© 2024 Blaze Media LLC. All rights reserved.
COMMENTARY: Liberals, you can't lecture about Trump when you helped nominate a depraved crook
WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 27: Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump delivers a speech about his vision for foreign policy at the Mayflower Hotel April 27, 2016 in Washington, DC. A real estate billionaire and reality television star, Trump beat his GOP challengers by double digits in Tuesday's presidential primaries in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Deleware, Rhode Island and Connecticut. "I consider myself the presumptive nominee, absolutely," Trump told supporters at the Trump Tower following yesterday's wins. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

COMMENTARY: Liberals, you can't lecture about Trump when you helped nominate a depraved crook


Liberals, you've probably noticed that lot of conservatives don't like Donald Trump. I think that fact has been made abundantly clear at this point. The fight over Trump and the future of the conservative movement has been loud and brutal and public. And it isn't over. No matter who wins next week, the gruesome conservative civil war will rage on. We will reflect on who we are and where we're going, and that process of reflection will no doubt be even more intense than it's been for the past 18 months.

You guys, of course, have been very generous in encouraging us to engage in this kind of frank self-assessment. Every day I see another pious think piece from some left wing outlet or another explaining how the Trump phenomenon is a symptom of a deeper illness in the conservative movement, and actually Trump's rise proves that all conservatives are racists and anti-Semites and we need to purge it from our system because it's all very bad and we should be very ashamed and yadda yadda and so forth. You're eager to offer your insights into the problems of conservatism, and offer them you have, over and over again. I thank you for the helpful input, but I do find it strange that you aren't quite as eager to turn that critical gaze inward.

Conspicuously, there is no Never Hillary movement among liberals. I'm not sure I've seen a single article in any left wing publication analyzing the maladies on the Left that may have led to her nomination. I've seen hundreds about Trump and the Right -- written by conservatives and liberals alike -- but the left has not spent nearly as much time diagnosing itself. Instead, you blame even Hillary's sins on conservatives. Yesterday, Time published an unintentionally hilarious op-ed explaining how Clinton is only being pursued for breaking the law because Republicans are sexist.

The alternative explanation, however, is that Clinton is being pursued for breaking the law because she broke the law. Many times. Whatever can be said about Trump -- and plenty has been said -- the fact remains that the Democrat nominee for president is the subject of at least two FBI investigations. Liberals selected as their candidate and standard bearer a woman who is suspected of engaging in multiple criminal conspiracies. As if one wasn't enough. You basically nominated someone who accumulates FBI investigations as casually as I accumulate parking tickets when I commute into DC.

The Clinton Machine has been steeped in scandal for decades, and now, just as its years of lawbreaking are starting to catch up to it, you people are trying to put it in the White House. Again. You grabbed the closest thing to an actual super villain and made it your candidate. Most people take "House of Cards" as a cautionary tale. You took it as a suggestion.

The matrix of Clintonian graft and deceit is so complicated that it would require a PhD in mathematics to sort it all out, but the latest revelations give us a clearer idea. We know that the FBI is investigating the Clinton Foundation for a host of serious criminal violations. It appears that the Foundation was a racketeering enterprise used by the Clintons to monetize and exploit her power as secretary of State. One can only imagine all the ways she'll monetize and exploit the presidency.

But the inquiries into corruption at the Foundation have run into interference from high ranking people at the FBI and the DOJ, including the FBI deputy director, Andrew McCabe. It just so happens that McCabe's wife recently received about a half a million dollars in donations for her failed state senate campaign from Terry McAuliffe, current governor of Virginia and longtime Clinton ally and former Clinton Foundation board member. McAuliffe is also the subject of another FBI investigation for illegal campaign contributions.

Meanwhile, a separate investigation into Hillary Clinton's illegal private server was just reopened, or reinvigorated, or revitalized, or whatever word you want to use, after the FBI found 650 thousand emails that potentially link to Clinton and her aide, Huma Abedin, on the computer that Huma shared with her husband, Anthony Weiner, who is under a separate FBI investigation. But the email investigation is problematic, too, because one of the DOJ officials overseeing it has such a cozy relationship with Clinton's campaign chairman that he tried to get his son hired onto the campaign.

If you're keeping track at home, that's four FBI investigations linked to Clinton and top Clinton aides and allies, two of which have been comprised because the people in charge of them are connected to the Clinton campaign. Actually, the number is even higher. It turns out that Clinton's entire inner circle is under FBI investigation for a range of felony offenses, bringing the grand total (that we know of) to five.

To call Clinton merely "scandal plagued" would be to sell her massively short. Clinton is political scandal made manifest in the flesh. She is a veritable fountain of corruption. She's dripping with it. She excretes it from her pores. She's a criminal surrounded by criminals surrounded by criminals, which I suppose is what you would expect for the co-head of an organized crime family. And you people say nothing about it. You ask no hard questions about her at all. You offer no criticism. No resistance. Nothing.

I don't want to hear, "Yeah but Trump..." We know about Trump. Many conservatives have been on Trump's case from Day One, as you're well aware. But has anyone on the Left been on Hillary's case (or cases)? For God's sake, you fools nominated Al Capone in a pantsuit. Gal Capone, I might start calling her. The level of criminality is almost farcical at this point.

It's true that a lot of Democrats voted for Bernie Sanders. And it's also true that the primary process was rigged in Hillary's favor. She had all the super delegates, plus she had a mole at CNN feeding her debate questions ahead of time. In another universe, that story might be huge news all by itself (at least on conservative blogs). But compared to Hillary's multitude of federal offenses, this is more of a Tier 4 scandal. On a scale of severity, it's well below the Clinton campaign deliberately fomenting violence at Trump rallies (another felony), but above Clinton telling Wall Street bankers that she has a "public and private" position on every issue.

But even if Sanders got a raw deal, millions of Democrats still intentionally voted for a serial felon. You guys decided to narrow your options down to a senile Che Guevara and Mrs. Underwood, and ultimately, with the help of the media and DNC (but I repeat myself), you went with the latter. Perhaps you have your own reasons to pause and reflect.

On that end, may I make one humble suggestion? I think it's possible that you ended up with the most corrupt presidential candidate in American history because you fundamentally reject the very concept of morality. Liberalism is an ideology of relativism. On the left, everything is relative, from human life to marriage to gender to morality. There are consequences to this philosophy. When you don't have any set moral standard, when you don't hold yourself and your leaders to an objective ethical code, it's inevitable that eventually you'll end up nominating an actual mafia boss.

It will only get worse from here, I'm afraid. Clinton is uniquely awful, but she is merely a uniquely awful symptom of the underlying disorder. If the disorder is not treated, the symptoms will worsen over time. I'm not sure how you could find someone more debased than Hillary, but it's guaranteed to happen if your compass is not calibrated according to some set of objective and inalterable moral ideals.

You can say "what about Trump" all you want, but there's no point. Many people on the right recognize the need for consistent principles, and detest double standards, and that's why we've been viciously fighting with each other for the past year and a half. A similar fight does not seem to have broken out on the left, and I think that's because you all essentially agree that morality is subjective and should be adapted to circumstance.

So, that's why you have Clinton. That's why, against all odds, you stand a chance of losing this election. And if that happens, remember that you only have yourselves and your moral bankruptcy to blame.

TheBlaze contributor channel supports an open discourse on a range of views. The opinions expressed in this channel are solely those of each individual author.

Want to leave a tip?

We answer to you. Help keep our content free of advertisers and big tech censorship by leaving a tip today.
Want to join the conversation?
Already a subscriber?