Hillary Clinton, last week, was noticeably upset responding to questions leveled at her about Benghazi and her role in the failure of her department to prevent what, according to Rand Paul, is the "worst tragedy since 9/11" (paraphrase). Many establishment repubs question, to a fair amount, the performance by Clinton in what I've termed "cry-gate"; in which Clinton seemed to put on airs whilst drumming up a few tears in regards to meeting the families of the victims of the Benghazi attacks. Whether or not the crying fit the following day was, in fact, genuine is beside the point. It is the opinion of Domestic Democracy United that cry-gate was an act by Clinton that figuratively spit on the graves of the victims of the Benghazi attacks.
"Cry-gate was not only offensively grotesque, but a losing move by Clinton who seemed like a poor method actor looking for something to work with. The tragedy of the Benghazi attacks were not, unfortunately, so much melodrama."
I wouldn't be so dire in my accusation, where it not for the fact that what occurred during cry-gate was irrefutably disingenuous. A breif application of Physiognomy would reveal my position that she "fake cried" is absolutely and unequivocally correct. What would my fellow Reston VA compatriot Frank Luntz glean off of an analysis of the tear reel?
I would wager that it would be classic Clinton.
Taking on the inflection one finds convenient.
This lie, is in fact, one of dire consequence.