As Twitchy told you, the New York Post’s editorial board recently published a scathing rebuke of Hillary Clinton, calling her out for claiming that she never told Benghazi victims’ families that the attacks were caused by a video.
The Post tweeted about it:
Liar, liar pantsuit on fire https://t.co/KBoD2GDacC
— New York Post (@nypost) December 10, 2015
Jonathan Allen, former Politico writer and author of the book “HRC,” had a big problem with that. No, not with Hillary lying, but with the word “pantsuit”:
That's not sexist at all. https://t.co/lyGVdgDRnT
— Jonathan Allen (@jonallendc) December 10, 2015
Actually, that’s correct. It’s not sexist. Like, at all.
Correct. It is not. https://t.co/tgF1UtJCBJ
— Lachlan Markay (@lachlan) December 10, 2015
@jonallendc Correct, it isn't.
— KeepCalmAndDrawl (@FormerlyFormer) December 10, 2015
@jonallendc You're right, it isn't.
— PC Doomhauer (@wiggumpi) December 10, 2015
You're right; it's not. @jonallendc
— WMBC (@MoonbatCatnip) December 10, 2015
@jonallendc correct. It's not.
— Craig Daliessio (@craigdaliessio) December 10, 2015
Unless Jonathan’s suggesting that Hillary’s the sexist one.
https://twitter.com/JoshsLiveTweets/status/675018273751089153
Indeed. Here she is today, in fact:
It wasn’t always pantsuits and presidential races. Some of Hillary's best #TBT moments: https://t.co/PaBpGpWRbZ pic.twitter.com/ro7EsXFd7T
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) December 10, 2015
Are you calling Hillary sexist, Jonathan? Is that what you’re doing?
She sells pantsuit swag in her online store & has made it her trademark. Totally fair game. https://t.co/YkIXjrN1Zc https://t.co/QdnSAtCrTp
— Jonah Goldberg (@JonahNRO) December 10, 2015
@JonahNRO it's fine to use pantsuit. But since the phrase pants on fire is accurate for someone wearing a pantsuit, why alter it?
— Jonathan Allen (@jonallendc) December 10, 2015
@RobProvince answering you because you Tweet at me a lot: Pants on fire works for someone wearing a pantsuit. Why focus on the pantsuit?
— Jonathan Allen (@jonallendc) December 10, 2015
Um, because it’s funny, Jonathan. And totally appropriate.
@jonallendc Since when is "pantsuit" a sexist term? Hillary wears them all the time. Is she sexist for wearing them? Think before tweeting.
— Spartan John-117 (@CFLancop) December 10, 2015
https://twitter.com/RobProvince/status/675029343630938112
@RobProvince @jonallendc @nypost pic.twitter.com/kTQGJfiXmH
— Holden (@Holden114) December 10, 2015
@jonallendc @nypost "pantsuit aficionado" pic.twitter.com/XDKcwajNbW
— Matthew Jones (@themattjones) December 10, 2015
.@jonallendc Referencing Hillary's pantsuit is sexist? Is she wearing one on the cover of your book that's your background image?
— Anthony Bialy (@AnthonyBialy) December 10, 2015
Oh, you mean this book cover?
That’s very problematic, Jonathan.
Everything is sexist. Everything. pic.twitter.com/eSbn6XnJyt
— BT (@back_ttys) December 10, 2015
https://twitter.com/AndrewBolderin/status/675037282299195396
Not only is he reaching, but his priorities appear to be somewhat … off:
@jonallendc That's your takeaway? "That was sexist" not "Huh, so she is a damned liar…"? Really? That's…pathetic.
— Remember Scalia (@Mattfobrien) December 10, 2015
Extremely pathetic. But not terribly surprising.
@jonallendc Look, we know you're in her pantsuit pocket, but does it have to be so obvious? Lighten up, you pathetic hump.
— JWF (@JammieWF) December 10, 2015
***
Related:
Brutal: NY Post ed. board shreds Hillary for ‘lowest-down, dirtiest lie of all’
