Ken Berwitz
Why did former Hillary Clinton staff member Bryan Pagliano plead the fifth amendment rather than testify about the personal email server he set up for Hillary Clinton?
And how can anyone in his/her right mind possibly believe that no classified documents passed through that server during Ms. Clinton\’s four years as Secretary Of State?
Two pretty good questions, if you ask me.
Excerpted from article at foxnews.com (not CBS, or NBC, or ABC, or the New York Times, L.A. Times, etc…..all of which have been more than happy to bury this ongoing scandal):
More than 100 days after he invoked his Fifth Amendmentright to avoid testifying before the House committee investigating the Benghaziterrorist attack, a key Hillary Clinton aide is at the center of the separateand ongoing investigation by the FBI into Clinton\’s use of a private unsecuredserver while she was secretary of state.
That former staffer, BryanPagliano, set up the controversial private email server in Clinton\’s home in Chappaqua,N.Y.
At the core of the separate FBI investigation is whetherhighly classified information was “grossly mishandled” by Clinton andher aides.
Let me reiterate an obvious fact that I have blogged about previously, but most of our wonderful “neutral” media [retend to be unaware of: As Secretary Of State, Hillary Clinton was constantly given classified information. And, because of her position as the chief foreign emissary of the United States, much of that information was passed to, and emanated from, her server before any wonks at the State Department classified it.
The argument that this one or that one did not have a “classified stamp” on it is as phony a 3-dollar-bill ruse as you will ever come across.
Now, why would the guy who set up this server plead the fifth. What possible reason would he have? What could he possibly have done in setting up a private email server that could incriminate him?
It sure as hell wasn\’t the setting-up of that server itself. There is nothing at all illegal about doing such a thing.
Therefore it has to be something else.
WHAT??????
And how deeply is Hillary Clinton involved in the answer to that one-word question?
A media that is at all serious about finding this information out would be asking – no, make that screaming – those questions. Not burying them in Nocoverageville, which is what they have done.
Just how far will they go to protect Hillary Clinton? Well, now you know. And who knows how much further they will go?
Just how stupid do they think we are? And – very sad to ask this one – what have voters done to convince them that we are stupid enough to accept their non-coverage so far?
