this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2026

245 points (98.0% liked)

politics

28625 readers

2721 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

outrageousmatter@lemmy.world

aidan@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world

JuBe@lemmy.world

Lasherz12@lemmy.world

245

Hillary Clinton calls House Oversight questioning 'repetitive' in 6 hour deposition (www.npr.org)

submitted 1 day ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

38 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In a short press conference following the deposition, Hillary Clinton said she wished the proceedings had been public and that she and her attorneys have asked for transcripts and videos to be available as soon as possible.

"It was disappointing that they refused to hold a public hearing so I wouldn't have to be out here characterizing it for you," she told reporters outside the Chappaqua Performing Arts Center in New York where the hearing took place. "You could have seen it for yourself. We had asked for that. We think it would have been better for the committee and its efforts to gather whatever information they are seeking."

Lamenting what she called "repetitive" questioning, Clinton said she would not appear before the committee again, even if the deposition were public.

top 38 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] KulunkelBoom@lemmus.org 3 points 10 hours ago

Well fuck yeah ma'am they ARE repetitive. They're fucking brain dead right wing drones. Limited vocabulary. Very limited thinking ability. Get ALL their talking notes from "higher up" and MUST NOT DEVIATE else immediate disfranchisement for YOU...

Of course they've got about three questions total, and you can bet two of them have to do with cum stains on a goddam dress.

They simply cannot let shit like that go - even as their own orange face god is shown to have violently raped children .

Fuck's sake boy, get a grip. This is Lord Trum[sky's world now - where the bad guys are in control. And when the bad guys control the law, the bad guys can do whatever the fuck they want. And they've got the secret police to back it up... and if that won't do it he'll send in a couple of brigades to "keep peace". Fuck's sake boy - HE'S A GODDAM DICTATOR. Don't you get it yet? We're fucked.

[–] sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 62 points 1 day ago (4 children)

An open and public hearing where we ask her about ties to Epstein so that if she commits purgery it's in full view of all Americans?

Nah. How about a private photo op sesh where we play tiddlywinks and bullshit about UFOs. Great one, Peds. Justice was secured

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 44 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The thing is, the Clintons are old hands at the political game, and both received extensive training on how to avoid foreign intelligence blackmail operations, like the one Epstein was running.

So it's no stretch to say that they both probably dodged that trap, not from any moral standpoint, but because of how fucking obvious it was.

Bill borrowed the plane, but seems to have ditched Epstein.

But the real reason I don't think the two fell for the blackmail operation is Trump. If he had dirt on the Clintons, he would have released it day one.

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yup. Republicans are so blatantly obvious about their cover up of pedophile here.

I wonder if we'll ever actually get the transcripts and videos to show how shitty they are.

[–] sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 day ago

I'm sure they'll be shown at some point in time when it's no longer relevant but they need to change the discourse again. By then they will have all gotten away with it

[+] stupidcasey@lemmy.world -17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think i I've never seen such a bull shit press conference as this, she is lying out hir teeth with every word trying to make it sound like a conspiracy by bringing up Pizza gate and UFO's.

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Okay, where's your proof that Republicans didn't bring up repeatedly Democrats drinking babies blood in a pizzeria's basement and UFO's?

Oh wait you don't because Republicans demanded the deposition be closed despite Clinton asking for it to be open.

[+] stupidcasey@lemmy.world -12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I would want it public too so I could appeal to it simply being absurd. the public has demonstrated time and time again that they cannot accept that people in power can ever do anything wrong.

not only that we simply do not have what is in those documents it might seem absurd to us if we haven't seen it the true horrors that we already know for a fact are in those documents.

Also we know the vast majority of the files have not been released yet and they are protecting powerful people (poorly) she is a powerful person we do not have the information on her we need to judge her.

This could all be a political stunt to make her look bad (I don't think so she doesn't seem all that appalled with Bill she at the very least knows) but we won't get to the bottom of it until both Republicans and Democrats are out and a third party who is not beholden to Epstein and his cohorts are all out, so don't blindly vote Democrat.

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

So much gish to gallop here.

-I'm glad we agree that the hearing should have been public.

