Author: A.T.

In 2005, I attended the opening session of the first Clinton Global Initiative.

Wednesday, I attended the closing session of the last.

So much good has been catalyzed by CGI in those intervening years — more than 3,600 “commitments” saving and improving hundreds of millions of lives.

Yet in today’s bizarro world, a sentiment like this . . .

“I have been a proud member of CGI since 2005. I have witnessed its unique practical and measurable contributions in the world, the opportunities it created for marginalized voices to be heard and how it helped push social issues otherwise ignored into the limelight,” said Zainab Salbi, the founder of Women for Women International, at a panel earlier this week. ​“This may be the last annual meeting, but the work and the spirit of President Clinton’s vision and the CGI committed community will live on forever.”

. . . gets spun by Clinton foes into this . . .

“The Clinton Foundation is at its heart a corrupt enterprise that masks its true mission of empowering and enriching the Clintons and their cronies . . . ” said Steven Cheung, director of rapid response for the Trump campaign.

My friend Dan Gelber’s recent post on the criticism:

It’s Neither Pay Nor Play

As Republican leaders scream for public executions and trials (in evidently that order) over the Clinton Foundation fundraising, it might make sense to take a step back for some much needed perspective. As a former federal corruption prosecutor, I can assure you the only thing noticeably absent from this fabricated “pay to play” scandal is the pay and the play. It does have, however, hypocrisy and irony aplenty.
A few things about the Clinton Foundation.

The Clinton Foundation is a charity and apparently a very good one. The funds raised are used to help nations battle diseases like malaria, AIDS and tuberculosis and address challenges like global warming and deforestation. A recent fact check found that nearly 90% of the money raised went directly to providing these services to the sick, forgotten and left behind. (that’s well over the 75% industry standard for charities).

Also lost in this debate is the fact that the Clintons don’t receive a penny in salary. Not one red cent. In fact, they donate their own money to the Foundation. Someone needs to explain to Secretary Clinton that if she’s trying to exploit the foundation for personal gain, she’s going about it exactly the wrong way.

So before we start to explore the claims of conflict of interest, first recognize the Clinton Foundation does not benefit the Clintons. It benefits the world. There is no “pay.”

And there is also no evidence of “play.” Not only were the Clintons not receiving anything of value, there is no evidence that donors to their charity received anything in exchange for their donation. The idea that people and leaders with influence might be able to meet with powerful people is a fact of life that plays out at every level of society. Not exactly scandalous.

What this brouhaha lacks in substance, however, it surely makes up for in irony. How does a guy like V.P nominee Mike Pence contend there is something wrong with these charitable donations? As a congressman he solicited over $10 million in campaign checks mostly from special interests who had business before his congressional committees and the congress. And the money he solicited and received wasn’t used to fight malaria; he used it to keep himself in office and on the public dole (and, on one occasion, to literally pay his home mortgage!).

If Pence gets a Silver Medal in hypocrisy, Trump gets the Gold. Donald Trump paid Florida’s Attorney General $25,000 just before that office declined to civilly prosecute his Trump University. Think about it. Trump is criticizing Secretary Clinton because of contributions people made to a charity, while he actually gave money to a public official who was deciding whether to prosecute him and his pretend University.

It is appropriate that the media shine a light on these matters – including the Clinton Foundation. But no one can seriously contend that Secretary Clinton has done something even remotely scandalous. As for Trump, that’s an entirely different story.

The foundation one candidate is associated with has won praise from leaders around the world, inspiring the cooperation of participants as diverse as Bono, Wal-Mart, Rupert Murdoch, and Bishop Desmond Tutu.

The foundation controlled by the other candidate uses other people’s money to buy a $20,000 portrait of himself and settle business disputes.  Even, perhaps, to make a little money.

(“It was 2010,” reports the Washington Post, “and Trump was being honored by a charity — the Palm Beach Police Foundation — for his ‘selfless support’ of its cause. His support did not include any of his own money. . . . [Indeed], Trump may have actually made money. The gala was held at his Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, and the police foundation paid to rent the room.”)

To join the final session of the Clinton Global Initiative, click here. The first hour includes a panel discussion with Ben Affleck on rape victims in the East Congo.  The second, starting at 59:30: a film montage followed by President Clinton’s own perspective

Have a great weekend.

Click here to vote, here to volunteer, here to contribute — and here to see what Republicans are saying about Trump and Clinton.

