"...HEY PRINCESS LIE-AWATHA...YOUR UP!
Posted on 04/25/2015 6:34:07 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
It is admittedly difficult to bear the obsequious servility that punctuates The New York Times editorial board’s latest gentle attempt to convince Hillary Clinton that she has a serious problem on her hands. Viewed, however, as a window into the thinking of the Democratic Party’s terrified pragmatists who are slowly coming to the realization that they backed the wrong horse, The Times’ latest is clarifying. It is a desperate and helpless demand that Clinton somehow stop the bleeding.
“Nothing illegal has been alleged about the foundation, the global philanthropic initiative founded by former President Bill Clinton,” The Times editorial averred. “There is no indication that Mrs. Clinton played a role in the uranium deal’s eventual approval by a cabinet-level committee.”
Well then, why did this editorial need to be written in the first place? Of course, the admission that corruption can neither be proven nor disproven is a condemnation of Clinton’s conduct rather than a defense of it. They know as well as anyone else that the evidence that presumably would exculpate Clinton was destroyed by her own hand. That reality certainly complicates the editorial board’s effort to exonerate the prohibitive Democratic nominee.
It doesn’t take long before The Times gets into the meat of the issue. Though they cling with all the conviction of a convert losing their faith to the notion that Clinton’s scandals are political rather than substantive in nature, the editorial board is nevertheless moved to demand that Hillary and Bill Clinton personally address the damaging allegations swirling around them and their family charity.
“The increasing scrutiny of the foundation has raised several points that need to be addressed by Mrs. Clinton and the former president,” The Times editorial read. “These relate most importantly to the flow of multimillions in donations from foreigners and others
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
guess one should ask is bill’s putter in her hole? if so, despite the hill’s hole, bill has two putters
The old “there is no evidence” line doesn’t sell too well, when anyone who has a brain cell knows that the statement is only true because Hillary destroyed that evidence in her private server.
They know as well as anyone else that the evidence that presumably would exculpate Clinton was destroyed by her own hand.
...
A person not in our royal ruling class would be charged with obstruction of justice. People don’t destroy evidence that would exculpate them.
Lack of evidence is not to be confused with proof of innocence.
Rats and their sinking ships are soon parted.
"...HEY PRINCESS LIE-AWATHA...YOUR UP!
I might vote for Satan to be on the safe side.
They vote NO when it doesn’t matter. The YES vote will come in 2016.
Has the NY Times decided that Hillary isn’t far enough to the radical left to suit them?
Is their open criticism of Hilliary’s criminal enterprise actually a cover-up for their true motivation?
We all know the NY Times really has no problem at all backing democrats who are lying, cheating, slimy criminals.
Do they want to push Hillary out of the way to make room for a different, more radical democrat candidate?
These are just warning shots. The VJ-led fascists are trying to cajole her to drop out without messing up their brand with open warfare. They need to show a happy face in order not to and void any chance of her replacement succeeding. But they need her to get out in time for the replacement to ramp up a full campaign. If Hillary doesn’t get the message or, more accurately, if she ignores the message then the warning shots will get closer.
Hillary’s pathological greed and lust for power won’t let her quit. This is her last chance. She won’t quietly go down to defeat at the hands of the Chicago gang again so we have to figure she’s preparing some counter-measures for them. Could get very interesting.
Could the NY Slimes be setting up Obozzo for a FDR rerun, a third and fourth term?
The would if they could...
Who knows what will happen in this lawless era?
Pretty fair assessment.
LOL
I think Baraq is just totally bored with this whole POTUS thing and wants to collect his billion $$$ in POTUS pardon bribes and go play golf everyday with the occasional cameo on PMSNBC to take shots at Republicans and receive adoration for his 8 great years.
The NYT doesn’t want to see a Republican President and see Hillary as very damaged and vulnerable.
the line “no evidence” infers the word that was omitted and that word is “yet”.
There is “no evidence yet” but even they don’t believe that if one of those financial supporters were to get jilted, that they would surreptitiously release that evidence. The Times knows fully well that the evidence exists, and they have in fact seen it, but have not released it. Since they cannot know if they will be able to keep the lid on it, they are now warning her that if the lid does come off, that she’s on her own.
Just another "vast right wing conspiracy" as far as Hillary is concerned.
“Could the NY Slimes be setting up Obozzo for a FDR rerun, a third and fourth term?”
How would that work?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.