This Vet’s Bullseye Question Draws The Bull Out Of Hillary For All To See – ‘You Clearly Corrupted…’

Original Source:

The following is another piece of information on Donald J. Trump’s campaign. Ensure that you keep yourself in the loop!:


It was a question Hillary hated – and it showed.

When a Navy veteran rose to address former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during the live broadcast of the “Commander-In-Chief Forum” sponsored by NBC and MSNBC, the moment was ripe for Clinton to field a question about the email server she used so recklessly during her years running the United States State Department.

And she flubbed it badly.

The question came from a veteran of Operation Desert Storm, the first Iraq war that saw the United States military demolish the army of Saddam Hussein and drive it out of Kuwait under President George H.W. Bush.

The veteran, a pilot, said he had routinely handled information “highly sensitive to our war-fighting capabilities.”

“Had I communicated this information not following prescribed protocols, I would have been prosecuted and imprisoned,” he declared.

“Secretary Clinton, how can you expect those such as myself who were and are entrusted with America’s most sensitive information, to have any confidence in your leadership as president when you clearly corrupted our national security?”

The veteran was described as a Republican, but the question goes beyond partisan politics and helps explain why a stunning new poll found Clinton losing to Donald Trump among military voters by nearly 20 points. Hillary’s answer to the vet’s pointed question was tense and bristling.

Check it out here:

First, her demeanor was icy, insulted, barely acknowledging the service this man rendered the country in a time of war – a queen being bothered by a commoner who happened to have once worn the uniform of service.

Second, the content of Clinton’s dodgy answer was degrading – and patronizing. Plus, it was stilted and halting — one reason why speculation about her wearing a secret earpiece through which her aides could feed answers is running rampant.

“I appreciate your concern and also your experience,” she said, with paper-thin sincerity.

“But let me try to make the distinction that I think are important for me to answer your question,” “First … you know and I know, classified material is designated, it is marked, there is a header so that there is no dispute at all that what is being communicated to or from someone who has that access is marked classified.”

Then she turned to issues about her own server.

“What we have here is the use of an unclassified system by hundreds of people in our government to send information that was not marked, there were no headers, there was no statement, ‘secret,’ ‘top secret,’ or ‘confidential. I communicated about classified material on a wholly separate system.”

That’s simply not true, and literally everyone in the United States who takes an interest in politics knows it.

The director of the FBI has publicly accused Clinton of being “extremely careless” in handling classified material. He testified before Congress that Clinton was not truthful in claiming she never emailed classified materials. That’s exactly what the veteran was asking about; whatever her hauteur, Clinton did not answer it.

Instead, she stared at a United States Navy veteran like he was a cockroach in the kitchen at midnight, and lied through her teeth.

The social media world certainly knows it.

The Hillary defenders were out in force, of course, they always are, scampering along behind the queen to make sure her robes aren’t badly soiled.

But the legitimate concerns about a system “rigged” for Hillary aren’t going away.

Former CIA Director and four-star Army Gen. David Petraeus was famously prosecuted and sentenced to a fine and probation for an offense that was arguably less serious than the many, many Hillary committed in the course of her years with the State Department.

On a less grand scale, a former Navy sailor was just sentenced to a year in prison for taking photographs aboard a nuclear attack submarine. There was no evidence he disseminated them. Dangerous to national security? Maybe. But how do they compare to the information about North Korean missiles or American drone strikes that Hillary is known to have handled on what she admits was an unsecured system?

But no matter what the technicalities, Clintonistas will have an impossible job defending Clinton’s demeanor when she turned that icy stare on a veteran of the United States who not only had the courage to put his life on the line in battle, but also had the guts to look Hillary in the face and ask the touch question so many in the media won’t.

In 2008, Barack Obama made headlines with a cutting “you’re likable enough,” remark to Clinton during a Democrat primary debate in New Hampshire.

She wasn’t likable at all on Wednesday, and it showed.

Just keep in mind, do not trust the lamestream media’s anti-Trump hype and never allow them to deter you. Make America Great Again!



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *