We note that Hillary is bathed in poor light reflected from Benghazi and from her email practices. We suppose all sides prefer to shadow Benghazi under the glare of the less reprehensible emails because the former attracts too much attention to too many other folk involved in shady U.S. government games involving arms and Islamic terrorists. Shady enough that they required leaving a U.S. ambassador to be tortured to death. Plus of course, the emails can be closed by the FBI Director’s decision not to prosecute Mrs. Clinton. A Pandora’s box of escaped Benghazi evidence dumped onto the public along with predictable leaks might assume very unwelcome repercussions.
But while FBI Director Comey withheld criminal charges, he was not nice to Mrs. Clinton, characterizing her email activities as in essence, ignorant, careless and incompetent as several news sources quickly explained. Some of these sources generally prefer Democrats in Politics. What goes on with the presumed Democratic presidential candidate and her presumed supporters?
We have an impression that President Obama, who aced out Mrs. Clinton in in becoming President, is not overly fond of the Clintons. We hear that Director Comey is not fond of corruption. And we have a suspicion that if Mrs. Clinton found a private email server handy as Secretary of State, she did not invent the practice nor was she a unique user of it. She is the one who first, was publicized for it and second, might benefit from attention to a misdemeanor in lieu of attention to darker matters like Benghazi.
At least, our view seems appropriate, whether correct or not. We are seeing two clowns vying for the U.S. presidency, American politics as farce. It is not the first time the show has had farcical elements certainly but how often has it been a farce through and through?
Mr. Trump is described as a Republican reaction against the GOP establishment; Socialist Bernie Sanders is tagged similarly among Democrats. Given current conditions and the intended direction brought about by present leaders, testy citizens seem approprriate.
But in a way, Mrs. Clinton seems remarkably appropriate too. Heralded as a new St. Joan leading her feminist forces as the first female candidate, what is she? An aging, acerbic, warmed-over preacher of obsolescent political nostrums whose sell-by date of 2012 was passed over in favor of the first black candidate, a politician whose program was mostly a now tarnished version of hers. How will a new sales boss move Volkswagen diesels from now on amidst the enormous backlog of emissions recalls?
We see a populist mountebank versus tarnished goods vying to take a throne poised under an incipient economic collapse. The Donald and Hillary are auditioning to perform as the next Herbert Hoover. The coming presidential election is in economic fact, the classic poisoned chalice. Unfortunately, while the surrounding festivities are farcical, the poison is real, the more so as it is unacknowledged. It seems fitting that this time, whoever fails to be elected may prove to have actually been the winner.