If one were of a low and suspicious nature regarding The New York Times’ historically inept Washington Bureau, one might suspect yet another example of the “Clinton Rules” — that is, a shaky allegation unsupported by facts.
Same as it ever was. When the evidence finally emerges, it will turn out that Clinton has been diligently coloring inside the lines all along. That’s because she’s smarter and tougher than her enemies.
Millions of Republicans are seemingly enchanted by Donald Trump’s updated impersonation of Dr. Jerry Graham of the old World Wide Wrestling Federation.
Has any murdering terrorist ever failed more dramatically than Dylann Storm Roof? Intending to start a race war, he succeeded only in shocking the moral conscience of the state and nation.
The swirl of innuendo and accusation currently dogging the Clintons is nothing more than conspiracy theories touted by the same newspapers that promoted the Whitewater hoax and cheered on Kenneth Starr.
Once somebody like Tom Brady has been targeted for something like “Deflategate,” it’s almost impossible for them to get even-handed treatment in the media.
The Hunting of Hillary recounts the true history of the “vast right-wing conspiracy” — as Hillary Clinton herself once famously described it — that sought to bring her down along with her husband when he was president.
Name-brand Texas politicians such as Gov. Greg Abbot and Sen. Ted Cruz have made fools of themselves by lending plausibility to what is essentially a mass psychiatric delusion.
The media coverage of “Clinton Cash,” shows that old the “Clinton rules” are back: all innuendo and guilt-by-association, murky insinuations and few facts.
Is there an element of calculation in Hillary Clinton’s latest listening tour? Sure. But if she truly listens, does that make her more or less “authentic” ?
The magazine and its editors made themselves willing, if not downright eager, parties to a hoax — and not a terribly sophisticated hoax at that.
What’s so insidious about “religious liberty” statutes as written, and why they cannot be permitted to stand, is that they would give zealous individuals and private businesses near-dictatorial powers with no legal recourse.
If Clinton’s use of a private email account is so shocking to the Beltway media, why did they barely notice (and care even less) when millions of emails disappeared from the Bush White House?