Who do you get when you have a journalist telling other journalists to “go easy” on Mrs. Clinton? You get Paul Krugman of The New York Times.

In a recent OpEd entitled “Clinton gets Gored”, economist and journalist, Krugman comes to his defense of Hillary Clinton claiming that she is being painted as an unfit candidate by his fellow journalists and comparing this year’s upcoming election to the Bush/Gore election in 2000. This from August:

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

Sniff, sniff. Everybody is picking on poor Hillary. Nobody targets Donald Trump! Krugman cites the scrutiny of their family racket–err-business, The Clinton Foundation as the prime example in his piece:

“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.”-Paul Krugman

Krugman went on to defend The Clinton Foundation based on his “journalistic” findings from Charity Watch, which gave The Clinton Foundation a “better rating than the American Red Cross”. In his attempt to mentor, he’s encouraged journalists to stop dropping innuendo and to read their pieces over “with a critical eye”. After all, they need to get it right. The Clintons are good people (cough, cough). They’re do-gooders (repeat in your best Mob Wives voice), do-gooders, I say.

The piece of resistance comes towards the end of Krugman’s OpEd (get ready):

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.-Paul Krugman

Yep. Funny, I think Krugman just dropped innuendo unbeknownst to himself which is quite the irony here “The best ways to judge a candidate’s character is to look at what she has actually done?” Hmm. Shall we make a list? How about what hasn’t she done? She hasn’t done her job in protecting secured e-mails and information. She feigns ignorance on the topic when any one who has been in the military knows that a PFC in The Marine Corps gets the same briefing and knows what NOT to do with secure information. She has avoided as much confrontation as possible with questions being on her turf if at all. Journalists have not asked her hard questions, they’ve been hurling softballs all along so I am not exactly sure what universe Krugman is living in. Clinton has taken donations into her “legit” family foundation (it has to be, after all, it scored and A plus) from countries that support men who believe in beating and raping their wives and in genital mutilation of women. (Champion of women?) The Clinton Foundation taken money from these very same countries that believe in killing homosexuals. (Champion of the LGBT movement?) She is endorsed by Cecile Richards and Planned Parenthood, an organization rooted in that old quack Margaret Sanger’s desire to eradicate the “undesirable” race but is shrouded in pink to promote “women’s health”. (Champion of future generations? Champion of African Americans?) And when phone calls were flooding in one September evening and something could have been done to save the lives of Americans under fire in hostile territory, she did nothing. Nothing. And yet, we’re supposed to trust her to keep our country and the men and women who defend it safe?!

Yes, character speaks volumes. And Clinton’s “carefulness” is nothing but a prudent measure to save face in the wake of her corruption stepping into the light. Journalists, keep sugar-coating the details. You’re doing exactly what they want you to do. Please stop picking on poor, little old Hillary Clinton. Stop being so unfair! Be more professional. Here’s your next story idea: How Clinton’s coughing fit can be attributed to Bush-era pollution.