Hil­lary’s Oc­to­ber demise?

Daily Freeman (Kingston, NY) - - OPINION - Cal Thomas Cal Thomas is syn­di­cated by Tri­bune Me­dia Ser­vices.

I love def­i­ni­tions be­cause they help fo­cus the mind.

Un­der dic­tio­nary.com’s def­i­ni­tion of “cor­rupt,” one finds the fol­low­ing:

1. Guilty of dis­hon­est prac­tices, as bribery; lack­ing in­tegrity; crooked:

2. De­based in char­ac­ter; de­praved; per­verted; wicked; evil: 3. In­fected; tainted. When used as a verb with an ob­ject we find:

4. To de­stroy the in­tegrity of; cause to be dis­hon­est, dis­loyal, etc., es­pe­cially by bribery. 5. To lower morally; per­vert. Don’t these def­i­ni­tions per­fectly de­scribe Hil­lary Clin­ton? As the FBI restarts its pre­ma­turely halted in­ves­ti­ga­tion into Hil­lary’s “ex­tremely care­less” han­dling of clas­si­fied ma­te­ri­als, per­haps this time it will con­clude what it should have con­cluded the first time around — that the Demo­cratic pres­i­den­tial can­di­date and some of her aides en­gaged not just in care­less­ness, but in crim­i­nal ac­tiv­ity.

And isn’t it won­der­fully ironic that the trip wire for the FBI’s an­nounce­ment had to do with emails found on dis­graced for­mer Demo­cratic Con­gress­man An­thony Weiner’s com­puter and prob­a­bly (you should par­don the ex­pres­sion) his hand-held de­vice on which he sexted with women and un­der­age girls? Among the com­put­ers re­port­edly seized by FBI agents is one Weiner shared with his wife and top Hil­lary aide, Huma Abe­din, from whom Weiner is now sep­a­rated.

Typ­i­cal of po­lit­i­cal Wash­ing­ton is the re­ac­tion by lib­eral Democrats, in­clud­ing Clin­ton her­self. When FBI Direc­tor James Comey said in July there was noth­ing in Hil­lary’s be­hav­ior that war­ranted an in­dict­ment, lib­er­als claimed she had been ex­on­er­ated and praised Comey for his pro­fes­sion­al­ism. Now that pos­si­bly new ev­i­dence has emerged ne­ces­si­tat­ing an­other look, Democrats and the left are jump­ing on Comey as a po­lit­i­cal hack. They can’t have it both ways, though they of­ten try.

An­other ar­gu­ment made by those fa­vor­ing a sec­ond Clin­ton pres­i­dency is that she is not her hus­band and that Bill’s ly­ing and ex­tra­mar­i­tal af­fairs should not re­flect on her. Re­ally? It was Bill who bragged when he was run­ning for pres­i­dent in 1992 that if he was elected, “you get two for the price of one.” That ex­change rate hasn’t changed.

He was right then. They are both sleazy and en­abling of each other. If Hil­lary wins the elec­tion, the cor­rup­tion (hers and his) will fol­low her into the White House be­cause that is her char­ac­ter and also his. If Repub­li­cans hold a con­gres­sional ma­jor­ity, investigations into Clin­ton cor­rup­tion will con­tinue and gov­ern­ment grid­lock will be worse than it is now.

Hil­lary Clin­ton would be the most un­pop­u­lar pres­i­dent to en­ter the White House in mod­ern times, per­haps of all time. Repub­li­cans and even some prin­ci­pled Democrats (there are a few), not to men­tion for­eign lead­ers, would im­me­di­ately re­gard her as weak and pos­si­bly a fail­ure from the start. Her prom­ises to con­tinue and even ex­pand the Obama “legacy” would not sit well with many Amer­i­cans who are hav­ing dif­fi­culty find­ing jobs and are see­ing their health in­sur­ance pre­mi­ums sky­rocket.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.