Innocent people don’t generally need to work overtime to cover their behinds. They also generally don’t get support from one of the country’s most important news outlets.
Clinton’s presidential campaign seems to have gone into overdrive to whitewash recent news that some people speculate could signal the end of her 2016 run.
As BizPac Review reported earlier Friday, two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether Clinton exploited sensitive and classified information while using a private email server during her term as secretary of state.
The New York Times reported the story Thursday, with the original lead paragraph implicating Clinton, the Democrats’ front-runner in polls, in possible criminal activity:
WASHINGTON — 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, senior government officials said Thursday.
Apparently the Clinton team didn’t appreciate that, and pressured their media minions to change the lead.
The revised version reads more like Clinton was a hapless bystander during the whole email debacle:
WASHINGTON — Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.
Needless to say, it’s scary how someone in a political power position like Clinton uses her authority to manipulate the national narrative.
It’s equally pathetic how fast certain sectors of the lapdog media bend over to capitulate.
Taken from Politico, which broke the story:
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.
Folks on Twitter weren’t exactly surprised by the soft Clinton cover-up. But they weren’t about to let it go either:
— Daily Kos Elections (@DKElections) July 24, 2015
— Elefante (@Calle_Elefante) July 24, 2015
Just think how bad it would be if Clinton actually became the next president of the “free” world. Shudder.
— The Foo (@PolitiBunny) July 24, 2015
If the fine line weren’t a big deal, the Clinton camp wouldn’t have pressured the Times to change it.
Stephen Miller came up with an eye-opening perspective:
There’s no story here, which is why Hillary sent people to go after a NY Times reporter faster than she did 4 people burning in an Embassey
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) July 24, 2015
Be sure to check out:
Latest posts by Nicole Haas (see all)
- Rep Steve King releases scathing rebuttal and warning on Trump’s deal with Dems: ‘The base WILL leave him’ - September 14, 2017
- Beefcake cop photos unexpectedly go viral, bring relief to hurricane victims in more ways than one - September 14, 2017
- Eight of Florida’s elderly die in sweltering hot conditions at rehab center - September 14, 2017