Booker Tease Washington: Democrat Senator Flirts With Possible 2028 Presidential Run
Middle Man: Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear Wants Voters to Know He’s Not the...
Irish Band U2 Release Song 'American Obituary' Honoring Renee Good
Detroit Police Officer and Sergeant Face Firing for Breaking Policy and Tipping Off...
America Owns Hockey: US Women Win OT Gold, Leave Canada Spiraling and Seething
Absentee Mom's Illegal Stay Leads to Daughter's Disney Visit Ending in 4-Month ICE...
Renee Good Memorial Burned in Fiery but Mostly Peaceful Incident
Absurd Tara Palmeri Goes Nuclear: Accuses Michael Tracey of Being Paid to Smear...
Wife of Illegal Who Killed Georgia Teacher Says What Happened, Happened
WaPo: Some Say Atlantic Story ‘Felt Misleading’ Once They Learned It Was Made...
Elmo Wishes Ramadan Mubarak to All of His Friends
Brian Stelter: ABC News Has Admirably Insulated The View From Equal Time Rules
China's 'Killer Robots' Terrify Americans on X — Until Everyone Realizes It's Just...
WaPo: Dancers Reenact Shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Front of...
Bodies Buried at Epstein Ranch? New Mexico Allegedly Opens Disturbing Probe

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