‘I Mean, I Would Crucify Her’


David French:

I can’t believe I’m typing these words, but the Washington Post has actually published a searing indictment of Hillary’s treatment of Bill Clinton’s mistresses. In a lengthy piece, it takes a look at Hillary’s responses to Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, and others. Some of the anecdotes are revealing – including this blast-from-the-past regarding Flowers:

“I think, by then [Bill’s presidential run], Hillary had a very good notion of Bill’s behavior,” said her longtime friend Nancy Pietrafesa. “Maybe she endured it, but I don’t think she condoned it.”

Nevertheless, Hillary Clinton dismissed an accusation made by Gennifer Flowers, the singer who sold her story to a supermarket tabloid after having previously denied an affair. In an ABC News interview, she called Flowers “some failed cabaret singer who doesn’t even have much of a résumé to fall back on.” She told Esquire magazine in 1992 that if she had the chance to cross-examine Flowers, “I mean, I would crucify her.”

Hillary’s remarks were not second-hand quotes from friends but rather quotes from actual news interviews. She was publicly vicious in her attacks against a woman who – it turns out – was telling the truth about an affair with her husband. And she was this vicious after she knew that Bill had been unfaithful in the past.

Then there’s this vignette, which reveals much about both Hillary and Bill:

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

@Highsider, #50:

Like most of the low information liberals that Hillary depends on, you only skim the surface.

Nobody is “skimming the surface,” Sherlock. Do you not understand function of a a Form 1040, and the meaning of the various entries that appear on it? It’s a summary document, presenting the final results of all the various computations and data provided on the supporting attached schedules.

Items #43 and #63 are final totals, representing precisely what their labels say they represent. Item 43 is the Clintons’ total Taxable Income for 2015 after all applicable deductions and adjustments, that amount being $8,352,507. If they were claiming a loss, the figure would be zero. Item 63 is their Total Tax for the year: $3,624,455. That’s the federal income tax they were actually required to pay to the IRS.

Schedule D, Capital Gains and Losses is only a supporting document. It provides one of the figures—a deduction—that ends up as part of the Form 1040 computation. You’ll find that particular figure on Form 1040 as item #13, Capital gain or losses. The deduction is only $3,000. That’s because you only get to deduct the smaller of $3000 or your actual losses. The Clinton’s reported an actual capital loss of $699,400, as Schedule D shows, but only got to write off $3,000 because that’s the limit allowed by law.

You people think you’re full of information, but you’re actually full of b.s. packed into your heads by articles written by people who are either equally gullible and clueless, or who actually know better but are deliberately deceptive. The Clintons’ alleged use of the same tax dodge as Trump actually amounts to a $3,000 total write-off for capital losses. After all such deductions and adjustments have been made, their taxable income for 2015 was $8,352,507 and their federal tax for the year was $3,624,455. They’re actually paying their taxes, they’re paying them at or near the highest rate on the tax schedule, and there’s proof that they’ve done so without fail, year after year.