Google Is Free: X BODIES Obama-Era Diplomat For Asking and (Wrongly) Answering His...
Biden Walks Through an Airport: Case Closed, He Was Never Senile, You Conspiracy...
Fenway Erupts in Boos: Healey & Wu Get a Brutal, Well-Deserved Reception on...
Don't Back a Florida Man (or Woman) Into a Corner—And Don't Commit Crime...
TIME Mag Review of Springsteen's HISTORIC 'Resistance' Concert Couldn't Possibly Be More O...
HuffPost's Attempt to Create a Good Friday Outrage Cycle About Pete Hegseth Is...
Ozempic (Allegedly) Gov. Celebrates National Walking Day While Chicago Mourns Teen Shot De...
Deportation? We Don't Do That: Illegals Squat for Decades, Their 'American' Kids Try...
DNC Stomps on Multiple Rakes in Rush to Slam Trump Over 'Affordable' Health...
Let's Check on How Many Network Evening Newscasts Mentioned the Fraud Arrests in...
Endorsed! Corrupt Clintonista Marc Elias Accidentally Makes the Best Case Ever for Harmeet...
Here's How CBS News Reported $4 Gas Under Biden vs. Trump
Vindman Outrage is the Ultimate Endorsement: Hegseth Rightly Boots Army Chief Gen. George
Newsom Press Office Follows Up 'President With a Brain' Post With Even More...
Make Military Bases Great Again: Pete Hegseth Restores God-Given 2A Rights to Servicemembe...

Just say no: Hillary Clinton wisely shoots down any idea of addressing her husband's 'indiscretions'

 

First things first: it would be helpful if everyone, Donald Trump included, could grow up and stop using words like “indiscretions” to soft-pedal Bill Clinton’s “alleged” affairs and alleged rape (which, despite Andrea Mitchell’s aside, was never “discredited,” a claim NBC News attempted to memory-hole from its video archive).

Advertisement

It’s been hypothesized that Hillary Clinton’s name-dropping of Alicia Machado was a trap that Trump just couldn’t avoid walking into, but make no mistake: Clinton won’t be making the same error. Asked Thursday night if she felt any obligation to speak out about a spouse’s past being brought into a campaign, Clinton just said no.

https://twitter.com/WastingTimeToo/status/781644225494384640

Again, that question, posed by a reporter on Air Hillary, was, “Do you, as someone who presumably wants more women to run for and win office, high office, do you feel any obligation, if Trump brings up your husband’s past, to speak out against a spouse’s indiscretions or past being brought into a campaign like this?”

That answer, again, was “No.”

Ridiculed as it was, Nancy Reagan’s “Just Say No” initiative made sense; a one-word answer shuts down any follow-up sales pitch by not feeding the questioner anything to counter.

Needless to say, Clinton’s supporters were thrilled with her answer; as we’ve reported, many of them saw no obligation for her to ever hold a press conference until after she’d been elected.

Advertisement

That’s the understatement of the year; Clinton even decided for herself that her right to privacy extended to all of her official email correspondence as secretary of state.

https://twitter.com/ProChildVA/status/781617209512714240

It’s a crazy thought, but if Clinton wanted to keep spouses out of the campaign, maybe she could stop talking about her “secret weapon” and citing his record during debates when asked about her plan to create jobs.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement