RABID.

Let's see what's on at National Review's front page. Their top five stories:

Hillary’s Health — Let’s Talk about the Facts

Hillary Clinton, Allergic to Transparency

The Most Ridiculous Reactions to Hillary Clinton’s Fainting  

(Spoiler: The "ridiculous reactions" are the ones suggesting she's not about to die)

Hillary Can’t Afford a Repeat of Sunday Morning’s Health Issue

The Historical Amnesia about Hillary’s Health

Notice a pattern? Rather than wade through each of these pieces of shit, let's take one equally emblematic example at Commentary by Jonathan S. Tobin. He starts with some phumphery about how the health problems of Wilson, FDR, and Kennedy demand Clinton's pneumonia "be treated with the greatest seriousness." But he knows he can't keep that up -- even Commentary readers have gag reflexes -- so he tries some more reliable shtick. For example, how about the old Questions Remain?

While most serious people dismissed the rumors about Clinton’s health that were being circulated by Donald Trump’s supporters, what happened Sunday morning will deepen suspicions both about her health and whether her campaign has been telling the truth about it...

It's not that we serious people really think something's wrong, but it's leaving deep suspicions, you see, into which somebody might fall and hurt themselves, and whose fault will that be? Besides which, since we're always calling her a liar, you pretty much have to believe our crackpot theories about her:

On hot days, people can get dehydrated standing around under the sun. But for Clinton to falter in this manner undermines her campaign’s preferred narrative, which characterizes all questions about her health as smears. And if people are prepared to believe the worst about Clinton’s health, it’s due in part to her consistently lying about matters such as her email scandal and the conflicts of interest involving the Clinton Foundation...

Guess they've left off #Benghazi for good. Eventually Tobin gets relaxed enough that he can afford to admit, "up until now, Clinton has actually been far more forthcoming about her health than Trump." Sure, why shouldn't he? After all, it doesn't matter, because she could be as transparent as The Visible Woman and it wouldn't make any difference:

It is no longer possible for her to refuse to give us more until Trump is equally forthcoming. Clinton must now come completely clean with detailed medical reports and allow her doctors to be questioned by reporters with medical expertise. Given his age, Trump should do the same. As is the case with his tax returns, it’s doubtful that the billionaire will release a single document. But he’s not the one whose health is currently in question. [emphasis mine]

Trump literally phones in his interviews, he's observably obese, and his face looks like corned beef from a Blarney Stone steam table, but if he refuses to give us his health records, well, whattaya gonna do? That darn Trump! OK, lady, pee in this cup.

The brethren have entered that weird phase of nontroversy -- the blind spot between polls, where they know everyone's paying attention but they don't know how everyone's taking it. They do know, however, that since their target is Hillary Clinton, Villagers such as Cokie Roberts ("it has [Democrats] very nervously beginning to whisper about her stepping aside and finding another candidate") will happily give them some big paddles with which to stir the shit.

This explains the hysterical edge in their coverage; they feel that, if only they can stir violently enough, the resulting stink will awaken the masses.