The first four words of the Boy Scout Law: "A Scout is Trustworthy..."
Like the Holy Trinity, there is only one "Clinton," but it has two persons. One is charming and personable, the other ugly, shrewish, and calculating. But there is only one Clinton; it is the same.
Clinton has been in the public eye for so long that the distinct person(s) who originally inhabited the two relevant bodies are long gone. When speaking in public, Clinton has one basic objective: tell the listener what the listener wants to hear. "The Era of Big Government is Over!" "This is the End of Welfare as we know it!" "I want to make abortion safe, rare, and legal!" All sounded great; all were nonsense with no connection to the speaker's attitude or intentions.
Any connection between what Clinton says and the Truth is pure coincidence. Indeed, the only time when Clinton tells the truth is when forced by circumstance to do so (e.g., the semen-stained dress).
We recently have one person of the Clinton claiming to have exchanged numerous emails with the other person of the Clinton, while that second person is known not to use email. Surprising? Not at all.
We now know that the ugly shrewish Clinton person conducted essentially all of her official and unofficial/personal communications while Secretary of State using a private email server that guaranteed it would never have to divulge emails that the Clinton wanted kept secret. The fact that this process would have gotten anyone else on Government payroll summarily fired is to be ignored. Indeed, one can make a strong argument that Clinton's conduct of its emails was felonious. The fact that "we" can never know what those emails said is now established, and we are supposed to be content with that.
And yet the Clinton tells us that it has divulged all of the "relevant" emails to the State Department and it pines for the day when the State Department will release them to its adoring public.
Are we supposed to believe this?
A Scout is Trustworthy. Can we not expect the same of someone who wants to be President of the Fucking United States of America?
Maybe not in the Peoples' Republic that our Progressives live in. Because after the Clinton, the Democrats of 2016 have...bupkis.
Like the Holy Trinity, there is only one "Clinton," but it has two persons. One is charming and personable, the other ugly, shrewish, and calculating. But there is only one Clinton; it is the same.
Clinton has been in the public eye for so long that the distinct person(s) who originally inhabited the two relevant bodies are long gone. When speaking in public, Clinton has one basic objective: tell the listener what the listener wants to hear. "The Era of Big Government is Over!" "This is the End of Welfare as we know it!" "I want to make abortion safe, rare, and legal!" All sounded great; all were nonsense with no connection to the speaker's attitude or intentions.
Any connection between what Clinton says and the Truth is pure coincidence. Indeed, the only time when Clinton tells the truth is when forced by circumstance to do so (e.g., the semen-stained dress).
We recently have one person of the Clinton claiming to have exchanged numerous emails with the other person of the Clinton, while that second person is known not to use email. Surprising? Not at all.
We now know that the ugly shrewish Clinton person conducted essentially all of her official and unofficial/personal communications while Secretary of State using a private email server that guaranteed it would never have to divulge emails that the Clinton wanted kept secret. The fact that this process would have gotten anyone else on Government payroll summarily fired is to be ignored. Indeed, one can make a strong argument that Clinton's conduct of its emails was felonious. The fact that "we" can never know what those emails said is now established, and we are supposed to be content with that.
And yet the Clinton tells us that it has divulged all of the "relevant" emails to the State Department and it pines for the day when the State Department will release them to its adoring public.
Are we supposed to believe this?
A Scout is Trustworthy. Can we not expect the same of someone who wants to be President of the Fucking United States of America?
Maybe not in the Peoples' Republic that our Progressives live in. Because after the Clinton, the Democrats of 2016 have...bupkis.
