By John Ruberry

The day after one of the biggest October surprises in presidential politics ever, Hillary Clinton called on FBI director James Comey to release, to use the phrase in his statement to his underlings, his discovery of emails that “appear to be pertinent to our investigation.”

That investigation is centered around Clinton’s selfish and reckless decision to used a home-brewed email server while she was Barack Obama’s Secretary of State, rather than a secure government server.

Over 33,000 emails, which Clinton ludicrously claimed to have been about personal matters such as yoga and her daughter’s wedding, were wiped clean from her server last year–the firm that did the work even bragged about it–after Congress subpoenaed them.

Despite the destruction of evidence, many of those emails were recovered and we learned that some of them were marked classified. In July, Comey said that Clinton and her staffers were “extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

Clinton lied.

Of course Clinton could have released those emails to Congress when it asked for them. Possibly within that cache could have been those emails found on the laptop shared by her longtime aide, Huma Abedin, and her estranged husband, sexting fiend Anthony Weiner. That laptop was seized by the FBI in an unrelated investigation of Carlos Danger for inappropriate online contact with an underage teen. Abedin swore under oath that she surrendered all documents with State Department emails to the FBI.

Abedin lied too.

John "Lee" Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven
John “Lee” Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven

So Hillary wants the FBI to immediately release, or at least before Election Day, those “pertinent emails.”

Clinton had her chance, but she chose, to use the term utilized by her protectors in the mainstream media, to yield to her “penchant for secrecy.”

Because what Hillary really has is a penchant for corruption.

The sad part of this story is that about half of American voters will still vote for Hillary Clinton–no matter what.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

Burried in a pretty good roundup of the Democratic meetings on Anthony Weiner at Hotair is this question from Allahpundit:

I’m confounded by her claim that she didn’t reciprocate any of Weiner’s sexual overtures in their chats. She has no reputation to protect so there’s no obvious reason for her to lie, but she’s also been known to say — publicly — “I want to have sexual relations with Anthony Weiner” and “He can get buck wild anytime I’m around.”

Ace has the same things to say:

Before you say that’s BS — she really doesn’t have a terribly strong reason to lie. She’s a porn actress. She doesn’t have a reputation for sexual modesty to protect.

You have to remember something, the difference between a porn actress and a prostitute is marketing. Both are paid to have sex with assorted men and/or women, but a porn star does it in front of a camera to market for a global audience.

The difference between a street corner or a spot in Ladd’s Commercial is her ability to market a sexual persona to men who buy her videos or subscribe to her web site etc etc etc…Her “He can buck wild anytime I’m around” stuff was part of that, but when Weiner bought the marketing, thought she meant it, and she shut him down.

“Porn Star” is what she does when she is on the clock. It’s not her hobby or what she does on her days off. If you believe it is then you are falling for the marketing. It brings to mind this exchange from All in the Family with Sammy Davis Jr.

This exchange starts at :35

Archie : Sam where are you flying out to tonight, Las Vegas Maybe?

Sammy Davis Jr: No I have a TV special to do in Hollywood.

Archie: Orrr Gee that’s beautiful yea! Well er while your hanging around, maybe could you give us a little preview, one of the songs you’re gonna do?

Gloria: Dadddy Mr. Davis makes his living entertaining , you’re asking him to go to work

Mike: Yeah Arch how would you like to be a guest in someone’s house and they say: “C’mon Arch do some packing and lifting for us.”

Weiner started following her for the same reason any guy was following her. I’ll wager a bunch of guys tweet her. The only difference between them and Weiner is he was in a position to get a tweet back.

Update:
I wrote this at 8 a.m. this morning, reports are now coming out that Weiner will resign today. Apparently he can take hits from the DCCC and the congress but when you’ve lost Ginger Lee you’ve lost your seat. 2 p.m. presser is scheduled.

Update 2:
Stacy McCain reminds us of the timeline.

For the first 10 days, Weiner lied, lied, lied, and the liberals who believed Weiner were wrong, wrong, wrong, while conservatives were right, right, right. In the past 10 days, since Weiner’s June 6 press conference, liberals have tried to forget that their credulity in believing Weiner’s lies, and the idiotic conspiracy theories they proffered in his defense.

