In this most bizarre and unfortunate election year, it behooves us all
to try for some perspective. Many of us have lost friends, whether online or in
what I gather is now called “meat space,” due to someone’s indignant inability
to accept disagreement about the major party candidates. The following is a
mental exercise that may or may not shed some light on the problem.
Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that every claim and
accusation made against both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton is true. And let
me immediately make a caveat I will repeat at intervals: I am NOT saying that
any or all of these claims and accusations are in fact true, and I do not
personally believe all of them. (I have no intention of saying which I find
credible to any extent.)
Another caveat: I’ll almost certainly miss items in one or both lists.
Feel free to supplement them in the comments.
Also: I’m leaving out actual political positions, which are in
themselves enough to inspire passion both for or against either candidate.
First, Donald Trump. Various sources assert the following (which,
again, I am NOT stating to be fact):
--He is a racist as regards blacks, Hispanics, and (if we ignore that
Muslims are not a race) Muslims.
--He is a sexist.
--He mocks the disabled.
--He insults military heroes.
--He has encouraged people to doubt that Barack Obama was born in the
U.S., as opposed to Kenya.
--He has made creepy suggestions of incestuous yearnings toward at
least one daughter.
--He has grossly exaggerated his wealth and his track record of
business success.
--He has made a habit of cheating people with whom he has business
dealings, ruining some of them financially.
--His Trump University was an expensive scam.
--He understands little or nothing about our constitutional system, the
role of Congress, or the nature of judges’ jobs.
--He has an extremely short attention span, a volatile temper, and a
minimal verbal filter.
--He compulsively counter-punches when he feels attacked.
--He is a pathological narcissist.
--He encourages his supporters to physically attack protesters.
--He has suggested that his supporters might want to assassinate
Hillary Clinton.
--He is a demagogue who hopes to become a dictator.
--He changes his positions frequently on short notice, and cannot be
counted on to cleave to any he has presented.
Next, Hillary Clinton. Again, various sources make the following claims
(which, once again, I am NOT endorsing):
--She has serious health challenges that affect her stamina, her
comprehension, and her memory, and have left her easily confused about
important matters. She has recently directed her staff, or allowed her staff,
to lie about the reason for her collapse at the 9-11 memorial.
--She used her position as Secretary of State to sell government access
and favors to various foreign and domestic figures. One of those sales involved
turning over a quarter of the US supply of uranium to the Russians. Others
benefited Islamic regimes who are less than fully friendly to the U.S.
--She grossly misjudged the results of deposing Libyan President
Qaddafi, among other events.
--For reasons of her own or for no reason, she reduced the security of the
embassy and other US installations in Libya despite multiple pleas to
strengthen them.
--She lied to the American public and to the grieving loved ones of
those killed in Benghazi as a result of her decisions.
--In order to conceal the influence-peddling mentioned above, she defied
multiple warnings and used a private and vulnerable email server for years.
This use included the knowing transmittal of classified material. Her server
was very likely hacked by foreign governments. The information thus exposed may
have contributed to the deaths of one or more Americans and/or American
intelligence assets.
--She lied repeatedly about various matters connected to her email
server and emails.
--She destroyed thousands of emails and refused to turn over others to federal
authorities. Some of these emails concerned State Department business, but she
lied about their contents.
--A few years after her husband Bill Clinton’s presidency, she was
complicit in former Clinton advisor Sandy Berger’s theft of unique original classified
documents from a National Archives reading room, documents that were never
recovered.
--During her run for the presidency in 2007 and 2008, she used various
surrogates to spread rumors that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, and cast doubt
about whether he was a Muslim rather than a Christian.
--She and Bill conspired to murder a series of people who posed some
threat to them or stood in their way in some manner, including attorney Don
Adams, former U.N. General Assembly President John Ashe, attorney Gandy Baugh,
Admiral Jeremy Boorda, former DNC Chairman and Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, influential
Texan James Bunch, informant Eric Butera, journalist Danny Casolaro, human
rights activist Berta Caceres, retired Director of Central Intelligence William
Colby, alleged lover (of Bill’s) Suzanne Coleman, reporter L.J. Davis,
filmmaker David Drye, DNC fundraiser Daniel A. Dutko, attorney and fundraiser Hershell
Friday, Deputy White House counsel Vince Foster, . . . The list goes on, with
the most recent additions including Julian Assange’s attorney John Jones and
attorney Shawn Lucas (representing Bernie Sanders’ supporters in a fraud action
against the DNC).
Phew.
From this exhaustive list – which, I once again repeat, I do not claim
to be true – we can draw the following conclusions:
--If more than a small fraction of either lists is in fact true, we are
so screwed. Or, to cling to some ray of hope, it is time for the members of the
Electoral College, once chosen in the November election, to step up and save
the country by casting their votes for someone else, as they have the power to
do (though whether those votes would count is unclear and may vary by state of
origin). Any likely electors should be caucusing now to consider the
possibilities.
--Your friends or former friends who support the candidate you oppose
probably believe at least some of these claims about the candidate you support.
The sources on which you rely have not convinced them otherwise, because they and
you trust different sources.
--Finally, an assessment with which others may differ: if every one of
these claims about both candidates were in fact true (which – one more time – I
am not asserting), I would consider Hillary Clinton to be, by a fairly close
margin, an even worse choice than Donald Trump. God help us all.
