Donald Trump got really weird on Twitter yesterday, "supporting" Huma Abedin for leaving Anthony Weiner, but at the same time making it all about Hillary Clinton by association. Because reasons and deflection.

Since Huma has access to classified information, Trump opined on the Dori Monson show that her sexting husband, Weiner must know "much of this information" and he thinks "it's terrible."

Donald then went on to attack Clinton for being careless with our national security and used the "close proximity" offensive.

CNN's Kayleigh McEnany repeated Trump's ridiculous claims on CNN's New Day and said, "LT. Colonel Anthony Shaffer came out and said, 'this is a perilous situation for national security."

Host Alisyn Camerota said. ..there's no evidence that she [Huma] shared any evidence... that she shared anything with her husband."

McEnany replied, "We don't know that."

Wait, even though there isn't any evidence to support Trump's claim, the lack of evidence counts as proof?

McEnany then claimed that Huma could have been blackmailed when she left some sensitive material in her car, that was never compromised.

"It's a dream to exploit a situation like this via blackmail. The point is whether it happened or not, I'm not sure it did. We don't have evidence of that. It is still a national security situation no doubt."

In Trump World it doesn't matter if anything "happened or not" just so long as he can claim "it's possible."

Hilary Rosen had had enough. "The last three administrations' National Security Advisers and National Security Teams are supporting Hillary Clinton for President, not Donald Trump."

She continued, "There's no question that the judgment that Hillary Clinton has far surpassed the support that Donald Trump has."

Camerota then asked, "What about the connection of Huma and Anthony Weiner?

And here's where Rosen made the only point that needs to be made on this issue. "The Huma issue is really a Trump attempt to exploit a personal tragedy. She doesn't need his advice to say 'good job' on separating from somebody who painfully hurt her. It's offensive to even go there."

McEnany jumped back in to brag about retired military leaders' complaints about Weiner and Rosen told her to "Stop it. You've said this for two days and it's just nonsense."

She continued, "You can get a military leader to say anything."

Rosen went on to bash Trump's intervention in Abedin's marriage, "The fact that a President of the United States would comment and slam somebody's marriage, a painful and embarrassing situation, and use it to exploit it for their own personal, political gains --"

Kayleigh, "He didn't do that. He said she was wise."

"He absolutely did that."

"He did not do that."

Rosen finished by saying, "Wise,' is the point. 'Yea, you finally got rid of that guy.' Guess what? He's on his third marriage. Who is he to communicate to anyone about other people's marriages?"

Who indeed. Let's never forget, too, that his divorce from wife number one was all over the New York Post (just like Weiner was yesterday) and that wife number two was PREGNANT with Donald's spawn when he married her. (Nobody cares except....family values Republicans!)

Donald is not an expert in how to stay married. He is an expert in tabloid sensationalism. He should keep his Twitter pie-hole shut when it comes to other people's marriages.

Oh, and memo to Kayleigh:

Okay, there isn't any evidence that Wendi Murdoch is dating Vladimir Putin, but remember, under the Kayleigh standard the lack of evidence counts as proof.