Corrupted Brazile

That's not the country, without the "e"; it is "Brazile", as in Donna Brazile, the now-former CNN commentator and possibly soon-to-be-former Democratic Party chairman.

Miss Brazile was just fired by CNN, having now twice been caught supplying advance questions that were going to be asked in debates in the 2016 primary season -- to Hillary Clinton.  The CNN chairman who canned her had candor in their internal meeting yesterday, in which he described her actions as "disgusting" and "unethical", a rare show of accuracy in the media, albeit behind closed doors.

It is sad that the media are in the tank for Hillary during the general election campaign; it is beyond contemptible that they were taking action on her behalf during the primary.

Why?  Because it is one thing for the media to claim a level of self-interest now, and operate on liberal "principles" as an excuse to endorse one candidate (although interjecting themselves is another thing).  It is quite another, when you are in a primary, the candidates are debating issues on which they mostly agree, and you pick a person over another.  That's disgusting and unethical.

Meaning that it is quite standard operating procedure for the left.

So fine, we all agree that Donna Brazile is a contemptible person who deserved to be fired from CNN and never hired again by any legitimate news organization.  We also agree that she deserves to be fired as party chairman, and ought to have a bloody hard time finding a job anywhere again, given her lack of ethics -- although some Democrat donor will keep her employed somehow.

Nope, my gripe today is with the recipient of those questions, the queen of unethical behavior herself, Hillary Clinton.  She received the questions and knew that they were legitimate, given that they were routed from the source through Donna Brazile Herself.

Why did she not tell Donna Brazile to roll the questions into a long tube and stick them somewhere where the sun doesn't shine? 

I'm serious.  If you are an ethical person, then even in the middle of an election cycle, your first reaction to cheating would be to walk briskly away.  The problem is that Hillary is not an ethical person, and ethics are nowhere near her default mindset.  Advance questions?  Heck, yeah, let me get some of them advance questions.

We know it happened.  We know it happened because Donna Brazile didn't go straight to CNN and plead her case, and broadcast to the world that she was framed, as would have been the case had she not actually slipped Hillary the questions.

Dang, I wish that had been exposed before the last debate.  I'd have loved for Chris Wallace to have asked Hillary why she had not walked away from Donna Brazile, and to have not let her try to get away with "russiansrussiansrussiansrussians", her usual response on anything exposed from the release of Wikileaks emails.

"Secretary Clinton", he would have followed up when she deflected to the Russians, "we know that you received the questions because Miss Brazile was fired by CNN over it.  Tell us why you did not immediately decline the question, and why you did not tell Miss Brazile in no uncertain terms that your ethical compass did not allow you to cheat, even in an election campaign?"

Ah, what a question.  Anyone on her plane want to ask that today?

Copyright 2016 by Robert Sutton
Like what you read here?  There's a new post from Bob at www.uberthoughtsUSA.com at 10am Eastern time, every weekday, giving new meaning to "prolific essayist."  Sponsorship and interview inquiries cheerfully welcomed at bsutton@alum.mit.edu or on Twitter at @rmosutton.