So yesterday we watched Seth Myers on Trump. One of you suggested Colbert’s take is even better.  (Thanks Matt!)  This is above my pay grade.  You decide.

Either way, Hillary started the birther movement, Trump ended it, the moon is a matzo ball, Trump knows more about ISIS than the generals, America is a disaster.  Gas is five bucks, we’re losing 800,000 jobs a month, the stock market is crashing, home foreclosures are a catastrophe, Detroit is bankrupt, our infrastructure’s crumbling — and only Trump can fix it.

Oh, wait.  Gas is $2.25 a gallon, we’ve had 78 consecutive months of net private sector job growth,* the stock market’s nearly tripled, home prices are robust, Detroit’s booming . . . and yes, our infrastructure is still crumbling.

But only because Republicans blocked the American Jobs Act.

And our economy — and, especially, wage growth — are weaker than they need to be.

But only because they also blocked a higher minimum wage and comprehensive immigration reform.  (Trump opposes both.)

Which is why we need to elect Hillary and a Democratic Congress to put millions of Americans to work revitalizing our infrastructure; to raise the minimum wage; to enact the immigration reform passed 68-32 in the Senate but blocked in the House; to allow federal student loans to be refinanced at today’s low rates — and to do so many other practical, realistic things that will move America forward — rather than take a crazy leap into the unknown with a sociopath.

Trump will “absolutely” release his tax returns — except he won’t.  (My guess: you pay more tax.)

He’s generous — though he hasn’t given to his own foundation since 2008 but has used others’ contributions to buy expensive portraits of himself and to settle business disputes.  (You will recall that over the last 30 years he has become party to a new legal action on average every three days.)

George H. W. Bush is voting for his opponent, Colin Powell calls him a “national disgrace,” he kept a book of Hitler’s speeches by his bedside.

I mean, what’s not to like about this guy?

He “stirs hatred and feeds self-vindication, and whether on paper it bears inspection for consistency, logic or soundness is immaterial.”

He’s “a past master at throwing up verbal smoke screens . . . knows the effectiveness of massive oratorical assaults . . . knows how to give pledges that will be broken . . . his crudity frequently borders on downright vulgarity.”

(Those quotes are not about Trump; they’re from the foreword and introduction to the 1941 book of speeches he kept by his bedside.)

But I digress.

Watch Seth Myers and Stephen Colbert.  They make the anxiety of these final 48 days a little easier to bear.

Click here to vote, here to volunteer, here to contribute — and here to see what Republicans are saying about Trump and Clinton.

*The record: 23 million net new jobs under the last Clinton presidency; 15 million in the last 78 months under Obama — so north of 35 million under the two of them, versus fewer than one million under the last two Republican presidents, Bush and Bush, combined.

So you absolutely need to enjoy this Seth Myers clip.  You will laugh, learn, and share it with everyone you know.

My work here is done.

But I should respond to one of you who wrote in regard to this recent post (“Which Of These Republicans Do YOU Believe — I believe all of them.”)

Ronald S.:   “While I understand you are not FOX News Fair and Balanced, perhaps some day you will also include the other side of coins.  Like Colin Powell on Hillary Clinton (‘I would rather not have to vote for her, although she is a friend I respect.  A 70-year person with a long track record, unbridled ambition, greedy, not [sic] transformational.’)  So, while I always vote, why would I volunteer or contribute based on your biased presentations?  Less ‘tribe,’ more complete, factual presentation, please.”

☞ I agree about the importance of being fair and balanced; disagree that here I was not.

There is nothing disqualifying about being greedy or ambitious or about not being transformational.  There is something disqualifying about being a “national disgrace and international pariah” (as Colin Powell characterized Trump).  So they are NOT equivalent, and it IS fair (I think) to make the case that many leading REPUBLICANS — not just Democrats — think Trump cannot be President.

Balanced in this case, I think, would have been to quote some of the many prominent DEMOCRATS who have terrible, disqualifying things to say about Hillary.

Except there are none, so I didn’t.

The more fact-based independent thought the better.  If people are thoughtful and fact-based, as Ronald is, we will win by a landslide.

Enjoy that clip.  Seth Myers nails it.

This strikes me as a really big deal: CHRIS CHRISTIE KNEW ABOUT BRIDGE LANE CLOSINGS AS THEY HAPPENED, according to prosecutors in the US Attorney’s office, based on statements from two of Christie’s top people.