Now is the day when Jeffrey Toobin, Joan Walsh and a lot of other liberals must be called to account.

and apparently Gennette Cordoba has decided to resign as well…from Twitter.

Do you remember when we were told this was a non-story and a Breitbart invention?

As the hit count of Ladd Ehlinger’s viral video on CA-36 manages to rise (on twitter @Webszachandrews tells me it has doubled since my post this morning) without my embedding of it; we see that Talking Points Memo DC apparently has a different definition of “thoroughly debunked” than CBS News:

A man who said he left a ruthless street gang in Central America and later won praise for his anti-gang work in Los Angeles was arrested Wednesday by authorities who allege he conspired to kill a rival even as he spoke out against gang life.

Alex Sanchez, 37, who heads the local office of the nonprofit Homies Unidos anti-gang group, was taken into custody at his Bellflower home on federal racketeering charges

I may be what some call a “wanna be” but I think this would be what people might consider a “legitimate story” as opposed to what Sam Stein calls: “fairly uncontroversial” at Huffpo. At least Talking Points Memo implies by its very name that it is spinning.

Normally one would not consider the video in question an example of “raising the level of debate” but it’s hard not to raise the level when it started at zero. But in the interest of raising the level of debate lets instead embed this video by Kerry Pickett on a protest in the NY 9th District to ask Anthony Weiner to resign:

Talk about a classic Brooklyn accent. I’ll bet his parents or grandparents were Dodger fans.

Amazingly this is actually raising the level of debate. I suspect if the DCCC’s call for Weiner to resign has not been effective I can’t imagine their shouts on this video will be.

Anyone who follows me on twitter (@datechguyblog btw) knows I’ve been pounding this theme a bit, but it’s nice to see someone MSMish finally bring it up

If you maintain that the 42nd president defended the Constitution by waging a righteous, ultimately successful battle against partisan witch hunters during the impeachment crisis, on what rational basis can you conclude that Weiner must remove himself from Congress?

Right now there is no illegality known in the Weiner case but you see people trying to find out he any government resources were used. Medved points out the Clinton contrast:

Clinton incontestably used taxpayer-funded resources for his sexual adventures, engaging in workplace assignations with Ms. Lewinsky in an anteroom adjacent to the Oval Office while placing more than 50 calls to her, some of them international, using his presidential phone line

The game was given away Suzanne12 in comments:

Clinton was, even in his darkest days, valuable to his party and his country. Weiner is not. All men are NOT equal and Medved should understand that. He’s a big boy and this isn’t the boy scouts.

Oh Suzanne12 we do understand this, that why we are calling you on the left who are acting all shocked on it. We know if you considered Weiner valuable (as some uber progressives do) you would be defending him and calling this a GOP witch hunt.

As I’ve said in the past any pol who comes out for Weiner resignation should be asked the Clinton question and be made to answer it.

It is of course axiomatic that the longer Rep Weiner is in both the congress and in the headlines it is bad for the democrats and to the GOP’s advantage.

It is also goes without saying what the right thing to do is here.

We can illustrate this in just a few links, lets start with Jay Nordlinger:

I wonder whether Democrats, or “progressives,” are comfortable with this double standard: It doesn’t matter what they do, because they are beyond this Judeo-Christian BS. But it matters what Republicans do, because they insist on clinging to the old myths and hang-ups.

Absorbing opinion from the left, a person may ask, “Who can expect a liberal Democrat to abide by ‘strict social mores regarding monogamy’?” Are there liberal Democrats out there who are insulted by that question? I hope so,

He also reminds us of two republicans resignations, one recent:

Note the contrast between the behavior of former congressman Chris Lee and the behavior of still-congressman Anthony Weiner. The first gets caught in a “social media” scandal, and immediately resigns. Weiner lies for a while, until it becomes impossible: and then determines to brazen it out.

and then a big moment:

Remember that incredibly dramatic moment on Impeachment Day, December 19, 1998? The Speaker-designate, Bob Livingston, was urging the president to resign. Pounding her desk, Maxine Waters screamed, “You resign! You resign!” Livingston held up his hand, asking for quiet — and announced his resignation.