-The fact that there are files still not released has no relevance here with your argument that Hillary was lying through her teeth. What we do know and have is that ~3 million files have been released and Hillary Clinton has been mentioned 700+ times and most of it has been with campaign stuff or gossipy crap between other people talking about her. I think the most damning thing release so far is having Epstein at her daughters wedding as a link between her and Epstein.

-Your attempts to both sides things also has no bearing on your claim she was lying through her teeth.

Nothing that you have pointed out supports the fact she was lying through her teeth about the deposition and honestly, I find your attempt to both sides things in this current situation is crap, a red herring to avoid your claim here

And honestly fuck this timeline where I'm having to justifiably defend a Clinton, which I would like to point out my personal opinion of her has no bearing on the veracity of her truthfulness of her account of her closed door testimony.

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Purgery

[–] sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Damn did I still misspell it? I swear I double checked. This last braincell is trying its hardest

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io 15 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Cheer up, detective man. It's perjury.

[–] sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 day ago

Thank you 🫶

[–] sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 day ago

Ppppeerrgggjjjyyy fuck

[–] WanderWisley@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (3 children)

A coworker of mine is soooo excited about Hillary being questioned, he is a big pizza gate fan and somehow this interrogation makes Hillary the actual ringleader of the Epstein files and Trump is somehow cleared of all charges.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 5 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Get some new friends.

[–] eletes@sh.itjust.works 4 points 14 hours ago

You can't pick your coworkers unless you quit

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Can you please please do us all a favour and go up to your coworker and slap the everloving shit out of them?

heh. Okay, maybe not, but you can lie and tell us you did to make us feel better. :)

[–] WanderWisley@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

[–] watson387@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 day ago

"What did the five fingers say to the face?"

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I bet they are a real rocket surgeon.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 6 points 1 day ago

we have questioned everyone behind closed doors and confirmed its them not us.

[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 9 points 1 day ago

Uhhh these are always repetitive, at least for the public ones. Most of the politicians asking questions just want to score quick gotchas and sound bites.

I suspect that the private depositions are typically more down to business, but in this case, Republicans want to obstruct the truth rather than expose it, so of course it's going to be a clown show.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I sure hope she reminded everyone what we should really be talking about, and it's the Dow.

[+] JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world -34 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Sorry, who was this woman's husband again?

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 40 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Red herring argument. Why is a inquiry into potential links to pedophilia being held behind closed doors due to Republican insistence?

That's the issue so stick with it.

[–] JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

It's funny to me that you read some sort of coded message from my comment. I'll also tag @Kirp123@lemmy.world and @Stormy@thelemmy.club as they replied too.

I didn't make a red herring argument, I wasn't glossing over Hilary's arguments, nor was I suggesting Hilary's husband has raped anyone.

After seeing the headline, I read the article and thought it was funny that Bill was referred to as her husband so many times. My comment is a joke about repetition that apparently only landed with a couple people. Oh well, it's all the more funny to me now.

Each of you made good points that I agree with. Cheers.

[–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 2 points 13 hours ago

I'm sorry too. Thanks for explaining

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago

Ah, gotcha. My bad.

[–] Stormy@thelemmy.club 44 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Her husband is the guy with no reports of forcing women to have sex with him, and no adults accusing him of raping them when they were kids.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

But he likely got a blowjob from a future President.

But if you think slick Willie was on the island for the snorkeling, I have a bridge in NY to sell you.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 11 hours ago

You've taken the bait. Good thing you're not a fish, you'd be somebody's dinner.

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

But he likely got a blowjob from a future President.

Your assertion is that Lewinsky would 1) run and 2) have a chance? I mean… I'd gladly take a look at her platform - no shame from me. But in this time where so little we hear is surprising, that statement caught me offguard. lol'

Oh........ wait, you're talking about the thing that Trump blew "Bubba". Sorry, forgot about that because it was widely debunked.^[edit: debunked as being Clinton, I mean] lol. I'll leave my first para just so maybe someone else can enjoy it or will have had the same thought. heh.

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 41 points 1 day ago

Does that even matter? Both her and her husband are attending the deposition and she makes perfectly valid points. Why are these hearings behind closed doors? Why aren't some people present in the files deposed? Like the President of the United States for example.