With the Thursday news that former President Trump now faces an additional charge of obstruction of justice related the deletion of security camera footage, the cast of MSNBC’s The 11th Hour with Stephanie Ruhle managed to completely miss the point as they basked in the news that Trump is now charged with the very thing he condemned Hillary Clinton for.
New York Times chief White House correspondent Peter Baker declared that “One of the things that strikes me is hearing the voice of Donald Trump saying “wipe the server.” I don't know if you remember this, Steph, but I certainly remember in 2016, an awful lot from candidate Trump complaining about his opponent, Hillary Clinton, wiping a server in the emails case back then.”
Baker followed up by adding, “Of course, you know, in the end, of course the FBI didn't find anything illegal about that, there was no charges of obstruction of justice in that case. But he made an awfully big deal about the idea of wiping a server and just the very idea of wiping a server, to him, as he characterized at the time, signals something wrong, something sinister is going on here.”
Before anyone could say “wait a minute” and ask if that means there really different standards for the Democratic Secretary of State and the Republican President, Baker wrapped up his thoughts, “So here he is now, of course, six, seven years later, trying to wipe a server, according to this document. Pretty remarkable full circle to come here.”
Several minutes later, Ruhle ran through a montage of clips of Trump from 2016 discussing Clinton’s email server, including one at one of the presidential debates that featured her laughing and smiling as he condemned her for wiping her server. Ruhle then observed to the Lincoln Project’s Stuart Stevens, “She’s smiling then, she’s smiling now. Compare that to this new indictment that alleges a maintenance guy at Mar-a-Lago told another guy, quote, ‘the boss wanted the server deleted.’ Stuart?”
Again, the fact that she might be smiling because she got away with it was not something that was even considered. Nevertheless, Stevens also got in on the attempt to apply different standards to Trump, “Well, you know, we know a couple of things here. No one tried to change the rules of an election that they’ve won. And nobody tries to destroy evidence that doesn't prove that they're guilty.”
If destroying evidence makes you look guilty, what does that make Clinton?
These segments were sponsored by Chase.
Here is a segment for the July 27 show:
MSNBC The 11th Hour with Stephanie Ruhle
7/27/2023
11:08 PM ET
PETER BAKER: One of the things that strikes me is hearing the voice of Donald Trump saying “wipe the server.” I don't know if you remember this, Steph, but I certainly remember in 2016, an awful lot from candidate Trump complaining about his opponent, Hillary Clinton, wiping a server in the emails case back then. Of course, you know, in the end, of course the FBI didn't find anything illegal about that, there was no charges of obstruction of justice in that case. But he made an awfully big deal about the idea of wiping a server and just the very idea of wiping a server, to him, as he characterized at the time, signals something wrong, something sinister is going on here. So here he is now, of course, six, seven years later, trying to wipe a server, according to this document. Pretty remarkable full circle to come here.
…
11:32 PM ET
STEPHANIE RUHLE: She’s smiling then, she’s smiling now. Compare that to this new indictment that alleges a maintenance guy at Mar-a-Lago told another guy, quote, “the boss wanted the server deleted.” Stuart?
STUART STEVENS: Well, you know, we know a couple of things here. No one tried to change the rules of an election that they’ve won. And nobody tries to destroy evidence that doesn't prove that they're guilty. The tragedy here is that I don't think this gonna make a difference for the Republican electorate. As your panel was saying, they now have to vote for him because he has to be the nominee so that they can try to keep a former Republican president out of jail. So, you know, if you get inside of their heads, they believe that there is a deep state conspiracy. What greater proof or the deep state conspiracy than to indict a former president?
