Did Chelsea Clinton Admit Donald Trump’s Attacks on Her Parents Are Accurate?

She doesn’t say that but she doesn’t exactly defend her parents either. Instead, the Clintons’ only daughter changes the subject. Why would she do that unless she knew that Donald Trump’s attacks have merit?

Ironically, the editors of Cosmopolitan, which published the interview with Clinton’s comments, seem to have been blind to the obvious dodge. They trumpeted it in their headline, “Chelsea Clinton: Republican Hate Speech Is “Far More Troubling” Than Attacks On My Parents.”

Odd. She skips away from the concrete criticisms of her parents and instead refers to undefined “hate speech.”

take our poll - story continues below

Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Kimmel’s Kavanaugh Comments Have Conservatives Clamoring for Cancelation

The question that elicited her response asked Clinton what she thought of the fact that “Donald Trump has called your dad an abuser of women, and your mom his enabler.”

She replies,

I find what Donald Trump — and many of the Republicans, because it’s not only Mr. Trump — say about Americans far more troubling than what he says about my parents. […]

But what I have found surprising and really disturbing in this election cycle is the broad-based misogyny and sexism and racism and Islamophobia and jingoism and homophobia and anti-immigrant rhetoric. All of that is coming out from the Republican side.

She really wants to change the subject and redirect the readers from the many lines of evidence that her dad is an abuser and her mother an enabler. Is it true of not? Is it relevant to the question of whether her mother should be president or not? Chelsea Clinton doesn’t seem to want to answer those questions.

And why is the issue about whether what Republicans say about Bill and [score]Hillary Clinton[/score] is worse than something else they allegedly say? I think it raises a more important question. Even if you grant that Chelsea Clinton is accurate in how she portrays Republican “hate speech” (she’s not, but leave that aside for the sake of argument), there is still a question that needs to be answered: Is Republican rhetoric worse than the actions of [score]Bill Clinton[/score]? Does her mother’s complicity with those actions really matter less than something a presidential candidate has said (allegedly)?

Remember, Trump launched his attack because Hillary accused him of being sexist. Chelsea is obviously doing all she can to change the subject.

war on women

Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.