So, first off, yes, they purposely caused the citizens of New Jersey tremendous inconvenience — that could even have been life threatening (if you were in an ambulance, say) — which gives an extraordinary meaning to the term “public service.”  Amazing.

And then Christie lied and lied and lied and lied and adamantly lied and dismissively lied and arrogantly lied — and was on the short list to be Donald Trump’s running mate and is to this day adamantly, dismissively, and arrogantly lying on Trump’s behalf.  (Trump, meanwhile, lies at a rate of more than 71 lies per hour.  More than one a minute.  And has become party to a new lawsuit over the last 30 years at a rate on average of one every three days.)

Yes, we know Trump could go into the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot people (and blame it on Hillary, like the “birther” movement) and he would still win, because — as with Trump University and the bankrupt Trump casinos and the bestselling book he didn’t write (the author of which calls him a “sociopath”) — Trump is all about winning! He’s gonna build a wall and Mexico will pay for it.

But it is appalling. Christie should be in jail. Like Trump, he is a liar and a bully and a sociopath.  (Though if Trump wins, he’s a pretty sure bet for a Cabinet post, no?)

Click here to vote, here to volunteer, here to contribute — and here, if you missed it, to see what Republicans are saying about Trump and Clinton.

I believe all of them:

Colin Powell:  Trump is “a national disgrace and an international pariah.”

Barbara Bush: “I don’t know how women can vote for [him]. . . . It’s incomprehensible to me.”

Marco Rubio: “A dangerous con man.”

Carly Fiorina: “A man who seems to only feel big when he’s trying to make other people feel small.”

Bobby Jindal: “An unserious and unstable narcissist.”

Mitt Romney: “A phony . . . playing the American public for suckers.”

Ted Cruz: “A pathological liar [and a] narcissist.”

Karl Rove: “A complete idiot . . . graceless and divisive.”

51 Former GOP National Security Officials: “Not qualified . . . dangerous.”

Lindsey Graham: “A race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot . . . empowering radical Islam . . . undercutting everything we stand for.”

Also Jeb Bush, when he  presented Hillary with the 2013 Liberty Medal: “Former Secretary Clinton has dedicated her life to serving and engaging people across the world in democracy.”  And Henry Kissinger: “[Hillary Clinton] ran the State Department in the most effective way that I’ve ever seen.” And John McCain: “Secretary Clinton is admired and respected around the world . . . a very effective Secretary of State.” And Condoleezza Rice: “She’s a patriot. […] I think she’s doing a fine job. I really do.” Lindsey Graham: “She is one of the most effective secretaries of state, greatest ambassadors for the American people that I have known in my lifetime.” And Paul Ryan: “[If she had become president in 2009], we’d have fixed the fiscal mess by now.”

Click here to vote.  Click here to volunteer.  Click here to contribute.

I believe all of them:

Colin Powell:  Trump is “a national disgrace and an international pariah.”

Barbara Bush: “I don’t know how women can vote for [him]. . . . It’s incomprehensible to me.”

Marco Rubio: “A dangerous con man.”

Carly Fiorina: “A man who seems to only feel big when he’s trying to make other people feel small.”

Bobby Jindal: “An unserious and unstable narcissist.”

Mitt Romney: “A phony . . . playing the American public for suckers.”

Ted Cruz: “A pathological liar [and a] narcissist.”

Karl Rove: “A complete idiot . . . graceless and divisive.”

51 Former GOP National Security Officials: “Not qualified . . . dangerous.”

Lindsey Graham: “A race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot . . . empowering radical Islam . . . undercutting everything we stand for.”

Also Jeb Bush, when he  presented Hillary with the 2013 Liberty Medal: “Former Secretary Clinton has dedicated her life to serving and engaging people across the world in democracy.”  And Henry Kissinger: “[Hillary Clinton] ran the State Department in the most effective way that I’ve ever seen.” And John McCain: “Secretary Clinton is admired and respected around the world . . . a very effective Secretary of State.” And Condoleezza Rice: “She’s a patriot. […] I think she’s doing a fine job. I really do.” Lindsey Graham: “She is one of the most effective secretaries of state, greatest ambassadors for the American people that I have known in my lifetime.” And Paul Ryan: “[If she had become president in 2009], we’d have fixed the fiscal mess by now.”

Click here to vote.  Click here to volunteer.  Click here to contribute.

