We've known for years that we have a "ruling class" (as author Angelo Codevilla dubbed it), which looks out for their own interests. We also know that they despise the rest of us. Barack Obama was responsible for the term "bitter clingers" when he referenced small town dwellers as "bitter" people who "cling to their guns and their religion." Ruling-class spokeswoman Hillary Clinton infamously referred to Trump supporters during the 2016 presidential campaign as "a basket of deplorables." Not to be outdone by her own condescension, she doubled down on her criticisms while traveling in India last week, explaining that married women didn't vote for her for president because they caved in to pressure from the men in their lives (a baldly specious claim that her shills in the press were only too happy to echo).
But their duplicity has sunk to new depths. We see daily that laws that apply to the rest of us do not apply to them.
Former President Barack Obama's first attorney general, Eric Holder, was held in both civil and criminal contempt for refusing to comply with congressional subpoenas. Obama's Justice Department declined to prosecute on grounds of executive privilege.
Obama's second attorney general, Loretta Lynch, held a completely inappropriate, (and arguably unethical, if not illegal) private meeting with Bill Clinton while his wife, Hillary, was -- in theory -- under investigation by the FBI. The Justice Department's primary concern thereafter was finding and punishing the person who leaked the story about the meeting.
Former FBI Director James Comey bent the rules when Hillary Clinton was under investigation for improper use of a private email server: Her aides were allowed to claim attorney-client privilege; she wasn't put under oath when the FBI interviewed her (nor was the interview recorded); Clinton lied; she destroyed evidence that was under subpoena; the decision was made to exonerate her months before she was even interviewed.
Any of the rest of us would be in prison by now.
The left can scream "collusion with Russia!" and "election manipulation!" at Donald Trump, and the accusation alone is meant to discredit him and his election. Meanwhile, the investigation which Democrats insisted upon has revealed that it was the Clinton campaign that funded the dossier that listed a serious of fabricated events tying Trump to Moscow; that phony dossier was used to persuade a FISA judge to authorize spying on Trump and some of his associates; FBI personnel were exchanging emails plotting ways to prevent Trump's election and discussing an "insurance policy," (which some pundits suggest sounds an awful lot like an aggressive Russia probe) in case he did. These emails included references to friendships with a FISA court judge, Rudolph Contreras.
Nearly 17 months after the 2016 presidential election, special counsel Robert Mueller and his team have found no evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. Still, the investigation grinds on. Mueller is now subpoenaing business records of Trump's businesses. Meanwhile, the millions of dollars that flowed into the Clinton Foundation's coffers from foreign nationals -- including Russians -- while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, is pooh-poohed as insignificant. Similarly, there are no consequences for Clinton's successful efforts to derail the Democratic primary process and deprive Bernie Sanders of the 2016 nomination.
But we're all supposed to freak out because of Trump's alleged affairs with large-breasted porn stars and Playboy bunnies.
*yawn*
Democrats dispensed with niceties like strong moral character in political candidates decades ago. (Hello? Ted Kennedy? Bill Clinton? "It's just sex," remember?) And as I've noted before, the GOP candidate in 2012 was the moral and faithful Mitt Romney. The left promptly went into full-blown deceit mode, painting him as a killer of cancer victims and a tax fraud. Those were all lies, and the Democrats knew it, but again, the rules are different for them. When called out on the deceit, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said smugly, "Romney didn't win, did he?"
Now we see this same dynamic playing out with use of data collected by social media leviathan Facebook, by political campaigns. It was brilliant campaigning when the Obama campaign did it, but somehow morphs into a national crisis warranting internal investigation when that same data is used by a Republican campaign.
This smells to high heaven. But it's typical. The left has been in a state of perpetual outrage since Trump's victory in 2016. In truth, they're as incensed as they are because they stacked the deck and broke the rules to win. All the rules, including those that should apply to political campaigns, media coverage and even law enforcement.
Now we're supposed to be dutifully distracted by the sleight-of-hand that is their daily barrage of hysteria, and ignore the evidence of their corruption that's right before our eyes.
But the public isn't playing along like the good little sheep they're supposed to be. Worse, they are using the internet and social media to spread the word and expose the deception. That is a source of further outrage, and it is behind the current efforts to silence conservatives and others who refuse to toe the left's party line.
That is a subject for another day.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member