One of the most majestic things I have ever seen in politics . . .

I wonder if Maxine has decided to call on Weiner to resign?

Next we see the this the NY Daily News via the Jammie Wearing Fool:

“I wasn’t happy to discover that my congressman is a 14-year-old boy,” said Julie Kirshner, president of the NOW chapter.

“But he happens to be one of the best politicians out there, so we’re in a bad position. We’re trying to give him the benefit of the doubt.”

We’ve seen a lot of that from the far left like Janeanne Garafalo, Marcotte and even Gennette Cordova

What does this say about liberals and their confidence in their own leadership? How little confidence must they have that in the entire NY 9th district or the entire democratic conference there is a person who can replace Anthony Wiener.

DeGaule once said “The graveyards are full of indispensable men” Maybe it’s too old a saying for them, so I’ll add one of my own.

The right thing is usually the smart thing.

One more question for our friends on the left. What if Rep Weiner was Fr. Weiner?

Yesterday I did my second re-write of Longfellow’s Paul Revere’s ride concerning the media’s disappointment on the Palin e-mails. If you want to comprehend why it was worth doing I offer you three screen shots from Memeorandum circa 4:55 a.m. today on the media’s frustration.

As you can see Anthony Weiner once again leads the pack and reaches the top. Featuring headlines such as:

Alison Gendar / NY Daily News:Rep. Anthony Weiner finally considering he may have to resign amid sexting scandal, says source

The Politico:More Anthony Weiner photos surface online

Lucy Madison / CBS News: Ryan, Hoyer call for Weiner’s resignation

Fox News: Weiner Opts for Treatment as New Self Portraits Emerge

These four threads includes links from a total of 17 different blogs/papers: The Moderate Voice , iOwnTheWorld.com, Weasel Zippers, Mediaite, Maggie’s Notebook, Runnin’ Scared, Tom Watson, The Gateway Pundit (2 threads) ,JammieWearingFool, The Daily Caller, Outside the Beltway, CNN, American Power, Ben Smith’s Blog, Patterico’s Pontifications, Politics and Gothamist

Friday a bunch of Palin e-mails from her time as governor was released by the state of Alaska and the MSM was so anxious to get their hands on them to find out what dirt they could get, they risked what was left of their reputations to recruit readers to held go through them. Yet after sifting through thousands upon Thousands of e-mails here is what we seen on memeorandum:

There is a single headline:

Brian Clark Howard / Daily Mail: ‘Trig will be a joy’: Sarah Palin plays God in touching email about her unborn son’s Down’s Syndrome

And there are only six threads under it. No Sheeples Here, The Gateway Pundit, UrbanGrounds, iOwnTheWorld.com, Balloon Juice and JammieWearingFool

Now lets look at the relative size, it won’t be legible but I want you to see the difference in the threads:

Note the size of the Wiener thread at the top and the Palin thread below. The media goal was the reverse. Even worse are the pictures. Weiner contrite, Weiner bare-chested, Weiner dogged by reporters, vs Palin holding her baby. Not the relative images they wanted to see when they were risking what was left of veneer of neutrality.

If today you turn on the TV and the press everywhere but Fox (Except for Rove and Krauthammer) are grumpy, you now know why.

Interesting stuff from Kristin Kirsten Powers:

This is textbook sexual harassment. It may not be illegal, but it’s definitely unethical. He is in a position of influence, and many women—especially a 21-year-old—would be afraid to report a congressman doing that to them because he holds so much power.

Let’s go into the wayback machine and re-write that sentence:

This is textbook sexual harassment. It may not be illegal, but it’s definitely unethical. He is in a position of influence, and many women—especially a 21-year-old—would be afraid to report a President of the United States doing that to them because he holds so much power.

So my question to Kristin Powers and every other democrat calling on him to resign is this:

How come a congressman who never even had physical contact with these woman MUST resign but a President of the United states with a longer history, and actual oral sex with a woman in the White House not only didn’t have to resign but was defended by many of the same democrats expressing outrage now?

