Why Biden's announcement is bad news

Known affectionately as "Uncle Joe," Vice President Joe Biden yesterday doused the sizzling speculation about a possible bid for the White House.  His decision, issued from the Rose Garden with the president and his wife flanking him, is worrisome indeed.  He had emphasized publicly and privately that running would require more of an emotional investment than he could afford in the wake of the tragic demise of his beloved son Beau.  He commenced his announcement with the assurance that his family had overcome the grief obstacle, giving rise to the impression that he was about to cast his hat into the ring.  He quashed the idea a few minutes later. 

Sounding reasonable enough by the nation at large, for the politically perceptive who don't trust this president or anyone in his administration, Biden's decision sends an emetic message.  It's a signal that the president meant what he said – despite Josh Earnest's dopey attempts to walk the comments back – during a 60 Minutes appearance on Sunday.  During his interview, the president opined that he did not think that Hillary Clinton's email server presented a threat to national security – a curious statement indeed, given recent announcements emanating from the teams and inspectors general (IGs) investigating (one IG serves the intelligence cadre, and one is investigating anew the status of emails at the State Department).  To those of us with our fingers on the pulse of the 2016 election, Uncle Joe's message indicates he's no longer needed as an insurance policy.

Prior to today's announcement, the Democrats had a huge problem.  Their presidential candidates, now sans Senator Jim Webb, who has telegraphed a possible independent bid for the Oval Office, are offering large helpings of viewpoints and agendas obviously skewed to those on the far left, with Hillary more than willing to build on the foundation laid by Obama.  Leading the contenders since long before she announced, Hillary Clinton has always been the presumptive heiress, with measurements for her crown taken.  Her poll numbers give her adequate distance from Vermont senator Bernie Sanders, a self-avowed socialist who isn't even an official member of the Democratic Party.  He rides behind her with a surprisingly high percentage of supporters.  In third place, barely escaping the dreaded asterisk, is Martin O'Malley, ex-governor of Maryland.  He's been reduced to serenading the ladies on The View with his guitar, hasn't a chance at the Big Desk, and has to know it.

But...if Clinton were sidelined by one or more indictments, Bernie suddenly moves into first place.  That's what Joe was meant to stop, because Bernie's ideas about how he'd architect the country post-Obama would likely make him unelectable, unless…Clinton has been assured that after she accosted the president by telling him to "Call off your f****** dogs, Barack," no such indictment will be handed down despite what the FBI finds.  He's not supposed to tell the attorney general what or what not to do, but that notion flew out of Washington the minute he first raised his right hand and swore.

Lest we forget, just before the 2012 Super Bowl, Obama told Bill O'Reilly that there wasn't "even a smidgen of corruption" in the IRS.  Despite subsequent revelations of massive wrongdoing, no one has been held accountable to our knowledge.  In fact, Obama has become adept at skirting indictments.  Lois Lerner is still in contempt of Congress as she lives off an obese pension, safe from consequences.  Neither has Eric Holder been indicted for contempt of Congress, even though he is out of office and no longer protected by the president's feeble claim of executive privilege over Fast and Furious documentation.

Is the picture coming into clearer focus?  The issue is far more complex and filled with "what if" scenarios, many if not all of which may have been dampened by the president's appearance on 60 Minutes.  His confident assurances are troublingly suggestive of the "fix" being in for Hillary just as it has been for Lerner and Holder.  Earnest moderating that opinion is just enough to give Obama some political cover.

Biden's refusal to run now casts a curious light on what could occur when the FBI submits its final report.  FBI Director James Comey takes his job extremely seriously.  He's not an obedient Obama lapdog.  Unlike J. Edgar Hoover, he's apolitical, well-scrubbed, and interested in conducting the bureau's affairs with the utmost integrity.  Whatever his team finds will be made broadly public.  If, as expected, Clinton did break numerous laws, will Attorney General Loretta Lynch have her indicted before the 2016 election?

Remember, if Justice drags its feet long enough, and Hillary by some miracle should win, a sitting president cannot be arrested.  Impeachment would be the only remedy here.  Perhaps the smartest thing to do is impeach Obama, and then the laws will be upheld, as they should be.

If Comey's cyber-forensics team finds, as expected, that not only was national security compromised by the vulnerability of Clinton's server, but Clinton clearly broke the law, he will expect the Justice Department to assign a U.S. attorney to litigate the matter in federal criminal court.  If that doesn't happen, our bet is that Comey and others will resign out of indignation due to a president who considers himself well above the law.

In short, it appears as if Mrs. Clinton is likely to get away with both the Benghazi murders and the illegal disclosure of classified information over unsecured servers.  Let us hope that the American people don't fall for her lies yet again.