Labor Day marks the traditional start of general election campaigns. The “traditional start.” Unless you have been living under a rock these last few months, or held out futile hope for a miracle of sorts, the two nominees had already been decided and so, the general election campaign for president, even during Bernie’s never-had-a-chance-primary-run, was plenty underway.

Of course, Donald Trump had been sort of running and then officially not running for president a couple times before this latest cycle, and I wish this time around had also been merely a bloviating threat. And Hillary Clinton has probably been running for president ever since she told her first lie in nursery school ages ago.

I find myself, admittedly a political animal, not just frustrated by what has happened this time around and what is happening now as the two major candidates race to the bottom, but also very angry. No, not at the Democrats. Well, at least not any more angry than usual. They did what was expected. They nominated the sleazy, power-hungry, money-grubbing Clinton, and I mean the wife one. My anger is at some Republican candidates and their supporters.

But this column is about Lesser #1, Hillary Clinton. A major thing she has going for her is her party. The Democrats place their leftist ideology above all else, even the national security of the nation, so that no matter what their leaders do, they are backed to the hilt. At any sign of trouble, the wagons circle, and the dishonesty and hypocrisy party supports and defends their guy or gal lowering the bar as they never would were the candidate not their own but a Republican.

Say what you will about Republican ideology, but GOPers are more honest than Democrats because they are quicker to do the right thing and condemn one of their own than the Democrats. A week does not go by when another Republican politician or former official announces he or she cannot support Donald Trump.

After all the Clinton shenanigans, actual deeds and not stupid comments like those from Trump, can anyone name one Democratic politician, even one, who has said he or she could not support Hillary because of the Clinton Foundation’s shadiness, Benghazi, the email server issue, the lies, the constant lies? Nope. Not one.

“But she wasn’t indicted!” The new battle cry; how proud her supporters must be. Had she been indicted and not found guilty, we would hear, “But she wasn’t convicted!” And I am sure were Hillary indicted and convicted, many Democrats would still dismiss the prosecution and call it persecution as they try to find a way for Ms. Clinton to run the country from a federal penitentiary. “She did nothing wrong!” “Everybody else did it!” “It’s a vast right-wing conspiracy!” “What difference at this point does it make?”

Democrats used to scream about even the appearance of impropriety when it came to Republicans. One of the reasons they still fume about the 2010 US Supreme Court Citizens United decision by a conservative majority 5 – 4 vote was because they disagreed with the ruling that independent corporate campaign expenditures do not corrupt or even give that appearance.

From the dissent by liberal justice John Paul Stevens: “It has likewise never been doubted that “[o]f almost equal concern as the danger of actual quid pro quo arrangements is the impact of the appearance of corruption… A democracy cannot function effectively when its constituent members believe laws are being bought and sold.”

Except when it comes to Hillary Clinton, of course.

It never ends with the Clintons and never will. They are reckless when they are fully cognizant they are under a microscope, because in part, they know their party will back them no matter what. I also think that at least when it comes to Hillary, she doesn’t give a crap about anyone else and can’t help herself perhaps because of some kind of pathological condition. If not, why does Hillary keep lying even when she doesn’t need to? It has to be more than hubris and arrogance. And I don’t want that kind of person running my country.

So what is the latest in the email and foundation sagas, all caused by Hillary herself, not by any right-wing conspiracy? Aside from finding out there were thousands more emails Clinton did not give the FBI, when she said all were turned over, Hillary did not have only one communication device, and “for convenience purposes” as she stated in March of 2015. She used 13 mobile phones – eight while Secretary of State – and five iPads! Supposedly, she used one at a time, LOL.

How convenient that must have been, all those cell phones! Who goes through so many cell phones? What was that all about, really? Clinton’s lawyers could not find the majority of the devices to turn them over to the FBI. I am shocked! Did Ms. Clinton lose them and did the Russians find them? Maybe they will end up on eBay.

And this: “The findings also noted that Clinton stored her BlackBerry in a desk drawer in her office, which was not authorized. Her office was in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF), and thus the use of mobile devices in the office was prohibited.” Of course there are plenty who argue that Clinton was not at all careless with national security, Bill Clinton being one.

In March of 2015, Hillary said she was well aware of how to treat classified information, yet she told the FBI she didn’t know that “C” markings meant classified. “Clinton stated she did not know and could only speculate it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order.” Really? And where were the “A’s” and the “B’s” and the “D’s” and other letters of the alphabet? This is like a bad Hollywood script. Makes sense since Hollywood is part of Hillary’s base.

Does anyone really believe that this very smart lawyer and cunning politician, who had been exposed to classified data as a first lady (illegally, without clearance), as a US senator and as the country’s chief diplomat, did not know after all those years, decades actually, about how to identify and handle classified information? Please.

Clinton also said she could not recall or remember something at least 39 times. Thirty-nine times! Lawyers will tell you this is a legal trick. Better to say you don’t remember than something definitive that could come back to bite you. It’s hard to prosecute for “forgetfulness.”

It’s no wonder Hillary Clinton hasn’t had a formal press conference since December 5, 2015. She knows some in the media, some, will press for answers she doesn’t want to give and that they won’t put up with any more lies or forgetfulness.

There is more, a lot more I could say about the liar in chief wanna be, but does it matter? I wrote above that a major thing Clinton had going for her was her in-lockstep-no-matter-what party. The best thing she has going for her? Lesser #2, Donald Trump. He’s next. Stay tuned.