Before I start this post let me offer up two points I think need to be understood: 1) While I enjoy a good conspiracy theory as much as anyone, I’m not a big believer in them, and 2) I have to admit there’s nothing – and I do mean nothing about the Hillary Clinton campaign I understand thus far. People want to say Donald Trump’s running an unconventional campaign? I’ll tell you his campaign looks positively conventional to what Hillary is doing. Very few campaign events, zero press conferences or events, small venues with small crowds, in out of the way places? I mean, I just don’t get it.

That out of the way, the only word that comes to mind about the FBI dumping boatloads of hard, incriminating evidence against Hillary Clinton on the Friday before Labor Day weekend is nearly unfathomable in terms of its political ramifications. Sure, a lot of folks are going to be away for the weekend, but to drop the kind of thing they did on a major political candidate so that it will be talked about and debated for the next four days seems (at least to these eyes) very strange. Rather than try and make heads or tails out of it, here are just a few thoughts in no particular order:

1. Not only does the FBI dump reveal Hillary to be a liar, refuting just about everything she’s ever said about her e-mails and the way she conducted e-mail business as Secretary of State, it makes her look like a friggin’ idiot. She’s either completely clueless about the hazards of conducting State Department business in such a brazen, unsecured fashion, or, worse, completely reckless and negligent about it.

2. Democratic strategists and Hillary supporters in the media aside, none of this passes the “smell test”. Even the most computer illiterate person understands the concepts of computer security and viruses, and hacking. If the average person does, wouldn’t it serve to reason that someone like Hillary Clinton and those around her would as well?

3. What this shows beyond the shadow of a doubt – again to the average person – is that there are two sets of laws: one for the rich and powerful, the other for everyone else. Most people have a reasonable sense of what the rule of law is, what is appropriate behavior and what is not. What today’s news dump does is reinforce the perception of the Clintons as folks who see themselves as folks who are above the law, folks to whom the rule of law doesn’t apply.

4. Further emphasizing my previous point: you take all this and add to it all the news about the so-called “pay for play” stuff going on while Clinton was Secretary of State between her and donors and the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative, and what it shows is a person, if not completely and utterly without moral character, then at least without any kind of sound judgment when it comes to public perception and conflict of interest. Maybe Hillary’s most ardent supporters can look past this kind of thing, but – most importantly this election year – I can’t imagine average voters willing to walk over broken glass to go to a voting booth and pull the lever for her.

Given all the above, here’s my question: why? And, more importantly, why now? Given that there are no coincidences in Washington politics, it’s a virtual lock that the FBI wouldn’t have allowed this news dump to happen without Clinton campaign knowledge, if not approval. It’s just so damning to her and to her reputation, unflattering to someone who’s supposedly – if you hear the Washington elites talk – the smartest, most experienced person ever to run for President. Simply put, this news dump makes her look like a moron, someone who shouldn’t even be getting security briefings, never mind running for President.

And what about this can’t recall business? Courtesy of Conservative Treehouse, here are the 26 things she told the FBI she couldn’t recall:

* When she received security clearance
* Being briefed on how to handle classified material
* How many times she used her authority to designate items classified
* Any briefing on how to handle very top-secret “Special Access Program” material
* How to select a target for a drone strike
* How the data from her mobile devices was destroyed when she switched devices
* The number of times her staff was given a secure phone
* Why she didn’t get a secure Blackberry
* Receiving any emails she thought should not be on the private system
* Giving staff direction to create private email account
* Getting guidance from state on email policy
* Who had access to her Blackberry account
* The process for deleting her emails
* Ever getting a message that her storage was almost full
* Anyone besides Huma Abedin being offered an account on the private server
* Being sent information on state government private emails being hacked
* Receiving cable on State Dept personnel securing personal email accounts
* Receiving cable on Bryan Pagliano upgrading her server
* Using an iPad mini
* An Oct. 13, 2012 email on Egypt from Clinton pal Sidney Blumenthal
* Jacob Sullivan using personal email
* State Department protocol for confirming classified information in media reports
* Every briefing she received after suffering concussions
* Being notified of a FOIA request on Dec. 11, 2012
* Being read out of her clearance
* Any further access to her private email account from her State Department tenure after switching to her HRC office.com account.

No matter how you look at this news dump, it isn’t good for Hillary. Either she’s grossly negligent, grossly incompetent (both of which would be hard for anyone but the most ardent Hillary supporter to argue), or – and this is the new twist – at least potentially physically unfit for office. Who wants to offer those options to the American people?

All of this leaves me wondering if this could be the start of the end of the Hillary campaign. Think about it: if you’re Hillary you basically have two choices, and you have to decide which is the most risky:

1. Stay in the campaign. If you win, all well and good. But if you don’t it’s a guarantee the Trump administration will appoint a special prosecutor for formal charges to be brought before a grand jury. You’ll also have his DOJ and AG coming after you very strongly. You could go to jail. You could even see the Clinton Foundation shut down on a variety of charges, perhaps even federal RICO statute violations. Or…

2. You step aside for health reasons, allowing Time Kaine or Joe Biden or someone to take your place and have them run against Trump. Given Hillary’s high negative ratings amongst voters it stands to reason that a ticket headed by her VP choice Tim Kaine or VP Joe Biden would be a much more formidable opponent to Trump than Hillary would, and they’d stand a better chance of being elected. If they win, Hillary skates and is home free.

Now for the conspiracy theory, and for this I have to thank Conservative Treehouse poster TrumpIllinois2016 for this, here’s a third, most intriguing option:

If I was Hillary, I would try to cut some kind of a deal with Trump behind the scenes. Basically, I’ll lose on purpose if you promise to not prosecute me or shut down my foundation once you are president. This would entail basically doing what Hillary is already doing…fundraising instead of campaigning. Maybe lessen the attacks on Trump and just tank a couple of the debates on purpose.

What does Hillary have to lose? Does she really want to be president considering the non-stop scandals she will face? The non-stop scrutiny of her health? Constantly having to deal with the press which she obviously can’t handle (i.e. no press conferences this year)? She doesn’t have a vision or any new policies that she wants to implement. She doesn’t want to change anything–she is running on the status quo. What is the upside to being president? Thanks to Trump’s attacks, her foundation will already be watched over like a hawk…she has already ruled out foreign donations…it’s not going to be as easy to enrich herself now that the public has caught on to her schemes.

I would keep my foundation, my privacy, and my freedom and just let Trump take the job. Trump will be much better for the country (she even knows this deep inside). Why risk jail time or having to forfeit a foundation that generates 10s of millions of dollars?

So, let’s say, just for the sake or argument, Donald Trump were to get a call in the next few days:

“Hi Donald? This is Hillary. You wrote “The Art Of The Deal”, right? Well, like Monty Hall used to say – you remember him, right? – let’s make a deal.”

You know, given what we know about the Clintons I wouldn’t put it past her. She doesn’t care about the Democratic Party, neither does Bill. They’re only it if for themselves. And if it means giving the country four years of Donald in order to protect her and Bill and their Foundation, it might be a deal worth making.

You’re Hillary Clinton. Which would you choose?