For many, this silencing proves insignificant because it will not directly affect her actions in the White House. However, her advocation of the women’s rights movement contradicts her actions. As she continues to boast of her gender and speak out for the rights of women in campaign speeches, do her actions verify her words? No, her silencing of Ms. Broaddrick displays this hypocrisy. These juxtaposing ideas show her lack of concern on the issue. These actions, with no attempt to reconcile with the rape victims, show the lack of concern she will continue to show throughout her career. Thus, her call for a protection of women’s rights will just be another empty campaign promise. Again, Mrs. Clinton finds herself speaking out against something while her actions paint a different picture. Here, she manipulates her support by rallying against the success of Wall Street companies, while her campaign benefits from such success. Hillary Clinton, herself, cannot even articulate a logical answer to why she receives large amounts of money from Goldman Sachs while bashing their industry. Time and again, her opponents and moderators ask this question and she side steps or stumbles on it (Why Can’t Hillary). This is just another example of her hypocrisy and manipulation of the American …show more content…
Clinton’s are untruthful, but why should she not be our President? The Executive Branch is supposed to execute the laws of the land; if she displays a lack of concern for our laws, she will not sufficiently execute them. Likewise, our nation’s justice system is based on honesty. If a common citizen is expected to be honest in court and in their everyday lives, our President should also uphold and reflect such honesty, as is expected of them. Mrs. Clinton has not done so; rather, she has shown a disregard for the law and opposition to her own words. Because her hypocritical, manipulating, and deceiving actions oppose the duties of the Executive Branch, she cannot represent our just nation as