DimWit Politics

Hunting We Will Go

 Breaking News

Hunting We Will Go

Hunting We Will Go
November 21
17:55 2018

The hunt is on.

The latest pseudo-scandals emanating from the pages of the New York Times and Washington Post – calls for more political investigations – reminded me of that 18th Century nursery rhyme composed by Thomas Arne. Here are the lyrics, and I have a feeling the tune will pop into your head.

You Might Like
Learn more about RevenueStripe...

A-hunting we will go,
A-hunting we will go
Heigh-ho, the derry-o,
A-hunting we will go.
A-hunting we will go,
A-hunting we will go
We’ll catch a fox and put him in a box
And never let him go.

Incidentally, modern-day political correctness actually changed the last line to “And then we’ll let him go.” But I digress.

The stories about First Daughter Ivanka Trump’s use of private emails to convey some innocuous business information has set off a Democrat/media call for a thorough investigation. The fact that there is virtually no comparison to the issues surrounding the emails of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has not stopped the #NeverTrump Resistance Movement and its political parasites in the Democratic Party from drawing false comparisons and misstating facts.

The calls for that “thorough investigation” are nothing more than a hunting expedition. Democrats and their media allies know full well that the distinctions between the Ivanka and Hillary cases outweigh the similarities. They are not interested in what was said in those very few emails where Ivanka may have mentioned non-classified business. They want to peak at the thousands that are unrelated to business in order to find anything … anything … that they can spin into negative publicity for the Trumps. They are a-hunting in search of a fox named Donald Trump – and contrary to the revised liberal wording, they will “never let him go.”

So, what are those all-important distinctions?

First there is the volume of business-related comments in Ivanka’s private emails – a couple hundred compared to thousands that contained no business references. Hillary’s use of her private emails was not incidental but involved a deliberate plan to conceal thousands of business-related emails – from and to her private account.

It was determined that on a number of occasions, highly classified information was transmitted via Clinton emails. No such evidence was found in the Ivanka communications.

Ivanka did not purchase and use a secret server as did Clinton – maintained in a bathroom in Denver, Colorado, for God sake. When it became obvious that the secret server would be an issue, it was destroyed, smashed, obliterated.

Ivanka maintained all her private emails. Clinton deleted more than 30,000 of hers. Which brings up the question: When did she have time to send 30,000 emails? Clinton’s emails were also taken out of the security perimeter and found on the laptop of a sexual predator and former Democrat Congressman Anthony Weiner – husband of Clinton aide Huma Abedin.

Ivanka filed copies of her business-related emails with the government as required by public records law. Clinton did not – even though she was told by President Obama to do so. In apparent anticipation of her scheme, Clinton refused to sign an employment document that guaranteed her commitment to turning over private communications dealing with government – a document that requires a signature as a condition of employment.

In terms of Ivanka’s private emails and government violations, there is no there, there. The two situations are not even remotely similar.
Look at it this way. Say one person goes into a bank to withdraw money and another person robs that same bank. Just because they both took away money does not mean they both should be investigated as criminals. And yes, that is exactly how ridiculous the Ivanka email issue is.

But we know it is not about those few business-related emails. That issue can be easily resolved. It is about hunting for that fox. Heigh-ho, the derry-o.

So, there ‘tis.

About Author

Larry Horist

Larry Horist

Larry Horist is a conservative activist with an extensive background in economics, public policy and politics. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman, as well as the White House. He has testified as an expert witness before legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress, and lectured at major colleges and universities. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He can be reached at lph@thomasandjoyce.com.

Related Articles


  1. Citizen
    Citizen November 24, 18:56

    I have no idea what your motivation is or your facination with President Trump but I am not interested in garbage you are peddling. I will say this that you have been conned by one off the best that has no moral compass.
    Going forward, I ask that you remove my email address from your mailing list!!!

    Reply to this comment
    • baggriff
      baggriff August 20, 16:26

      Glad to see you go!
      When you can not use pragmatism in looking at what is going on in politics then this is being short sighted!!

      Reply to this comment

Write a Comment

Special Offer

Latest Comments

"Democrats and media pundits take great joy in proclaiming that no matter the outcome in...

And who would want to accept the hand of someone who's spent the last 3...

Pelosi has been Trumped and she knows it....

Take a Look!

Don’t Miss This!

12174 - DimWit Politics - Display - 300x250 B - [WEB].txt Displaying 12174 - DimWit Politics - Display - 300x250 B - [WEB].txt.