Hillary's "full disclosure" --- four lies and a stonewall
Tom Bevan at Real Clear Politics has this piece questioning an assertion in an article on Tom DeLay. The author somehow asserts that Hillary made a full disclosure when questions arose about her extraordinary cattle futures profits. While Bevan shows that the record demonstrates how false that is, he left out a large part of the story.
When questions arose about Hillary's $100,000 profit on an investment of $1000, she offered up an explanation, but it proved to be demonstrably false. She offered up another, but alas, investigation proved it to be untrue as well. Again, Hillary told a third story which didn't stand up to the facts. And then a fourth.
After the fourth explanation had been demonstrated to be untrue, James Carville gave a press conference at the White House on the matter. He explained that Hillary had been forced to fabricate four different false stories because she was unable to remember anything at all about the transactions involved. Since she couldn't remember anything, she would, henceforth, have nothing more to say about cattle futures. The press was told not to bother asking because she would not respond. The press, of course, then dropped the story as instructed.
Had our MSM not been so eager to do her bidding, they might have asked how any intelligent person could have no memories of the biggest financial bonanza of her life (to that point). After all, the deal was worth triple her annual income at the time. Not only that, but White House lawyers and accountants had access to all the trading records, her files and her calendars. Apparently, despite extensive access to all these records and experts with the ability to re-create much of what happened, she was still saddled with the memory of someone with advanced Alzheimer's.
Is someone with such a poor memory fit for public office? The MSM chose not to ask.
Did Hillary offer full disclosure in the cattle futures scandal? No. It was precisely the opposite. Four lies and stonewall.
When questions arose about Hillary's $100,000 profit on an investment of $1000, she offered up an explanation, but it proved to be demonstrably false. She offered up another, but alas, investigation proved it to be untrue as well. Again, Hillary told a third story which didn't stand up to the facts. And then a fourth.
After the fourth explanation had been demonstrated to be untrue, James Carville gave a press conference at the White House on the matter. He explained that Hillary had been forced to fabricate four different false stories because she was unable to remember anything at all about the transactions involved. Since she couldn't remember anything, she would, henceforth, have nothing more to say about cattle futures. The press was told not to bother asking because she would not respond. The press, of course, then dropped the story as instructed.
Had our MSM not been so eager to do her bidding, they might have asked how any intelligent person could have no memories of the biggest financial bonanza of her life (to that point). After all, the deal was worth triple her annual income at the time. Not only that, but White House lawyers and accountants had access to all the trading records, her files and her calendars. Apparently, despite extensive access to all these records and experts with the ability to re-create much of what happened, she was still saddled with the memory of someone with advanced Alzheimer's.
Is someone with such a poor memory fit for public office? The MSM chose not to ask.
Did Hillary offer full disclosure in the cattle futures scandal? No. It was precisely the opposite. Four lies and stonewall.
posted by Stan at 1:11 PM
1 Comments:
To paraphrase one of TV's court judges (in a teaser ad), I wouldn't believe anything Hillary said even if her tongue were notarized.
Post a Comment
<< Home