. . . the deplored.

In Chi Trib, veteran presidential debate moderator Jim Lehrer “gets at an important and frequently overlooked point” about fact-checking, writes James Taranto.

Even if the moderators play it straight, Trump will have an antagonist in the debates: Hillary Clinton. Implicit in the demand that moderators favor Mrs. Clinton is the fear that she is not up to the task of taking on Trump herself.

That’s what you get when you choose a nominee based on family connections and spare her the tough primary campaign that might have exposed her lack of political talent.

Yes.

What’s that old joke, playing on “if the shoe fits, wear it”? Starts off, “If the foo . . . “

See how Wall St. Journal’s James Taranto reads a newspaper:

A Washington Post editorial today laments that, as the headline puts it, “The Hillary Clinton Email Story Is Out of Control,” though the editors never specify who they think should control it. “Ms. Clinton’s emails have endured much more scrutiny than an ordinary person’s would have,” they shrug, and besides, “there is no equivalence between Ms. Clinton’s wrongs and Mr. Trump’s manifest unfitness for office.” The paper that has dined out for decades on its aggressive Watergate coverage is now pro-coverup.

A clear case among other things of Corruptio optimi pessima.

. . . even if Obama vetoes as he has threatened.

Of course, what do his threats matter? (Except when he has phone and pen to use. He’s a hot hand with phone and pen.)

The fellow is on to something: “Donald Trump can so skillfully elude a reporter’s questioning that he often is treated with kid gloves . . . .”

Which is to say, he knows the rules of engagement, is quick on his feet (or in his chair),  that is, handles himself well, scores high in an important presidential qualification.