[Third Estimated Tax Payment Due Today (for taxable income not subject to withholding).  Click here for instructions and the form.]

And speaking of taxes, how outrageous that Trump  will not release his, which in 2014 he said he “absolutely” w0uld if he ran for President.  We know he tells more than one lie per minute and has gotten involved in a new legal action every three days, on average, for the last 30 years.  But still. Click here to force his hand.  My guess: he pays less in tax than you do, gives less to charity than the Clintons, has far less income than he’d like people to believe, and is in bed with the Russians.

And as we now know used his foundation money to buy a $20,000 portrait of himself and illegally contribute $25,000 to Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi four days before she declined to join other attorneys general in investigating his fraudulent Trump University.

Want something to make you feel good for a change? (Average household income rose $2,800 last year, 3.5 million Americans were lifted out of poverty.)  Watch the President in Philadelphia Tuesday. It is a thing of joy.

For those living abroad or who know someone living abroad, there’s this, to make voting easy.

For Jill Stein voters — enough to swing the election as Ralph Nader did in 2000 — there’s this, from Current Affairs: Why Leftists Should Have No Problem Voting for Hillary.”*

And speaking of 2000 — there’s this must-read Paul Krugman column in the New York Times: Hillary Clinton Gets Gored.

Americans of a certain age who follow politics and policy closely still have vivid memories of the 2000 election — bad memories, and not just because the man who lost the popular vote somehow ended up in office. For the campaign leading up to that end game was nightmarish too.

You see, one candidate, George W. Bush, was dishonest in a way that was unprecedented in U.S. politics. Most notably, he proposed big tax cuts for the rich while insisting, in raw denial of arithmetic, that they were targeted for the middle class. These campaign lies presaged what would happen during his administration — an administration that, let us not forget, took America to war on false pretenses.

Yet throughout the campaign most media coverage gave the impression that Mr. Bush was a bluff, straightforward guy, while portraying Al Gore — whose policy proposals added up, and whose critiques of the Bush plan were completely accurate — as slippery and dishonest. Mr. Gore’s mendacity was supposedly demonstrated by trivial anecdotes, none significant, some of them simply false. No, he never claimed to have invented the internet. But the image stuck.

And right now I and many others have the sick, sinking feeling that it’s happening again.

True, there aren’t many efforts to pretend that Donald Trump is a paragon of honesty. But it’s hard to escape the impression that he’s being graded on a curve. If he manages to read from a TelePrompter without going off script, he’s being presidential. If he seems to suggest that he wouldn’t round up all 11 million undocumented immigrants right away, he’s moving into the mainstream. And many of his multiple scandals, like what appear to be clear payoffs to state attorneys general to back off investigating Trump University, get remarkably little attention.

Meanwhile, we have the presumption that anything Hillary Clinton does must be corrupt, most spectacularly illustrated by the increasingly bizarre coverage of the Clinton Foundation.

Step back for a moment, and think about what that foundation is about. When Bill Clinton left office, he was a popular, globally respected figure. What should he have done with that reputation? Raising large sums for a charity that saves the lives of poor children sounds like a pretty reasonable, virtuous course of action. And the Clinton Foundation is, by all accounts, a big force for good in the world. For example, Charity Watch, an independent watchdog, gives it an “A” rating — better than the American Red Cross.

Now, any operation that raises and spends billions of dollars creates the potential for conflicts of interest. You could imagine the Clintons using the foundation as a slush fund to reward their friends, or, alternatively, Mrs. Clinton using her positions in public office to reward donors. So it was right and appropriate to investigate the foundation’s operations to see if there were any improper quid pro quos. As reporters like to say, the sheer size of the foundation “raises questions.”

But nobody seems willing to accept the answers to those questions, which are, very clearly, “no.”

Consider the big Associated Press report suggesting that Mrs. Clinton’s meetings with foundation donors while secretary of state indicate “her possible ethics challenges if elected president.” Given the tone of the report, you might have expected to read about meetings with, say, brutal foreign dictators or corporate fat cats facing indictment, followed by questionable actions on their behalf.

But the prime example The A.P. actually offered was of Mrs. Clinton meeting with Muhammad Yunus, a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize who also happens to be a longtime personal friend. If that was the best the investigation could come up with, there was nothing there.

