Posted on 08/11/2016 11:29:51 PM PDT by Eleutheria5
FMCDH(BITS)
I’m no fan of Hillary and believe she should stand trial for her actions re the emails, for starters. However, the script in this video commits a polemical error of using a plural when citing a single incident, for instance, calling one spot on her tongue “lesions”, characterizing one Secret Service dog handler report as a plural, etc. It undermines his main thesis when he uses the same type of exaggeration that liberals use indefaming conservatives.
The abundance of accurate truth is enough, in this case.
She says she was alone the whole night and laughs, implying that neither Bill nor Huma were available to service her prurient urges. Did she get asked, since she says that she was in touch with the Dept. of State and was up the whole night, whether the DOS did contact her, what they told her, and what she said back to them, or did it end with a discussion of what’s so G-ddamned funny?
The hive mind elitists tend to pick up expressive tendencies of their political leaders. For example, I listened to a military official speaking who stammered in a perfect imitation of Obama. It was eerie.
Can you imagine what would happen if the elitist hive mind plugged into Clinton?!
Yes, it is a contrived laugh....she wants to deflect. She is awful. Just awful.
I don’t feel reassured by that conclusion. Which is more scary, that she’s nuts or sociopathic?
Sociopathic is nuts.
Nuts can be in two ways: 1. Delusionals, who draw irrational conclusions and see stuff what ain’t there, such as paranoia; or 2. Deranged people, who have irrational reactions to normal situations. Sociopathics, I suppose, are of the second category.
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.