I think the question should be asked of every democrat who releases a statement on this case.

Update: We can start by asking Tim Kaine

“Lying is unforgivable. Lying publicly about something like this is unforgivable, and he should resign,” former DNC chief Tim Kaine said.

However apparently it’s ok if done by a sitting president under oath.

And then Harry Reid next:

“I know Congressman Weiner. I wish I could defend him, but I cannot,”

But you could defend Bill Clinton.

I suspect we could play this game all day.

Update: Ace of Spades picks up my theme

Yesterday, or the day before, I heard Kristen Powers claim for those who allege “it’s not about the sex, it’s about the lying,” it really is about the sex.

This is a Clinton-era go-to defense, that, as she says (and was said 100x in 1998-99), if you’re going to have illicit sex, of course you will also lie about it; the two things are bundled, a package deal. Few people have illicit sex and then tell the truth about it.

Hell, we’ve accepted this idea so much that Presidents are permitted to lie under oath about it.

So her point is that this is just about sex, then — the lying being a necessary consequence of the sex — and that this is nobody’s business, except his wife and family’s.

I haven’t hit the moral card very hard because I don’t know how I feel about this. I know David Vitter had all the holes punched in his Subway Frequent Whoremonger Card (get a free girl sandwich!), and he stood for reelection, and won, and I’m not terribly upset by that.

So I guess maybe the liberals are right — honestly, who knows, maybe the only thing that matters is, as Amanda Marcotte avers, whether they vote the right way.

Ace gets more hits in a week then I’ve picked up all time so perhaps people will start asking the Clinton Question.

Update: Kirsten Powers, not Kristen. Corrected

Update 2: Instalanche, and a lesson to those who wish to have one. Spelling and grammar count!

Update 3: I don’t remember a full court Democratic Press to remove Clinton do you?

Update 4:
No offense to Michelle but why is she in any way surprised by this? We’ve already established that if you support Abortion it doesn’t matter if you have sex with young women you have power over. Democratic woman believe this. Their acceptance of Wiener is the natural progression.

Is available now in my archive .

If you haven’t gotten your fill of Weiner Jokes now is the time to listen and remember this was recorded before he fessed up.

We also talked a bit about John Jon Stewart and the “conservative blacklist” and were joined by Roxeanne DeLuca and Brian Henchey. If you missed us Saturday here is a 2nd chance.

We’re at 6:04 and they are trying to duck the story as a joke.

It makes sense because their coverage of the story HAS been a joke.

One week ago they were in the best single position to talk this story, to lead this story and to comment on this story. They choose not to.

Now you have a story where not only is the left discredited, but Andrew Breitbart is vindicated.

So they will of COURSE stay away in the first 15 minutes, because this is the bit that is repeated in the 8 a.m. hour.

Does anyone seriously doubt that if Weiner was a republican that it would have been the lead?

Cripes who is the program director there: Charles Johnson? It’s like Watching North Korean or Syrian TV where stories they don’t like doesn’t exist.

If you want to know the difference between those who choose to spin and those who choose to report, you have now seen it, I suspect they will attempt to avoid the entire story for the entire show. UPDATE:They led in the 6:30 hour and gave the subject less time then they gave hitting Sarah Palin. Of Course they did!

The day they hit a republican on any kind of sex scandal we will be throwing this in their face.

Oh and they no longer have any authority to hit Andrew Breitbart EVER or hit Gingrich on his affairs either.

Update: They don’t have the ability to LEAD with Gingrich or Breitbart

Update 2: I was reading Ed Driscoll who linked to a line on the PJ Tatler called: “The Borg Deactivate”

I took the liberty of going over to the site to see what exactly they’ve written on the Weiner matter, and lo and behold it was like watching Morning Joe

Their one post on the 31st said this:

I’d suggest CNN producers should have asked themselves the same question before booking Breitbart today, and before they allowed him to go on the air and repeat crude speculation that the Democratic Congressman was having some “relationships” with “young women” and “girls that are quite young.”

