Hillary & Bill: Inveterate liars
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Tuesday, Feb. 12, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) asked Hillary Clinton about Benghazi and why she, as secretary of State, should not be held responsible for four dead Americans.
Hillary turned the tables. She raised her voice and assumed an air of righteous indignation and invective, saying, “What difference at this point does it make whether the killings were a result of a video or just some guys out for a walk one night who then decided to attack our embassy and kill four Americans?”
Say what, Hillary? Four Americans died because you did not read the numerous memos from Benghazi asking for more security.
Why did she not read these memos?
In an Academy Award-winning response to the Benghazi inquiry, Hillary adopted the same posture as her husband, Bill, when asked about Monica Lewinsky. Bill, with eyes narrowed, looked into the camera and said, “Let me make this clear. I never had sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.”
Hillary, like Bill, is an inveterate liar.
And guess what, America? Despite this, Hillary will be the next president. Bet on it.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Consequences in space
- Valley musical superb
- Tragedy sensationalized
- Deer Lakes drilling OK
- Sign on to save Springdale
- What would Ben say?
- Cover many stances
- Tragedy’s ramifications II
- Tragedy’s ramifications I
- Tragedy’s ramifications III
- Resurrection? Really?