The One-Sided Media Refuses to Find True Obstruction of Justice

The Democrats make accusations concerning Donald Trump but never seem to back them up. With their allies in the media, they throw whatever they can find at the wall and see what sticks. So far, there is not one single shred of evidence on anything to do with the Russians, period. Many Americans see an accusation as the truth and the media plays into it.

The Republicans look at these accusations, acknowledge them and investigate. That is a very big difference they have with the screaming left wing Democrats. It is why we saw absolutely none of this when Barack Obama acted to obstruct justice. That also meant no outrage at all from the left-biased media.

Obama would send strong signals to police and the judiciary about how he wanted certain cases resolved. A perfect example was his feeble efforts on April 10, 2016. He attempted to influence the decision on whether to prosecute Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information when she set up her own email server.

He knew very well that prosecutors choose which cases to pursue and which not to. Are they just a technicality or actually criminal? Obama attempted to mitigate the transgression.

Does anyone remember Obama telling Chris Wallace of Fox News, “She (Hillary) would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy. What I also know is that there’s classified and then there’s classified. There’s stuff that is really top secret top secret, and then there’s stuff that is being presented to the president or the secretary of state that you may not want on the transom or going out over the wire, but is basically stuff you can get in open sources.”

He went on to pontificate the issue of intent and her loyalty to the country, noting her commitment to service.

Is that interfering or what?

But that wasn’t enough for Obama. He said, “I continue to believe she has not jeopardized America’s national security. Now what I’ve also said, and she’s acknowledged, is there’s carelessness in terms of managing emails that she has owned and she has owned and she recognizes. But I also think it is important to keep this in perspective.”

This was the President of the United States. Obama was intelligent and also an attorney. He knew better. Obama knew exactly what he was doing with his “Gosh, gee whiz” nonsense.

Did the press say one word?

Move forward to July, 2016. Right after former Attorney General Lynch had handed off the decision to him because she failed to resist Bill Clinton’s effort to obstruct justice, former FBI Director James Comey struck some of the same themes as Obama with respect to loyalty and intent. Remember Lynch’s “chance meeting” on the tarmac of the Phoenix Airport with Bill while his wife was under criminal investigation by the FBI? Did the press have one negative comment on all this obstruction?

Just to review legalities, this is important. Perhaps the hysterical media bent on Trump’s destruction should read it.

Blueprint for a Prosecution

Here are the unbelievable findings of the corrupt FBI Director, James Comey, on the Hillary Clinton criminality concerning her personal server, etc.

Comey said to a nationwide audience, “Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.”

Huh? Didn’t he just lay out the entire blueprint for a prosecution?

Does anyone think the majority of the media cares one bit about this? Should it anger Americans who expect the fair truth from the press?

Comey continued. “In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.”

Does this madden anyone to the media’s selection of what they will cover and what they will ignore? Does anyone not think the media is one-sided? Is there any sane observer who doesn’t think Comey was in collusion with the Clintons and Obama?

Ferguson, Missouri

Fast forward to August, 2014, Ferguson, Missouri. Police officer Darren Wilson killed 18-year-old Michael Brown. Whether Wilson acted justifiably would have to be investigated, but that didn’t stop Obama from repeatedly suggesting how much he cared about Brown and his family, which had to weigh on prosecutors.

Obama expressed empathy for Brown’s family and referred to him affectionately as “this young man.” He said, “The death of Michael Brown is heartbreaking, and Michelle and I send our deepest condolences to his family and his community at this very difficult time.”

Was this the president’s place? Isn’t this something that law enforcement should be covering? That didn’t bring one peep from his Attorney General Eric Holder. Not one.

He wasn’t through meddling, though. “I know the events of the past few days have prompted strong passions, but as details unfold, I urge everyone in Ferguson, Missouri, and across the country, to remember this young man through reflection and understanding. We should comfort each other and talk with one another in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds. Along with our prayers, that’s what Michael and his family, and our broader American community, deserve.”

What was the reaction of the compliant media? Silence.

Later on, Obama told the Congressional Black Caucus Awards Dinner, that the incident has “awakened our nation” to the problems between African-Americans and police. He had no evidence of this and zero proof. His own corrupt Justice Department eventually decided they couldn’t justify pursuing Wilson. Wilson no doubt experienced extraordinary distress at having killed someone and then be charged in the public arena with doing it out of racism.

Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman

There was a similar situation in the Trayvon Martin affair. In March 2012, after this African-American was killed by “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman, Obama said a few days later that Americans need to do “some soul-searching to figure out how does something like this happen,” and famously added, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”

How was that Mr. Obama? When did you become the conscience of this nation single-highhandedly? What kind of message did that send to prosecutors and potential jurors?

Well, the jurors in the case were not influenced by Obama’s attempt to distort justice, thank goodness. Justice was served with or without the interference of the President of the United States.

How did this come across with the “fair and balanced” national media? Dead silence.

That’s quite different to the way they react today.

Dwight L. Schwab Jr. is a moderate conservative who looks at all sides of a story, then speaks his mind. He has written more than 3500 national political and foreign affairs columns. His BS in journalism from the University of Oregon, with minors in political science and American history stands him in good stead for his writing.


Dwight has 30-years in the publishing industry, including ABC/Cap Cities and International Thomson. His first book, “Redistribution of Common Sense – Selective Commentaries on the Obama Administration 2009-2014,” was published in July, 2014. “The Game Changer – America’s Most Stunning Presidential Election in History,” was published in April 2017.


Dwight is a native of Portland, Oregon, and now a resident of the San Francisco Bay Area.