There’s a common problem suffered by both Bill and Hillary when it comes to being caught in a lie: they wind up lying again to cover up the initial lie. But lately, they’ve both moved even farther into nonsense with this approach. Both of them have been caught red-handed actually lying about the definitions of words in the English language, and then using what I like to call, the Clinton Definition Style Lie, to rebut the initial lie. Neither one of them is good at it, and they both have both wound up looking dumber than the 1980s big hair fashions lately. Unfortunately, that old cliché, “two wrongs don’t make a right,” is a memo that these two lightbulbs missed.
Here’s an example from each Clinton:
Team Billary’s Fib: Hillary tries to recreate the meaning of the word “never”
When speaking out about her Emails, Hillary responded that she had “never” had a subpoena. What does it mean to never have something? You have not been given, or obtained, the item, during your lifetime. However, in Hillary’s utilization of the Clinton Definition Style Lie, she attempts to redefine “never” so it means it’s exact opposite, “I’ve had one.” Because she has.
Trey Goudy, who investigated the Obama administration along with his panel in response to the Benghazi attack, proved that she had been subpoenaed by showing that subpoena to the populace. Hillary responded to this by lying, and stating that when she was asked about whether she had ever been subpoenaed, she thought it referred to her Emails. So, she didn’t really understand the question. Is she really that dumb, or does she think the voters are that dumb? Then why didn’t she phrase her answer that way? How much more brain power does it really take to say, “I never had a subpoena” and tag on three more words to it, “about my Emails.” Nice try, Hillary.
Team Billary’s Fable: Bill redefines what “is” can apply to
In classic Clinton Definition Style Lie fashion, when asked about lying and negatively responding to the question about if there “is an improper relationship with a White House intern” Bill stated that it depended upon what your definition of “is” is. For instance, he compared “is” to “was” which is certainly past tense. Just like Hillary, Bill covers up one lie with another lie and tries to change a real word meaning. Also like his wife, Bill either thinks the public is dumb enough to believe him, or he is demonstrating his low intellect. (Notice the use of “is” in the sentence before this). “Is” puts things in what we call the passive voice; it is used when telling a story (fiction or #News), writing certain types of satire articles, informal writing etc. People use “is” when they talk about something that happened in the past, and sometimes it relates to the present. Notice I’m telling a story about something Bill said in the past that relates to the present when using “is.” They way “is” was posted to Bill implied an affair in the past and possibly the present, and how it affected the present (his office).
Anybody else in their right mind, asked if there “is the possibility of the existence of something” would take the phrase “is” and also apply it to the past, even if they didn’t really think about it. For instance, take this question: “Is the possibility of a winning presidential campaign still in existence for Hillary Clinton?” I’m asking to consider what’s she’s done in the past during her campaign and wanting people to think about it as it applies to the present. And normal people would consider how Team Billary is trying to lie and rewrite the English language, and most likely respond with, “No.” #Election 2016 #Democrats vs Republicans