. White males invented the internet — when will they accept responsibility? Hillary relied on her employees to save the right e-mails, and if they messed up, well who suffering baseless political attacks by the vast right wing conspiracy? Poor Hillary, that’s who. Etc.
Option 3: After writing the original story, NTY has been informed that an investigation will be opened targeting someone other than Hillary. This would deflect blame and block access to evidence in other inquiries until after the election (such as the RICO lawsuit wherein Hillary’s server and e-mails would likely loom large?).
I was talking about the New York Slimes and the Mainstream Press. It is the subject of this tread don’t you know?
I read a couple of weeks ago the Benghazi committee is interested in David Brock, which means Media matters.
More than likely some of the emails that are now missing were between Brock/Media Matters and Hillary orchestrating news stories before the Benghazi attack and directing the spin of the news after the attack.
Thanks-—nice input.
The bigger investigation would be looking into the 15 missing emails. If Clinton did not turn those over to the State Department she is in violation of the Records Act. If she deleted those emails she is also guilty of obstruction of justice. Both are felonies. There is enough evidence in the public domain to suggest a prima facie case to sustain those counts. That would serve as probable cause to go in front of a grand jury or support an indictment at an arraignment.
Did you notice about 10-11 weeks ago the MSM all at once, all at the same time, all with the same story as if being directed and on cue started covering Hillary and her money laundering operation.
The talking point the MSM was attempting to create was clear.
If the Hillary controlled the MSM why is the MSM covering Hillary’s money laundering operation? Wouldn’t the Clinton’s have the MSM cover it up if they controlled the MSM?
So much for that talking point. Now we know beyond a doubt Hillary can control the MSM.
THREE PEAS IN A POD Obama puts on a convincing act---
he "knows nothing."Obama didn't even know about this (snix).
Circa 2010--Ex-Pres Clinton in Moscow having a laugh w/ Putin.
as strategic US uranium deposits were sold off to Russia for Big Bucks.
<><>Obama was oblivious to the Clintons jerking around US foreign policy?
<><> Obama knew nothing of Hillary and Sid Blumenthal's emails WRT Iran (the man Obama banned from US govt employment)?
<><> Obama knew nothing about the Clinton Foundation/slush fund buck-raking activities?
<><> Obama never noticed Bill Clinton trotting around the globe?
<><> Obama never noticed the Clinton "charity" used to worm his way into the confidences of foreign leaders....but only those foreign leaders w/ untapped reserves of gold, uranium, oil, and other valuable commodities?
Obama never noticed that Secy Hillary never e-v-e-r uttered a discouraging word e-v-e-r......as the Clinton Foundation sucked up hundred of millions of foreign dollars from shady characters.
==================================================
REALITY CHECK The avaricious Clintons devised hundreds of obscure programs to collect billions.....bragging about do-goodism, how the money was supposedly dispersed to "assist" endless charitable projects.
No question----Obama's protecting the Clintons---b/c they're his meal ticket. The Clintons deposit Obama's cut into his two (cough) "foundations." All of them are living happily ever after--getting rich on other people's misfortune
It’s going to get better I believe.
More than likely if the Benghazi comm is looking into the role the news media played in Benghazi they probably have the al Qaeda doc from OBL to Mullah Omar where OBL says to the effect the media is 90% of the preparation for the battle.
Nothing like having OBL himself giving an explanation as to why the “spontaneous” lie was concocted.
Amen.
The New York Times: All the Leftist Propaganda Fit to Print...
For the last 10-11 weeks the MSM has been on a campaign to contradict the doc from OBL to Mullah Omar and give it new meaning.
Instead of the news being orchestrated for the attacks which is what it means, they are trying to make it appear as if the terrorist are following what is being discussed on right wing radio/blogs/news, (aka right wing hate speech) and planning the attacks around it.
The attempted mass murder in Texas with the cartoons contest is a perfect example.
They wanted us to believe the terrorist had picked up on P Geller’s right wing hate speech mocking mad mo and planned the attack in just a few days.
We had ourselves a new and improved version of the “spontaneous” lie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.