Take the Constitutional Quiz Take the Constitutional Quiz

WolfPresident Obama is on the . . . warpath. (Him? No, really. He is.) He’s mad as . . . and he’s not going to take it anymore. (For the next month, anyway. After that, he’s just another average Joe. No one will care what he thinks then. If they do now.)

So, what has him in a dither? He’s ticked off at Putin, Russia’s leader. What for? (You ask.) Listen here and I’ll tell you.

Obama claims that Putin at least attempted to (and perhaps did) influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election. That’s outrageous, says Obama.

And how did Putin do that? Well, first, he directed some of his cronies to hack into the Democrat Party’s computer to get their hands on their scandalous emails. (More on that in just a moment.) Then, second, Putin had his cronies anonymously turn over their scandalous email findings to WikiLeaks (scandalous to Obama apparently referring to the hackings and not the emails). And finally, third, Putin had WikiLeaks do what it does, leak those (scandalous) emails to all our voters (who, seeing what was in all those (scandalous) emails, would thereupon be outraged and vote for Donald instead of Hillary).

Actually, attributing the third step to Putin seems rather questionable, and silly. WikiLeaks wouldn’t need any prompting or encouragement from Putin to leak the (scandalous) emails; they’d take care of the third step on their own initiative.

Forgetting about Putin’s alleged third step, I do think Obama makes a good point about the first two steps, the thought that the leader of a foreign government would interfere in domestic U.S. matters being downright obnoxious. (I do often agree with Obama. Hmm, maybe I should rephrase that—sometimes I agree with Obama. Uh, maybe I should rephrase that still once more—I agree with Obama every once in a blue moon.)

But here’s the part I really find intriguing: How come Obama isn’t equally (or even a little) offended by the (scandalous) conduct (stupidly) recorded in those (scandalous) emails?

You know, things like Hillary promising to keep Clinton Foundation activities separate from Clinton Department of State actions, and then claiming that she honored that promise when the emails show countless instances in which she did not honor that promise; things like Hillary accepting and using advance secret disclosures to her of Presidential debate questions; things like . . ..  (You get the point. I’m gonna cut the list off here because The Wife says I make these blogs too long.)

Not wanting to appear biased, i.e., against only one side of the aisle, I decided to ask Donald what he thought of all this hubbub. I wanted to know if he thought Obama’s remarks were unprecedented. He said, worse than unprecedented, they were unpresidented, just as he found when the Chinese seized the U.S. drone ship the other day in international waters. Because, Donald explained, Obama hadn’t outted Putin while the precedential election was still underway.

Pointing out that Obama had done precisely that during the precedential election and that the media had fully reported on that, I asked Trump if he really thought there was no price to be paid when he repeatedly makes false statements of fact. He said, “No, not at all. It works like a charm. People like it when I lie. They buy into whatever I say. It makes them feel good. Even the ones who Hillary doesn’t find deplorable.”

I then asked Trump what he thought about the little Shepherd boy who falsely yelled “wolf” over and over, only to be ignored by the townsfolk when he yelled “wolf” when the wolf really did show up. He said he didn’t pay any attention to that story because it was a lie—and therefore not worthy of his precedential time.

Join the discussion either by logging in just below or by signing into your favorite social media outlet. If you’re having trouble, please follow these instructions to guide you! Thanks!