A Caustic Judge Jeanine Pirro Ravages Obama as a Serial Liar

| November 23 2013
David Leeper

In her strongest attack yet, Judge Jeanine Pirro tears into Obama for his chain of lies about Obamacare and Benghazi, now-all-too-clearly concocted to win a second term on a mountain of fraud and deceit.

In the past, commentators used the “L-word”, lie, lying, or liar only rarely, usually choosing some bland euphemism instead. Judge Jeanine is holding back no longer — she uses the L-word 17 times in this diatribe.

By the Judge’s account, Emperor Obama has no clothes, and only his sycophantic inner circle and self-deceiving servile media are still pretending otherwise.

 

20131123_cna400Even the Left-leaning British journal The Economist has thrown in the towel.  Witness their cover story this week: “The Man Who Used to Walk on Water.”

In their article, the haughty elites of British journalism offer Obama some fatherly advice on how to get back “at least some” of his credibility.

As the Brits themselves would put it, that’s a bit rich. No doubt those editors are trying to get back some of their own credibility after endorsing Obama in 2012 over Mitt Romney, a proven state governor, turnaround manager, and business executive.

I wonder if those editors would like a do-over on their endorsement(?). Even for a Left-leaning editorial board, that was one odd choice for a publication named The Economist.

5 comments
NeilFeuer
NeilFeuer

She is judge, juror and 100% correct!

I, without any doubt, do not have any question that this POTUS is a complete socialistic, Marxist, communist liar and his agenda is to bring down America.

One can say just look at his middle name,Hussein, one can say look at his friends, mentors, appointees (that alone tells one who you really are and where your loyalties are), one can say just look at all the cover ups and scandals, they have all proven to be true and so many more, some we may never even know about.

If we were face to face, I would not shake his hand and I without any doubt would would tell him, on and off camera, that I have no respect for you respect is earned, and you haven't done one thing to earn my respect.

I really despise you and everything you stand for, I have thought of so many if factors, but the bottom line is, you aren't worth the time!

sleepergirl
sleepergirl

I agree that The Economist is no doubt trying to "polish the tarnished silver" (a la Downton Abbey).  I would call their attempt to resurrect the sunken Obama a bit cheeky.  

I'm glad Judge Jeanine is saying Obama lied and continues to lie like the serial liar he is.  It riles me when pundits gently use words like dissembling, disingenous, falsehood, prevaricate as they dance around the ugly word they really should use.  It is an ugly state of affairs to be sure when a nation can truthfully call their US president  "The Lyin' King."  God save the US.

thealias
thealias

the New York Times’ continued use of bizarre Orwellian language to avoid calling Obama a liar . Lincoln, on the one hand, told a “big lie.” Obama, on the other hand, “wrongly assured” people something that he “later amended” only after, due to circumstances completely beyond his control, “it turned out not to be true.”

WesternFreePress
WesternFreePress moderator

@NeilFeuer Or maybe, when someone asks you why you're not shaking his hand or standing when he walks into the room, you could just say, "Oh, I was waiting for President Valerie Jarrett to arrive."

WesternFreePress
WesternFreePress moderator

@thealias Yes, yes --- "misled," "prevaricated," "told falsehoods" and all the other euphemisms used to avoid saying that someone LIED are so annoying. Enough already. We can parse words if someone really did unknowingly tell a falsehood, but when someone knowingly lies, call it a lie!