When Obama promised to Fundamentally Transform America, was anyone seriously expecting that he meant to refashion it into a French Aristocracy? Because it is looking more like it with every passing day.
Bad enough that the self-styled American royal family has a “better than you” attitude to the people they were sent to represent.
“I wake up every day in a house built by slaves.” Michelle said last month with no hint of irony that she has PERSONALLY spent millions of dollars on vacations paid partly by people who can no longer afford their own health care. She wore a dress for one dinner that cost more than the worldwide median income. For someone who makes a living bashing “immoral one-percenters” she has acclimated easily to the “one percenter” lifestyle.
At this rate, it’s only a matter of time before someone starts calling the White House “Versailles”.
The attitude of entitlement quite naturally extends to the use of political power. We see it systemically. (“A pen and a phone.”)
When you begin by viewing yourself as a potentate, you will not restrict your operations to the lawful limits of power. You will cheerfully apply your will endlessly to whatever limits you may do so unopposed.
In an environment where there are many willing accomplices — accomplices with links to powerful and influential positions within the administration, in the courts, in the DoJ, and (obviously) the media — those plans face precious few obstacles in their implementation.
Courts change the rules for his legislation retroactively to legitimize it. (Obamacare is a not a tax. Oh wait. Now it is, so it is valid. Who cares if it was created by a body with no powers of taxation.)
Rules governing immigration are selectively enforced. (If your last name is, say, Jimenez? You are a DREAMer, and only a heartless skinflint would turn you away from seeking a better life in America. If it is Romeike? You will be tied up in expensive red tape until the public shames the government into relenting.)
This is the environment in which government appointees work. Friends are rewarded, foes are punished. Some have noted, for example, that Petraeus was only thrown under the bus AFTER failing to uphold the narrative about Benghazi, suggesting that this is punishment for breaking ranks from their “Mohammed video” narrative.
The IRS has enormous power to harm private individuals, and we have already seen a willingness of this administration to use that power for private ends. (You might ask Dinesh D’Souza whether any other departments use their powers in a similarly selective fashion.)
So what were we really expecting Barack Obama’s appointee to do with Hillary’s accusations? Even leaving aside rumors about the Clinton’s “trail of bodies”, what about the very direct harm that can happen to a political career of someone who falls out of favor?
The Attorney General is a devout Progressive. She has bought into the ideology completely, if she did not, she would never have been chosen by this partisan administration.
Lynch was appointed by Barack Obama to her present post. She was appointed by Bill Clinton in 1999 to her earlier post as US Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. Bill Clinton had a clandestine meeting with her in a plane only days before Lynch publicly announced no charges would be pursued against Hillary.
Barack Obama announced his public support for Hillary Clinton in early June, while the investigation was still ongoing.
Barack Obama has begun campaigning alongside Hillary… BEFORE the announcement that charges would not be pursued.
Oh, and guess what?
Just last weekend, the Times reported that Hillary Clinton plans to keep Loretta Lynch in her position if she wins the election in November. (I’m sure the timing is just a coincidence.)
In case your head is spinning from all this flagrant political self-interest, let’s recap
We are expected to believe:
-It is “merely coincidence” that Loretta Lynch has decided not to bring criminal charges against the very woman who could — and evidently plans to — guarantee her a powerful job this November.
-It is “merely coincidence” that, if her opponent were to win, that same powerful job would go to someone else.
-It is “merely coincidence” that Obama is touring with Hillary the same week that this nasty business is being swept under the rug.
-That Obama is “not” repaying a debt for not throwing him under the bus for Benghazi during his last campaign.
-It is “merely coincidence” that Bill Clinton met secretly with Lynch days before she decided not to pursue charges against Hillary.
-That “exactly the same decision” would have been reached if there was an “R” after Hillary’s name.
-The rule of law “does not” apply differently to Politically connected than it does to a Commoner.
Are you — the American Public — going to quietly accept this ruling?
Is this still America? Or has it been reduced to a “nation that identifies as France?”
