You know what? I can imagine it. Pretty vividly, actually. Right down to the names of the “hypothetical” IRS officers involved.

Of all the examples she could have cited to make the point that Trump is a loose cannon, how did she and her speechwriters conclude that this was one worth floating? I understand calling him out for wanting to issue illegal orders to the military; that’s the most alarming thing he’s said since he got in the race. But attacking Trump over a potential IRS gone rogue is like attacking him for potentially wanting to intervene in foreign civil wars without Congress’s approval. We’ve seen that movie already. In fact, Hillary Clinton produced that movie.

Even lamer, if the IRS decides to start taking down political enemies, it’s more likely they’d focus on taking down President Trump himself than his adversaries. Judging by their political donations, IRS employees lean in exactly the partisan direction you’d expect the taxman to lean. Obama didn’t need to tell Lois Lerner to target tea partiers. That sort of thing would occur to her naturally given the agency’s institutional lean.

Oh, one more thing: Did I hallucinate it or aren’t Hillary Clinton and her husband notorious for holding vindictive grudges against people who cross them, to the point where they actually have a written enemies’ list? Claire McCaskill was so terrified of being on that list after she endorsed Obama early in 2008 that she turned around and issued her Hillary 2016 endorsement in 2013. You cross Trump and you’ll get a nasty tweet written about you. You cross Hillary and you’ve got a network of Washington power players who won’t forget. Imagine electing a person as vindictive as that. Surely she wouldn’t use federal agencies to settle scores, right?