Clinton pretends to address public’s disbelief in her trustworthiness

By Dave Andrusko

Hillary Clinton shakes hands with the Rev. Jesse Jackson on June 27, 2016 . Zbigniew Bzdak / Chicago Tribune

Hillary Clinton shakes hands with the Rev. Jesse Jackson on June 27, 2016 . Zbigniew Bzdak / Chicago Tribune

Yesterday we posted about how a more dispassionate assessment of recent polls shows that while pro-abortion Hillary Clinton is ahead of billionaire Donald Trump, it is not nearly to the extent that the likes of the Washington Post would have you believe.

One reason, probably the biggest reason, is that the public, including a fair number of Democrats, find the former Secretary of State untrustworthy. She was in Illinois yesterday for Jesse Jackson’s International Women’s Luncheon and made what at first blush seemed to be a remarkable admission. Of course, in virtually the same breath, she took back with one hand what she had just given with the other.

I first heard about it yesterday in a brief post at the Chicago Tribune. Later Real Clear Politics posted the entirety of the relevant paragraphs:

CLINTON: I personally know I have work to do on this front. A lot of people tell pollsters they don’t trust me. Now, I don’t like hearing that. And I’ve thought a lot about what’s behind it. And you know you hear 25 years of wild accusations anyone would start to wonder. And it certainly is true, I’ve made mistakes. I don’t know anyone who hasn’t. So I understand people having questions.

Maybe we can persuade people to change their minds by marshaling facts and making arguments to rebut negative attacks. But that doesn’t work for everyone. You can’t just talk someone into trusting you. You’ve got to earn it. So, yes, I could say that I sometimes sound careful with my words is not because I’m hiding something it’s just that I’m careful with my words. I believe what you say actually matters. I think that’s true life, and that’s especially true if you’re president.

Translated out of ClintonSpeak, she has been unfairly treated (presumably by the great “Right Wing Conspiracy”) and mere evidence and facts and arguments aren’t enough. (By the way, if that isn’t a slam on the average voter, I don’t know what would qualify. Anyway…)

So if “You can’t just talk someone into trusting you. You’ve got to earn it,” what follows?  An attempt to talk someone into trusting her. How?

By insisting that being “careful with her words” is not what a sizable percentage of the population thinks it is–a total lack of transparency–but evidence of her superior qualifications to be President.

It’s enough to give insincerity a bad name.

Editor’s note. If you want to peruse stories all day long, go directly to nationalrighttolifenews.org and/or follow me on Twitter at twitter.com/daveha