Brian Baker: Write it on ice
By Brian Baker
Thursday, December 15th, 2016

In my last couple of columns I’ve been discussing how the American left has blown its collective mind over the election of Trump and its hair-on-fire antics in trying to turn the tides of time to before Nov. 8, when their queen-bee-in-waiting, Miss Pantsuit, was still just a stone’s throw away from her coronation.

As I’m writing this (who knows what they’ll come up with tomorrow?) the Next Big Thing is that Russia hacked the DNC computers because “they wanted Trump to win.”

It’s splashed all over the place in the leftist media. Big headlines; op-ed topic du jour.

But let’s examine this for a moment. Still unexplained is why the Russians would want Trump over Clinton. Are the Dems trying to imply that he’s a Russian agent or something? A Manchurian Candidate?

It certainly can’t be that the Russians were afraid of Clinton. After all, as secretary of state she was an abysmal failure; all of her policies led to disastrous consequences, from the Arab Spring meltdown, to Benghazi, to China’s resurgent aggression in the South China Sea, to Russia’s own newly energized militarism in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. So no, that can’t be it.

Another aspect of this issue – the one the left doesn’t seem to raise and, in fact, wants to distract people away from – is really basic: if there was nothing in those hacked emails to hide, what’s the big deal, anyway?

This is the modern computer era. Everybody gets hacked. That’s a given. There’s even a phrase for it: “The internet is forever.”

Never write, post, publish or email anything you don’t want to see splashed all over the web. Even kids know this. So what was in those “hacked” emails that supposedly brought Clinton down?

Truth. The simple truth.

Those emails, whether hacked by the Russians or someone else, revealed the depths of corruption of the Clinton cabal in its maneuvering to win office, from the manipulations of Debra Wasserman Schultz and Donna Brazile in stealing the primary from Bernie Sanders, to the complicity of the Clinton team in her illegal email rig, to the cooperation of the allegedly “independent and unbiased” press, right on down.

But there’s also a further reality. Those hacked emails didn’t actually reveal anything people didn’t already know about Clinton. All they really did was confirm what people already knew: that Clinton is cynical and corrupt to her core and surrounds herself with like-minded people. Nothing new here, move along.

Thus the net impact of those hacked emails, in reality, was pretty much a big, fat zero.

Let’s face it. This latest burst of sanctimonious outrage is nothing more than another effort to deny the reality of the election outcome and a lame attempt to besmirch and delegitimize the guy who won the election fair and square: Donald Trump.

My Armenian mother told me there’s an old-country maxim that goes: “Write it on ice.” In other words, if you write something down that you might not want people to see later, it will disappear forever when you write it on ice, which melts.

But you never know about anything written on paper – or nowadays in emails.

So the lesson for the Dems is this: Next time, don’t document your corruption in emails. Better yet, why not consider abandoning that corruption all together?

Brian Baker is a Saugus resident.

About the author

Brian Baker

Brian Baker

Brian Baker: Write it on ice

In my last couple of columns I’ve been discussing how the American left has blown its collective mind over the election of Trump and its hair-on-fire antics in trying to turn the tides of time to before Nov. 8, when their queen-bee-in-waiting, Miss Pantsuit, was still just a stone’s throw away from her coronation.

As I’m writing this (who knows what they’ll come up with tomorrow?) the Next Big Thing is that Russia hacked the DNC computers because “they wanted Trump to win.”

It’s splashed all over the place in the leftist media. Big headlines; op-ed topic du jour.

But let’s examine this for a moment. Still unexplained is why the Russians would want Trump over Clinton. Are the Dems trying to imply that he’s a Russian agent or something? A Manchurian Candidate?

It certainly can’t be that the Russians were afraid of Clinton. After all, as secretary of state she was an abysmal failure; all of her policies led to disastrous consequences, from the Arab Spring meltdown, to Benghazi, to China’s resurgent aggression in the South China Sea, to Russia’s own newly energized militarism in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. So no, that can’t be it.

Another aspect of this issue – the one the left doesn’t seem to raise and, in fact, wants to distract people away from – is really basic: if there was nothing in those hacked emails to hide, what’s the big deal, anyway?

This is the modern computer era. Everybody gets hacked. That’s a given. There’s even a phrase for it: “The internet is forever.”

Never write, post, publish or email anything you don’t want to see splashed all over the web. Even kids know this. So what was in those “hacked” emails that supposedly brought Clinton down?

Truth. The simple truth.

Those emails, whether hacked by the Russians or someone else, revealed the depths of corruption of the Clinton cabal in its maneuvering to win office, from the manipulations of Debra Wasserman Schultz and Donna Brazile in stealing the primary from Bernie Sanders, to the complicity of the Clinton team in her illegal email rig, to the cooperation of the allegedly “independent and unbiased” press, right on down.

But there’s also a further reality. Those hacked emails didn’t actually reveal anything people didn’t already know about Clinton. All they really did was confirm what people already knew: that Clinton is cynical and corrupt to her core and surrounds herself with like-minded people. Nothing new here, move along.

Thus the net impact of those hacked emails, in reality, was pretty much a big, fat zero.

Let’s face it. This latest burst of sanctimonious outrage is nothing more than another effort to deny the reality of the election outcome and a lame attempt to besmirch and delegitimize the guy who won the election fair and square: Donald Trump.

My Armenian mother told me there’s an old-country maxim that goes: “Write it on ice.” In other words, if you write something down that you might not want people to see later, it will disappear forever when you write it on ice, which melts.

But you never know about anything written on paper – or nowadays in emails.

So the lesson for the Dems is this: Next time, don’t document your corruption in emails. Better yet, why not consider abandoning that corruption all together?

Brian Baker is a Saugus resident.