Radial Ratio: Texas Dem’s Tired Idea of ICE Agent Self-Defense Against Moving Vehicles...
Marco Rubio Blocks Tim Walz's Illegal Pardon, Newsom Froze Like Deer In Headlights
Sayonara, Sex Offender: Marco Rubio Reminds Tim Walz What Protecting Americans Looks Like
Orca Orchestrations: Hollywood’s ‘Reimagining’ of ‘Free Willy’ Has Movie Fans Wailing with...
Scott Jennings Just Needs 1 Post to Shut Conspiracy Nuts Attacking America/Israel's Allian...
Hakeem Jeffries Is Getting Help Deciphering What His Opposition to the SAVE Act...
Gavin Newsom Is a Lying Sack of SNOT. In Other News, Water Is...
She's Gonna BLOW! Ana Navarro Completely UNRAVELS When Asked to Name 1 American...
Rep. Ilhan Omar Was Eager to Answer Questions About Huge Financial Disclosure Revisions...
Oh, HONEY: X Points and LAUGHS As Maine Dems Pretend They're SUPER DUPER...
Bats**t ISN'T a Good Look? Who Knew? Megyn Kelly Suddenly Calling Out Kirk...
Maine Senate Hopeful Troy Jackson Is Trying the 'Man's Man' Approach and it's...
BOOM --> DataRepublican Takes on Candace Owens and Her Horde of CRAZY After...
Ro Khanna's Pro-Platner Timeline (Including All the Hypocrisy and Projection) 'Is Sociopat...
EARTH TO CUOMO! Bill O'Reilly Takes Chris Cuomo to the Cleaners in Heated...

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