Clin­ton is ‘un­fit’ for of­fice, not Trump

Cecil Whig - - OPINION -

FROM: JOHN ZALESKI ELK­TON

The dis­gust­ing smears by the news me­dia, Democrats and other syco­phants in at­tempt­ing to push the nar­ra­tive that Don­ald Trump is “un­fit for the pres­i­dency” is hypocrisy and des­per­a­tion. The last time I checked Ar­ti­cle II of the Con­sti­tu­tion, it stated, “No per­son ex­cept a nat­u­ral born cit­i­zen, or a cit­i­zen of the United States, at the time of the adop­tion of this Con­sti­tu­tion, shall be el­i­gi­ble to the Of­fice of Pres­i­dent; nei­ther shall any per­son be el­i­gi­ble to that Of­fice who shall not have at­tained to the age of 35 years, and been 14 years a res­i­dent within the United States.”

The “un­fit” nar­ra­tive put for­ward by the news me­dia is par­tic­u­larly dis­gust­ing when con­sid­er­ing its praise of Barack Obama, who had no ex­pe­ri­ence what­so­ever as a chief ex­ec­u­tive any­where.

The news me­dia put for­ward a nar­ra­tive which has no legs: say what you will about Don­ald J. Trump, but he has not been re­spon­si­ble for any of the prob­lems in fed­eral gov­ern­ment over the past 30+ years, whereas Hil­lary Rod­ham Clin­ton has been at the epi­cen­ter of it all, whether in the cabi­net of a failed pres­i­dent, guid­ing failed pol­icy, or at the heart of scan­dals for which we, the tax­pay­ers, have been on the re­ceiv­ing end.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.