When the outrageous remarks about women Donald Trump made in 2005 became known just before the second presidential debate, the press compiled exhaustive lists of Republicans far and wide who would no longer support the Republican presidential nominee.
Will the press compile similar lists of those who won't support Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in light of new developments during the past several days relating to her use of a private server and private email accounts for government business? Will they even ask anyone the question? It can now be reported that the won't-vote-for-Hillary list — and it certainly has more than one person, even if not yet admitted — has a member whose relationship with the Clintons goes back over two decades: Democrat pollster Doug Schoen.
In the Political Insiders segment of Harris Faulkner's Fox Report Weekend Show on Fox News, Schoen announced that "as of today, I am not a supporter of the Secretary of State for the nation's highest office":
Transcript (bolds are mine):
HARRIS FAULKNER: Well I want to get your focus now. Just put you in the tractor beam. What's your reaction to the FBI reopening its case?
DOUG SCHOEN: As you know, I have been a supporter of Secretary Clinton.
FAULKNER: We all know. Yes. (laughs)
SCHOEN: Right. You do know. But, and the "but" is a big deal, at least to me. Given that this investigation is going to go on for many months after the election —
FAULKNER: No matter who wins.
SCHOEN: No matter who wins. But if the Secretary of State wins, we will have a president under criminal investigation, with Huma Abedin under investigation, the secretary of state, the President-elect should she win under investigation.
Harris, under these circumstances, I am actively reassessing my support. I'm not a Trump —
FAULKNER: Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a minute.
SCHOEN: Right.
FAULKNER: You're not going to vote for Hillary Clinton?
SCHOEN: Harris, I'm deeply concerned that we will have a constitutional crisis if she is elected.
FAULKNER: Wow.
SCHOEN: I want to learn more this week, see what we see. But as of today, I am not a supporter of the Secretary of State for the nation's highest office.
FAULKNER: How long have you known the Clintons, Doug?
SCHOEN: I've known the Clintons since '94.
FAULKNER: Wow.
Wow indeed.
In the final seconds of a longer video here, Schoen adds that his posture is in his view necessary "because of the impact on the governance of the country and our international situation." There's more to it than that, obviously, because all of this goes back to Hillary Clinton's original sin, namely the proactive, deliberate to set up a private server and routinely conduct government business in an irresponsible, unsafe manner.
Monday morning, Schoen followed up with a column at The Hill:
... Let me contextualize this point a bit more as the term “Watergate” gets thrown around alot these days.
Donald Trump likes to say that the Clinton email scandal is worse than Watergate. I remember Watergate very well.
What troubled me most, other than the crimes committed, was that the United States was paralyzed and unable to act. President Nixon and the government were rendered impotent, unable to govern and meet its responsibilities to the American public.
I worry that the same thing could happen after a victory by Secretary Clinton and could carry on into her term of office.
... Moreover, we simply cannot face a situation where the president elect may need or want a pardon from the president to govern. Or worse yet, need to pardon herself after she takes office.
As of now, I have no confidence that either of those questions will be answered by Election Day or that we will have full clarity on an investigation into what could be as many as 650,000 emails that found their way to Weiner and Abedin’s computer.
However, in good conscience, and as a Democrat, I am actively doubting whether I can vote for the Secretary of State. I also want to make clear that I cannot vote for Donald Trump as his world view and mine are very different.
I remain a Democrat and proud of the work I did for six years for President Bill Clinton between 1994 and 2000 and I write with extreme sadness. But I cannot in the waning days of the election make the case that Secretary Clinton should be elected.
Now we have the beginnings of a list of Democrats who did support Hillary Clinton who can no longer do so. What's more, he's a well-connected longtime friend of the Clintons. Will the press ask other key Democrats, especially those in tight House and Senate races, if they still endorse Mrs. Clinton? If not, why not? Are New Media outlets going to have to do the dirty work and compile a list on their own?
In light of what the press did with news about Trump three weeks ago which was clearly far less serious in terms of national security implications and how much the nation's next president can be trusted, a failure to follow up on Hillary Clinton's support among key Democratic Party politicians, officials, and even liberals not directly associated with the party would represent a most obvious double standard.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
