‘Male’ Shoot: New York Magazine Men’s Style Issue Features Farcical and Freakish Front...
Clueless Christiane: CNN’s Amanpour Blames ‘Series of Events’ for Public’s Distrust of Leg...
Ms. Rachel Proclaims That Black Teen Nolan Wells Didn’t Drown
CBC News 'Is Well on Its Way to Becoming a Judenfrei (Jew-Free) Broadcaster'
James Talarico Says When He Takes on This Corrupt System, He’s Doing It...
Dr. Abdul El-Sayed Means It When He Says We Desperately Need a Democrat...
Let's All Point and Laugh at the Aerospace Engineer Who Said Starship Would...
New Hollywood Movie Attacks Chris Hansen for … (Checks Notes) … Catching Pedophiles
This Is 'Journalism' at ABC ... The View’s Ana Navarro Electioneers a House...
New Republic: Trump Banning Student Loans for Majors That Don’t Earn Enough Money
Jake Tapper, Thomas Massie Play 'Fun Police' With White House Deputy Chief of...
Five Terror Suspects Arrested Near UK Air Force Base Sunday Released on Bail;...
Cryptic Campaign: Don’t Say ‘Cheese!’ — The Laughing Cow’s Logo Switch Is Nothing...
Boston Mayor Invites Illegal Immigrants to Apply for $575 Scholarship to Learn to...
There's Been a THIRD Arrest but ABC News STILL Doesn't Want to Ruin...

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