Note that the usual Breitbart rhetorical recklessness was too much for CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, who appeared right after Breitbart. Dismayed by Breitbart’s “outrageous” insinuations about Weiner and “young girls,” Toobin said it was “too bad that he got to say that stuff on CNN.”

Agreed.

Rather interesting that Morning Joe is following George Soros/Media Matters lead isn’t it?

Remember Media Bias is not as much about how one reports, but what stories they choose to report.

Update 3: Stacy McCain in the Spectator on the Media:

Why should Haberman or O’Donnell expect anyone to believe their predictions? Haven’t they spent the past ten days being wrong, wrong, wrong, while Breitbart was right, right, right? Didn’t MSNBC and Politico, along with most other media outlets, credulously repeat Weiner’s claim that his Twitter account had been “hacked”? Did Haberman or O’Donnell protest when Joan Walsh of Salon accused Breitbart himself of being the hacker? And didn’t Weiner, by attempting to stonewall his way through the scandal, enable those who smeared Breitbart? Indeed, wasn’t Weiner betting on the media’s liberal bias as his hole card in a high-stakes bluff?

Let me remind you of something I said about Bill Sparkman:

Mr. Sparkman was counting on the media blaming the right for his death for his scam to work. He intentionally tried to frame us for his murder!

Anthony Weiner was playing the same game that Bill Sparkman was, he counted on the MSM’s hatred of the right to support his version of events.

The number of leftist heads blowing up right now must be stunning!

Daily Kos, Charles Johnson, Joan Walsh. This is the day that the MSM has to apologize to Andrew Breitbart. That alone makes it special.

Lesson to Joe Scarborough et/al. If Robert Stacy McCain says something is a story, BELIEVE HIM!

As far as Weiner goes, it’s the smartest move he could have made to have a shot to save his seat. I think he manages to do it.

Update: It’s pretty bad when Rep Weiner admits he is wrong before Charles Johnson:

And I’ve been getting a flood of hate mail, much of it demanding that I “apologize” for something. So here’s my official response to this demand:

Not a freaking chance. If Weiner admits to sending the pictures in question, I’ll be surprised and disappointed, but I’m never going to apologize for calling it as I see it.

And I’m certainly never going to apologize for pointing out that Andrew Breitbart is a sleazy fraudster, with a well-documented and very tawdry history of deception.

So to those demanding that I apologize: try holding your breath until you turn blue. Maybe that will do i

I don’t demand anything, I prefer you show yourself as you are, but right now who has more credibility, Charles Johnson or Andrew Breitbart?

Update again: the left’s new meme Should we care?

Daily Kos:

Update: To be clear, his apology to Andrew Breitbart was part of a general apology to everyone in the media who he misled. Now the media wants to know whether he had what he would call “phone sex.” At this point, given that what Weiner did was a personal failure, these questions seem way over the line.

Update : Without condoning Weiner’s personal behavior, the amount of media attention this story has received is even more outsized than the photo that started this circus. I’d love to one day hear a politician get questioned this aggressively about a matter of actual substantive importance.

Update 3: Cannonfire was hitting Breitbart even as the photos were coming out, no updates since the confession.

Oh here is the Breitbart Press conference

Update 4: Pelosi calling for an ethics investigation.

Update 5: At Kos there is a parody suggesting that Weiner’s presser was faked, that a healthy sign over there, but at Cannonfire the guy is INSISTING that Weiner is LYING ABOUT SENDING THE TWEET!

Suppose that Weiner had said: “I am guilty of improper relationships with half a dozen women, and I am guilty of sending these women erotic photos, but I did not send that picture to Gennette Cordova on the 27th.” What would be the result?

Obviously, the journalistic feeding frenzy would continue for months.

More importantly, Breitbart would, under those circumstances, release the ultra-explicit photo, which probably depicts an erection. That shot would be published ad infinitum for the rest of Weiner’s life.

Faced with that rotten choice, I would have gone with the “Get it over with as soon as possible” option.

I’m sorry at this point your beliefs have crossed the line from opinion to religion. I would apply for the Tax exemption now.