Whispers Persist That Hillary Won’t Run: Health May Be Worse Than Disclosed

5
>>Follow Matzav On Whatsapp!<<

hillary-clinton-glassesIf you listen to the chattering class in Washington, D.C., Hillary Clinton is a virtual certainty for the 2016 Democratic nomination, and the front-runner in the next presidential race.

But in private, rumors persist that the former Secretary of State may not even be capable of making it to Iowa and New Hampshire. Clinton, these skeptics often say, will not run for president again because of health concerns.

These ubiquitous rumors of her health have been fueled in part by the supermarket tabloids. The National Enquirer wrote in 2012 that Clinton had brain cancer, something a spokesman dismissed then as “absolute nonsense.” In January of this year, the Globe claimed that Clinton secretly had a brain tumor.
Asked about her health on Thursday, Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said in an email to The Daily Caller: “To your question, very caring of you to ask. She’s 100%.”

But the rumors suggesting otherwise date back to the end of 2012, when Clinton’s health made headlines as she finished her term as secretary of state: aides explained then that she developed a stomach virus, hit her head, suffered a concussion and subsequently developed a blood clot in her brain but was being medicated and was expected to recover.

But skeptics say there is much more to the story of her health, which has recently been the subject of increased speculation in Washington.

Because of these rumors, some on the right have been convincing themselves that Hillary is sick and therefore won’t run – a bombshell that would upend the 2016 race.

Read more at THE DAILY CALLER.

{Matzav.com Newscenter}


SHARE
Previous article
Next articleU.N. to Meet Over Ukraine Conflict

5 COMMENTS

  1. Neeeeeeeeeebach! You’re breaking my heart! How can life possibly go on without Madam Hillary controling our lives?

  2. Hope it’s true, we had enough of the liberals. It’s time for a good conservative to instill some Torah values back into the country.

  3. The National Enquirer only prints sensational nonsense. I wonder if any of their articles have a shred of truth in them.

Leave a Reply to Chacham Cancel reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here