So I would urge journalists to ask whether they are reporting facts or simply engaging in innuendo, and urge the public to read with a critical eye. If reports about a candidate talk about how something “raises questions,” creates “shadows,” or anything similar, be aware that these are all too often weasel words used to create the impression of wrongdoing out of thin air.

And here’s a pro tip: the best ways to judge a candidate’s character are to look at what he or she has actually done, and what policies he or she is proposing. Mr. Trump’s record of bilking students, stiffing contractors and more is a good indicator of how he’d act as president; Mrs. Clinton’s speaking style and body language aren’t. George W. Bush’s policy lies gave me a much better handle on who he was than all the up-close-and-personal reporting of 2000, and the contrast between Mr. Trump’s policy incoherence and Mrs. Clinton’s carefulness speaks volumes today.

In other words, focus on the facts. America and the world can’t afford another election tipped by innuendo.

Read my blog, The Conscience of a Liberal, and follow me on Twitter, @PaulKrugman.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

Do you think my card will ever be charged the $10,000 — or that Reid Hoffman’s the $5 million — we pledged to veterans’ groups if Trump releases his taxes? Something he promised in 2014 he “absolutely” would do if he ran for President. Click here to join the fun. Because really, what’s Trump trying to hide?  That he’s not remotely as rich as he claims? That he and Melania pay less tax than you do?  That he and Melania give less to charity than Bill and Hillary? That he’s in bed with the Russians?

The market doesn’t seem cheap these days, but I bought some more GEC at $4.64 yesterday — albeit only with money I can truly afford to lose.

*Even in “safe” states it matters: we need the widest possible majority to show the world — and conspiracy theorists — she won by a mile.

Kevin R.: “It was a mistake for Hillary to make that ‘deplorables’ comment Friday, but click here for more on what many Trump supporters believe (blacks are lazier and less intelligent) and for the parody Donald Jr. chose to post (featuring Trump flanked by noted racists).”

Paul Abrams: “Not all Trump supporters are racist, but all racists are supporting him.”

No?

Parvez Sharma: “Does the malevolent Breitbart even know that the greatest of American Presidents, FDR — elected four times — was always battling grave illness, pain and polio and in a wheelchair to boot? And he lifted an entire generation out of poverty? And what about Camelot? JFK had not a single pain-free day as President. I think we all need to knock on doors in swing states and get every New Yorker to write long letters to their grandparents in South Florida.”

Click here to volunteer!

And, just before I introduce you to a likely Trump voter, may I point out that — horrible as Trump would have us believe things are, and disastrous a job as he would have us believe the President has done — the standard-of-living index, as rated by average Americans, has doubled on Obama’s watch?  We’d be still further along if the Republicans hadn’t blocked putting folks back to work revitalizing our infrastructure; hadn’t blocked refinancing of federal student loans at today’s low rates; hadn’t blocked hiking the minimum wage; hadn’t blocked the comprehensive immigration reform that passed the Senate 68-32. But from the edge of depression we’ve come a long, long way.

And now Roger Huffstetler’s post in case you missed Saturday’s Richmond Times-Dispatch:

“Mama Sue, who you gonna vote for?” I asked my 86-year-old grandmother.

“Trump,” she said, without missing a beat. “I’ve never voted for a Democrat for president, and I’m too old to start now.”

Mama Sue represents generations of Huffstetlers who have worked with their hands for a living. When my grandfather filled out his draft card, he listed “Self Farming’’ as his occupation. A friend who taught me to make a half-Windsor knot jokingly called me “first in your family to tie a tie.” That’s about right.

I can empathize with people who wonder why someone like Mama Sue supports Donald Trump. He divides people into winners and losers. And “You have to be wealthy in order to be great,” he said at a campaign rally in May.

According to his definition of greatness, Mama Sue is a nobody. The rewards from decades of her hard work in mills accrued to others. One of nine children, she lived in rural North Carolina, where cotton mills outnumbered libraries. So when she decided in the ninth grade to leave school forever, no one was surprised. She had six kids over seven years; helped farm 120 acres; and sewed, spooled, or weaved for more than 40 years.

For Mama Sue, her grandchildren are her trophy case. Just as she once worked her hands over garments that found their way to others, she kneaded into all of us a sense of optimism, determination and curiosity.

But what I’m struggling with is simply dismissing Mama Sue because of who she votes for, instead of honoring and learning from her. A person is not who they vote for. That narrow world view is exactly the country Trump is trying to create: one where what separates us is more important than what connects us.

