Well, it looks as though Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s laughable attempt at campaign “transparency” backfired in epic fashion when reporters somehow missed the memo that Clinton can’t handle tough, substantive questions.
The Clinton Foundation is a bubbling cesspool of pay-to-play corruption that, in the frightening event that Clinton should be elected president, will result in inevitable conflicts of interest. Former President Bill Clinton even admitted that if his wife were elected president, he would step down from his position with the foundation.
A reporter asked Clinton if she thought there would be conflicts of interest should her daughter Diane Reynolds Chelsea Clinton remain on the board in the event of a Clinton presidency:
“No, I do not,” as Clinton angrily interrupted the reporter, according to the U.K. Daily Mail. “I’ve said over and over again, doesn’t matter how many times you ask me, and how you ask me. These issues will be decided after the election, and we will decide the appropriate way forward.”
Not long after Clinton said that decisions about her daughter’s position on the board, and presumably issues like it, will not be decided until after the election, MSNBC conspicuously decided to cut away, despite the fact that this presented one of the pathetically few times Clinton was actually asked a substantive question on the campaign trail.
As MSNBC operates as a veritable arm of the Democrat Party, it was clear that the producer must have been flustered by Clinton’s obviously ridiculous, opaque answer to an extremely important question.
You can watch the embarrassing video here:
If Chelsea Clinton’s seat on the board presents no conflict of interest, what is there to decide after the election?
This is precisely why Clinton doesn’t do news conferences or answer questions off-the-cuff — she can’t handle legitimate questions that force her to keep her constant lies straight.
Clinton went on to claim that the Clinton Foundation went “above and beyond” to be transparent during her tenure as secretary of state.
Not only did Clinton angrily respond to a legitimate question, she had the gall to claim that the family slush fund foundation was transparent. The only thing transparent about the foundation was the pay-to-play, money making scheme that shamefully cloaked itself as a charity.
It was bad enough that Clinton either won’t or can’t campaign properly and answer the questions the American people deserve to have answered, but now when a reporter stepped up to ask one, Clinton behaved like a petulant child — and the media covered for her.
Now, which candidate is temperamentally unfit to be president?
H/T WZ
