Isn’t It Hillary Who Looks Unhinged?

REUTERS/Rebecca Naden

David Krayden Ottawa Bureau Chief
Font Size:

It has become de rigeur amongst Democrats to suggest that President Donald Trump is unhinged, psychologically unstable, just a little bit crazy. His opponents have even suggested an obscure Constitutional amendment be invoked to remove the president from his office because of his allegedly impaired mental abilities. Hillary Clinton never misses to a beat in her quest to define Trump as a grossly unhinged and egotistic beast who clearly can’t be trusted to manage the affairs of state.

But what are we to make of Clinton’s increasingly bizarre and cutting remarks that have defined the latest leg of her book tour? Technically, Hillary’s quest to sell every last copy of “What Happened” became a world book tour when she crossed the border into Canada and charged her admirers in the Great White North an outrageous fee to spend a few moments with a woman who was not only a failed presidential candidate but arguably a highly unsuccessful Secretary of State as well. Clinton is not yet finished with spreading her charm and exuberance in Canada, but this week she has taken the What Happened Tour to the U.K. where she continues to delight, inspire and astound everyone.

Although she may have created a wellspring of joy on Tuesday by announcing that she won’t run for the presidency again, she has also been responsible for some boldly stupid statements about Trump and his record of president. On Sunday night she described the president like he were a dictatorial recluse hiding in a bunker and completely isolated not only from his staff but from reality. She suggested Congress and all of his closest cabinet confidantes were working overtime to find ways to prevent Trump from pushing the nuclear button in a fit of rage against North Korea.

While she said she was “worried” that Trump would plunge the world into a nuclear war, she characterized the Democratic bluff on Russia’s attempts to influence the 2016 election as “cyber 9/11.” That’s not only a significant comparison but a wholly inappropriate allusion; the real 9/11 actually occurred and resulted in tragedy. The “cyber 9/11” is a mere figment of Clinton’s imagination, or, at least, a sorry attempt at Democratic talking points.

So who is the unhinged one here? While Clinton plays the consummate huckster with another biography to sell, she engages in a highly volatile monologue with a world audience that doesn’t just achieve a political objective of embarrassing the Trump administration, but accomplishes the dubious distinction of undermining the United States itself.

All to sell a book, mind you.

Clinton, after all, may be a political pain in the posterior that you wish would retire gracefully but she is also a former First Lady and Secretary of State. I just cannot imagine anyone else with similar curiculum vitae traipsing around the globe in a quest to sell a self-aggrandizing book and suggesting the U.S. is in the hands of a trigger-happy madman.

The Clintons — both of them — are all about the cash. And they are always looking for new ways to raise some more of it. The Clinton Foundation was good while it lasted but it seems like a lost cause after all that bad publicity. So Hilllary Clinton, although she’s promised to refrain from seeking the presidency in the future, now sees her herself as the leader of the Democratic “resistance” and who knows what kind of money that role will generate.

And just who is the egotist? When she isn’t declaring Trump to be driven to starting a nuclear war, Clinton is describing him as the ultimate narcissist. But what kind of person would write a book about why they shouldn’t have lost a presidential election and then proceed to tell the world that the world that the man who did win that election is unfit for office?

Obviously, Clinton did not invest enough of her time and energy in the nasal breathing that she attributes to assisting her cope with defeat. Perhaps some more Chardonnay would help. At the very least she needs to start doing a little more thinking and a lot less talking.

Follow David on Twitter

Views expressed in op-eds are not the views of The Daily Caller.