Swiftboating Hillary -- Without a Swift Boat

This boat isn’t swift and it doesn’t come as a public service from Vietnam Veterans, either. It’s really more like a canoe filled with rattlesnakes that keeps floating slowly up the river. But the intent is the same: Destroy the Democrat who seeks the Office of the US Presidency.

And that would be Hillary.

Just when we thought the Benghazi brouhaha was dying down, out comes the e-mail/communications commotion.

For years the consensus declared no woman could ever be President because no woman could ever have the adequate qualifications to be America’s Chief Executive. Now there’s a woman in our midst who does. Hillary Clinton not only has a unique background in public service, she’s held the actual jobs that back up her intentions. She’s talked the talk AND walked the walk.

First Lady (for two terms), special envoy for human and women’s rights, US Senator, former US presidential candidate, Secretary of State — all these job titles are in her resume. But they’re still not good enough. She’s still not good enough. In fact, she’ll never be good enough.

Evil fairy tale Queen from a Disney cartoon?

Or All-American Evita gone power-mad?

Take your pick. Breakfast bagels haven’t been smeared as much as this woman has. But now their latest satanic incarnation of her goes way beyond the pale. Now Hillary’s a sinister Bond villain with one hand on her BlackBerry and the other hand on a home server that will destroy the world!

I’m not being facetious here. I’m describing the caricature behind this latest vilification of a woman who deserves better. Seems like the more she excels, the more she gets attacked. In fact, Hillary has been doing such good work in all her many jobs that the only way to stop her was to stomp her down with a technicality.

So get ready for some real convoluted mudslinging in time for the November election.

Get ready for more depictions of Hillary as an evil, overbearing, power-mad bitch scoffing at labyrinthine bureaucratic record-keeping that the Federal Records Act demands. Why not? Everyone believes the worst about her anyway because everyone already believes she’s an uppity bitch who thinks she’s above man-made laws. She thinks she’s soo special, she thinks she doesn’t have to obey the same laws that we all have to follow. Just wait. We’ll get you, Hillary. We’re gonna frost your ass.

The real problem here is that this ass-frosting is operating on some time-released plan without a real timeline. By timeline, I mean a natural, expected chronology of events. Usually when someone violates a law, the law is actually on the books, and there’s also knowledge or awareness of its existence. Not in Hillary’s case.

According to news media and nearly all the Republicans on Capitol Hill, Secretary Clinton broke the law. She violated the Federal Records Act. They’re leaving out some important details, though. They’re not telling you that the Federal Records Act was passed by Congress on September 10, 2014, and signed into law by President Obama on November 26, 2014.

And when was Hillary Clinton Secretary of State? She became Secretary in February, 2009, and resigned on February 1, 2013, on the same day John Kerry became the new Secretary of State. That means that Hillary left office nearly 2 years BEFORE the Federal Records Act became law.

That means that these laws she allegedly violated were literally not in existence during her 5 years of service. That means that her detractors are so determined to keep her from being elected President that they’re using laws that weren’t even around when she served as Secretary of State! That means they really ARE out to get her.

Whatever your political affiliations are, you’ll have to admit this kind of character assassination is pretty extreme.

And what of her use of BlackBerry as part of a combined private and business communications system, with server located at her home? She has maintained all along that she got approval from the State Department to do so. Of course, that’s not what this latest 83-page investigative report from the State Department has found. Inspector General Steve Linick and his staff “found no evidence” of her request. No evidence found of any approval, either.

Thanks to her political opponents and talking heads, as well as some reporters, the implication of these findings indicates Hillary lied or destroyed important e-mails. If you actually read the report and familiarized yourself with its language and syntax, however, you’d realize it’s something else. It’s really nothing more than a big C.Y.A. document to shield the State Department and its career bureaucrats from reprimand, demotion, or job loss.

What IG Linick is really stating is that he and his staff couldn’t find any e-mails or official, written forms or post-it notes to back up former Secretary Clinton’s claims. He never said her claims were lies. He just said he couldn’t find any hard evidence — any real proof — that she’d asked or gotten an OK to set up her communications system.

Oh. Like no federal employee in that department could have given her a verbal OK? Or could have forgotten to record this request and approval in the appropriate computer? Or in the proper computer file? Or no one could have simply pushed the wrong button on his/her computer and automatically deleted this information? Puleeeze. As long as there’s human error, computers will continue to delete and malfunction.

And let’s not forget how much these bureaucrats want to cling to full-time employment. Why else would so many employees be in complete acquiescence with everything she did or said for 5 long years, but then rat her out as a loose cannon when she got investigated years later? Suddenly, when IG Linick began interrogating them, they admitted to all kinds of “concerns” and “complaints” about this Madam Secretary’s e-mails. Suddenly, there were these other mysterious, anonymous staff members who told them to “forget what they’d seen” and “never mention this to the Secretary again.”

Sounds suspiciously like 007 went on coffee break when M went all wackadoodle.

Or maybe these worker bees have been reading too much Ian Fleming — or Tom Clancy — for their own good.

At the heart of all these behaviors lies a true collective projection of our own fears and uneasiness about power and this woman who wants to be in power. It’s not about Hillary Clinton, candidate for President. It’s really about us, the voters, who misunderstand and misconstrue power whenever a strong woman wants to wield it.