You know things are bad when you’re the presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee and even the Washington Post can’t take you seriously anymore. Mark Thiessen’s January 25th Post editorial by is only the latest in what appears to be a increasing, rats-off-the-ship flee by liberal bastions from the Hillary movement. With various reports of Hillary actually seriously trailing Bernie in Iowa caucus polls and the FBI champing at the bit to handcuff her, even the Dragon Lady herself has to admit disintegrating supporter allegiances are escalating from an unfortunate coincidence to a hip new lefty trend.
In his piece, Mr. Thiessen efficiently pulverizes Hillary’s litany of so-called defenses against her treasonous email security crimes.
“Clinton’s constantly changing email story is rapidly falling apart. First, Clinton claimed there was “no classified material” on her private server — which turned out to be untrue. Then she claimed none of the intelligence on her server was “classified at the time” — which also turned out to be untrue. Now, in a National Public Radio interview last week, Clinton said there was no information that was “marked classified.
But this is not a defense.”
The point Mr. Thiessen is making, is that what clearly hurts Hillary even more than her pitiful straw-grasping of excuses, is the sheer number and variety of them. Instead of bolstering whatever hope her defense might have by, ya’ know, sticking with one, Hillary instead hops and skips through every possible synonym of words like “no” and “classified” as if it was some sort of perverse, Mad-Libs game.
Mr. Thiessen is a former speechwriter for George W. Bush and knows a thing or two about communicating sensitive data. As is obvious to anybody save the most Kool-Aid bloated, Clinton-sniffing cyborg and probably Hillary herself (although she may be aware enough to know the real score and her denial is simply bluster), you can’t “accidentally” transfer classified data to unclassified systems. If Hillary removed the classification markings on documents, that is a crime all by itself. Hence, this is why stating the papers weren’t marked doesn’t help her credibility, to say nothing of her common sense.
Admittedly, there isn’t exactly a Constitutional law preventing you from running for President if you posses a total lack of common sense, but it seems the Democrats have taken that truth a little bit too much to heart. It’s more like you can’t run for the Democratic ticket unless you possess a bleak, empty, bottomless vacuum where commons sense is normally found.
But when is that any different for the Dems than any other election?