Pols of Privilege: Victor Davis Hanson Says Socialists in the Spotlight Owe Everything...
Female Lindsay Clancy Murder Trial Jurors Say Defense Attorney Was Funny and Entertaining...
Ashen Passion: Adam Carolla Shocked to Learn Anti-White Dems of Color Are Hooking...
Video Lets Us Experience Lindsay Clancy Trial Deliberations From Vantage Point of ‘Lone...
Hope Walz Says Republicans' Obsession With Old State Flag Is Like a Racist...
Appeals Court Says Administration's Argument to Allow the IRS to Share Data With...
A Call From the 83rd Floor, a Mother’s Life’s Work, and a...
MS NOW’s New Membership Service Allows Users to Talk to Rachel Maddow, Joe...
The Actual Problem in the Clancy Mistrial Wasn’t the Holdout — It Was...
Joy Reid Couldn’t Wash It Off: Wajahat Ali Goes Shopping for a New...
Arlington County to Pay Families of Wage-Earners Detained by ICE Up to $2,000
Danbury, Connecticut City Council Votes to Allow Noncitizens to Be Hired As Police...
Caught on Tape: Nebraska 'Independent' Admits He Only Backed the Wall to Win...
Site Runs 'Hit Piece' on CA Assemblyman Who Sent $6 Million to His...
'Do Us a Favor and Stay Home': Families Confront Mamdani Over 9/11 Ceremony

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