Contrary to Trump’s myopic focus on winning, American greatness is not found only in our victories. American greatness is the enduring pursuit of a more perfect union — together.

So many of us know no one who is supporting a different candidate. Instead of dismissing these people for how they vote, let’s aspire to defeat Trump every day through conversations with each other. By all means, discuss, cajole, twist arms. But most importantly, listen to the values behind people’s choices. You’ll see there’s so much of the struggle we share.

Let’s not become a country where we close our ears and hearts to each other. Let’s get back to the real work of reveling in the struggle together.

Over the years of calling Mama Sue, politics has come up from time to time, but not nearly as often as precipitation. And I always learn something from her. Her most important lesson is also the hardest learned. Over an eight-year period, Mama Sue had to bury three of her six adult children, including my dad. Every night before she goes to bed, using their pictures as a poor substitute, she kisses them goodnight. When she talks about it she’s sad but not bitter or defeated: “Life’s not always easy, Roger Dean, sometimes you just have to keep going even when you don’t want to.” And I admire her fierce dedication to this nation.

“I pray every day for America; I love this country,” says Mama Sue, grandmother to 12 and great-grandmother to a dozen more.

“I know you do,’’ I reply. “I know you do.”

Roger Dean Huffstetler is a Marine veteran and entrepreneur living in Charlottesville. You may contact him at rdhuffstetler@gmail.com.

 

Hillary is one tough cookie.  Can you imagine all the traveling she’s done and speeches she’s given — with pneumonia? 

I spoke for four minutes at the same event she keynoted Friday night — having done nothing much the two or three days before — and was pretty well shot for the rest of the weekend.

By contrast, she participated in the Commander-in-Chief forum (and was solid as a rock, despite her pneumonia), held a press conference the next morning, flew to Charlotte and spoke brilliantly and substantively for half an hour — watch! — then flew to Missouri for another joyful half hour — watch! — sat for photos and posted two deeply personal, affecting stories on Humans for New York — read them! — and who knows what else she did (oh, yeah; she coughed — well, she had pneumonia) — and then showed up at our dinner the next night and greeted 100 guests (that alone would knock me out for the day, but she does it several times a day) — and gave a strong speech, during which she deplored racists and homophobes.

Doesn’t Trump?

She said “half” his voters seemed to fall into that basket — which was a political faux pas she quickly walked back.

But consider: more than half Trump’s supporters think our President is a foreign-born Muslim (this poll put it over 60%).  And more than a few tweet horrible racist or homophobic or Islamophobic things. In 2016, shouldn’t this be deplored?  David Duke doesn’t think so, of course. But is he on the right side of history?  And is it not deplorable that Trump has amplified the message of fringe white supremacists to millions of his followers?

There’s nothing wrong with being a Muslim or having been born in Kenya, of course, any more than there would be anything wrong with Trump’s having been born Heidi Drumpf in Essen before undergoing surgery and coming to America. It’s just that neither is true.  Trump and Obama were born in America and neither is Muslim or transgender.

But I digress.  My point is that, yes, Hillary can fall ill.

Who can’t?

(If she ever fell truly ill, we’d still have, in Tim Kaine, a President vastly preferable to Trump.)

But boy is she rugged.

I was at a “panel” 20 or so winters ago whose two participants were: Mr. Justice Harry Blackmun and First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton.  Some of us were aware that Hillary had the flu.  Justice Blackmun spoke for about 15 minutes — I forget the topic — and then it was Hillary’s turn.  She came up to the standing mike — there was no podium, so you could see her from head to toe — put her hands calmly by her sides and, where I would have begun with excuses, “I hope you’ll forgive me, I’ve been hacking all day and am flying on Sudafed” — she began exactly where Justice Blackmun left off . . . seamlessly segued to her own remarks . . . and then, after 15 minutes — without notes or a script or a single grammatical error, lost thread, or infelicitous phrase — came back to Justice Blackmun’s final thought long after I, at least, had forgotten that’s where she started.

It was a tour de force.  With the flu.

And do you know what?  She recovered from the flu, just as she will recover from pneumonia.

She went on to become a fine Senator and Secretary of State, just as she will go on, I think, to be the most qualified President ever elected.

Trump’s lab results are “astonishingly excellent.”  Bizarrely, he would be the “healthiest.”

But he would also be the least qualified.