If you voted for Obama in 2012, don’t bother reading any further. You’ve already shown that you don’t give a rat’s ass about the Constitution.  For the rest of you, please continue.

Barack Obama is expected to endorse Hillary Clinton within a matter of days. The last big hurdle is his scheduled meeting with the geriatric Bolshevik, Bernie Sanders, who is opposing her. Ordinarily, a sitting president endorsing his party’s primary winner would not be a big deal. However, this year is different. Retired US Army Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters was on Fox Business news a couple of days ago and made a very good case why an Obama endorsement of Hillary Clinton gravely damages the US Constitution.

Via PJ Media’s Debra Heine:

“Indeed, it would be fully wittingly,” Peters said. “This is not politics as usual. It’s not a standard endorsement. The power of the presidency is in play, here, and it’s working against the Constitution.”

Peters continued, “By endorsing Hillary, President Obama is sending a signal to the FBI, to the attorney general, and to any future juries, (if it comes to that) that he doesn’t think that what she did is very serious. It matters because at the fundamental level, our country is not about the president, it’s not even about Congress or the Supreme Court. Everything flows from the Constitution. And we have seen a terrible abuse of the Constitution of late in the selective enforcement of laws at the federal level of this administration, and at the local level like in Chicago, or Ferguson, or Baltimore.”

“And this president, who supposedly is a constitutional scholar, is undercutting it by coming out in support of Hillary at this time,” Peters complained. “I see Obama and the hard left determined to cling to power at any cost including subverting the Constitution and that truly concerns me. Selective enforcement of laws — that’s Vladimir Putin, that’s Erdogan in Turkey, that’s the Chinese. We need equal justice for all to the extent humanly possible,” Peters said. “This endorsement sends a very powerful signal — don’t go after Hillary.”

I think this is exactly right though it will hardly deter a man who sees the Constitution as an impediment to be disregarded rather than a sacred treasure requiring devoted and faithful stewardship. Obama has never shied away from using the prestige of the presidency to influence judicial proceedings, left, right, and center. But there is a difference between trying to have an innocent man railroaded for murder for killing a brutal thug in self-defense and helping elevate to the presidency a woman who has willingly used her office for personal gain, and made US top secret information vulnerable to foreign intelligence services and who may have actually engaged in the sale/barter of US secrets for profit.

No matter how “independent” FBI Director James Covey claims to be, he cannot indict Hillary. And the US Justice Department is led by Obama’s political appointees who are not only beholden to Obama for their job but who know that if they act to prosecute Hillary and her inner circle, against Obama’s stated wishes which is what an endorsement would signify, that their political careers are finished. If Obama publicly endorses Hillary Clinton that is a clear sign to everyone that the fix is in and Hillary and her inner circle will go scot-free for the same thin Aldrich Ames is serving a life sentence for.