WhatFinger


Shameless...Do you really want four years of this?

Hillary to Bret Baier: I refused IG interview because I'd talked about it 'in the public arena'



I think in describing the type of liar Hillary is, we sometimes toss around the word "shameless" just because it seems like a good all-purpose adjective - without necessarily thinking about what it means or why it applies. Here's a perfect case in point. The shamelessness of her lying has to do with the fact that she will say things so completely absurd that anyone who thinks about it for even a second will shake their head and ask, "Did she really just say that?" But Rule 1 of lying in ClintonWorld is that no one really cares all that much about the thing you're lying about, so even if your lie is transparently absurd, lie away! The conservative alternative media will yelp about it for a day or two, but after that no one will even remember.
So when Bret Baier got the rare opportunity to interview her on Fox News last night, he gave it a go with the e-mail story, particularly her absurd claim that she and her team have been cooperative with investigations. That's hard to square with the fact that she refused to be interviewed by the State Department inspector general for his investigation, as did almost everyone on her staff. How is that cooperative? The relevant exchange begins at 4:50 of the following video (below): So to summarize, there was no reason Hillary needed to talk to the IG because he could just read the statements she'd made "in the public arena." In other words, he could watch her denials in press conferences and in scattered media interviews, and that would have to suffice because she would have nothing else to say.

Support Canada Free Press


That isn't just the definition of shameless. That takes it to a whole new level. She is not nearly as smart as people make her out to be, but she knows perfectly well that this is not how investigations work. An investigator who culls his information from news reports isn't an investigator at all. The IG - who absolutely lambasted her in his report despite her spin to the contrary - needed to ask specific questions designed to complete the picture of information he had gathered internally. She can't possibly know that she would have nothing new to say because she doesn't know what he would have asked her. And she didn't want to find out because subjecting herself to real questioning from someone who actually knows what happened would have been a disaster for her. By the way, if she submits to an interview by the FBI, you can bet the parameters of the interview will first be painstakingly negotiating between her lawyers and the Justice Department, such that the FBI agents will find themselves frustrated by all kinds of limits on what they can ask and where they can take the questioning. My guess is that such negotiations are going on even as we speak. She will claim to have cooperated, but in fact she will make sure she has worked out a deal that allows her to cooperate as little as possible. Get ready, America. Nothing has changed about the way the Clintons operate since they last occupied the White House 16 years ago. They still sit there and look in your face and lie to you - and expect you to just accept it no matter how ridiculous the lie might be. The only thing different now is that the much less capable and intelligent Clinton would ostensibly be in charge. Do you really want four years of this?


View Comments

Dan Calabrese -- Bio and Archives

Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain

Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.


Sponsored