Matt Drudge ran with the headline today that claims Hillary is sick, his claim uses the National Enquirer as a source. Yes, that National Enquirer, the one that started long ago with stories like Boy Stuck In Refrigerator, Eats Own Foot. It is the gossip rag that people end up staring at when at the grocery store checkout line. The Gossip rag where nothing is what it seems, and the only thing they have going for them is their click-bait titles and headlines. Space Aliens Land on Earth, Decide To Leave. The link from Drudge goes to a Radar Online story which then links to the actual story told in a few pictures which show the actual source of the story as the National Enquirer as shown below.



The National Enquirer as a source is about as good as hearing a tale from your mother’s aunt. It’s all gossip and complete and total bullshit. Yet here we are with Matt Drudge using them as a source for the story about Hillary that will propagate throughout the internet as fact when nothing could be further from the truth. Notice how Drudge uses the most god awful picture of Hillary Clinton to tell the tale? It looks as if she is so sick she is not able to even get out of bed.


It is quite funny the way the media uses pictures as if that tells the tale of the person one is reading about. If you look at the pictures used in politics, it’s meant to convey a sense of who you are voting for. Even liberal rags like Huffington Post use the same pictures to attack people’s credibility. Ever see pictures of Bernie Sanders? He always is made to look mean or disgruntled. Trump is always made to look like a buffoon. Scott Walker always made to look like a clueless shifty eyed loser and so on.


Angry man Bernie Sanders from BuzzFeed.


Shifty-eyed Scott Walker from Raw Story.


Trump buffoon from Forbes.

You get the picture of course. News media uses the worst possible pictures to tell their slanted stories. It helps to make the victim look as bad as possible when telling their sad tales of woe. As for Drudge and his credibility at being a number one mover and shaker in politics today as noted by a few commenters in an earlier story, the case is now closed on that. Using the National Enquirer as a source for your headline news story is about as low into the sewer as one can go.



  • trytoseeitmyway

    So you’re saying she’s perfectly fine. OK let’s make a note.

    • Sarah Palin’s Heartbeat

      Yes, she probably has some health issues, everyone at that age usually does. Arthritis, Gout, Bladder Control, Hives, Swelling of the face tongue or lips. Anytime you are on medication for one thing it usually causes another thing to happen, and usually a host of other things to happen. So, the point is that older generation people have health issues. I don’t see the problem here. Of course, liberals were aghast at McCain choosing Sarah Palin who was a so-called heartbeat from the Presidency. Yeah, that was scary.

      • Probus

        The most scary thing is a novice was elected president, and that novice attended church services for 20 years listening to Jeremiah Wright spew lies and deceit about the USA.

        • Moose Hunter

          Well then there is Sarah Palin of course, You Betcha..Now where’s my moose gun?

        • RockyMissouri

          Except Rev. Wright was an honorable American who enlisted in the Navy AND Marines. He was telling the ugly truth about Manifest Destiny in the history of this nation…and the recording of the juiciest bit of his rant is what got people upset.

          The president should have dealt with this at the time, for everyone’s sake.

          • Probus

            James K Polk was correct regards Manifest Destiny as those south west states are no longer part of a third world country and worth more to mankind.

  • Cullen Hanson

    The same National Enquirer that broke the John Edwards mistress / love child story? I remember the total ridicule they suffered in exactly the same way you portrayed this story. The only small problem was that the story was 100% accurate and Edwards ended up resigning his candidacy.

    • Elvis Lives

      So you prefer to get your hard core political news from the National Enquirer, OK. Point made. Low information voters such as yourself depend on gossip rags to get their daily political news injection.

      Hey, news item: Humans Have Colonized Pluto, Built Colony Already.

      Here is another one: Aliens Colonized Earth 100 Years Ago: They Run The Show


      JFK Isn’t Dead: He Resides At A Retirement Home With Elvis.

      • Cullen Hanson

        Elvis, calling me a “low information voter,” while always a fun, cliched and reflexive insult, misses the point that my post made. It suggests that you can’t comprehend the simple comparison that I made regarding the media, which tried to discredit the National Enquirer on an Edwards story (“because, hey, look at the source!”) that turned out to be accurate. Summarily dismissing their story again because “it’s the National Enquirer,” seems as if they’re making the same mistake again.

        But, I’ll refrain from calling you a “low comprehension” reader.

        • Bill Bartles

          If a so called journalist like Drudge has to resort to using the Nat Enquirer to get a story out it usually means that everyone in the mainstream/midstream has passed on it.

          If all you can hope to get is a gossip rag to print your crap then it doesn’t rise to news level in any way shape or form. It’s gossip plain and simple.

          Saying that the Edwards story was correct therefore every story from then on from Nat Enq must be viewed in that way is being disingenuous. The Nat Enq is a gossip based rag only, and for Drudge to use it shows how low he has to go to snipe at Hillary whom he has had a hard on for years.

          • Froddoislost

            I don’t see where Cullen ever said Nat. Enq. has cart blanc. He did, however, point out that the last time that NE ran with a story that the mainstreams walked on, THEY had the story, IN SPITE of everyone pointing at the source as some sort of discredit. It’s called ad hominem, and it’s usually the last tact of a defeated cause. Like liberalism.

          • Liberal Biases

            Liberalism a defeated cause? Then why do conservatives constantly complain that the media has this liberal bias and that conservatives are under attack which forces conservatives to go to war with liberals?

            If it was a defeated cause then conservatives would be in complete charge of the entire show right? The way you draft your comment shows that liberals are alive and well and fully functioning to keep conservatives in a constant state of panic like Drudge spews.

          • Froddoislost

            Well, both houses of congress and 31 of 50 governors offices. Futher; 68 out of 98 partisan state legislative branches.

            Liberalism is a dying ideology, and the dem’s know it to the point they understand that only illegal immigration can save the party.

            Even Europe has figured it out.

            But you? Never!

          • breitbartunmasked

            If it is dying then why are conservatives always living in fear of liberals? What’s up with that eh? If it was dying, conservatives would be enjoying their lives instead of complaining about liberals day after day and or living in fear of something that is dying or dead..

          • Froddoislost

            I think you are delusional.

            In the political arena, of course conservatives complain about liberals. Liberals want to steal everything from the producers and give it to the government.

            On the other hand, most conservatives have a life outside of politics. I haven’t met very many liberals who had any life whatsoever. So they sit and bitch and hate on conservatives.

            Just like you do.

            Fortunately, a lot of young people (the smart ones anyway) see what this is, so only the loud and ignorant ones commit to your side.

            Like I said; liberalism is dying. From the foul stench of its own success; places like Detroit and Oakland. The workers see that the liberal utopia that have been created are hell holes. They understand far better than indoctrinated fools like you.

          • Cullen Hanson

            –“Saying that the Edwards story was correct therefore every story from
            then on from Nat Enq must be viewed in that way is being disingenuous.”

            Bill, where exactly did I say or imply that? My point was almost the opposite. Throwing out 100% of their stories because it’s the National Enquirer proved to be a mistake earlier. I certainly didn’t say that 100% of their stories were true.

          • Bill Bartles

            Cullen, you are however implying by your comment that because they happened to get one story correct that suddenly their star should rise high for every story after. It’s the implication that that because of the Edwards story (you really had to reach way back for that didn’t you) was a real story, that somehow their business model is putting out true stories.

            That is not their business model Cullen and never has been. Their business model is gossip that no one else wants to produce because it’s shady, usually wrong, or based he said she said by people with agendas.

          • Cullen Hanson

            No, I’m not. I can put my own words out there if you don’t mind. I’m saying that you cannot dismiss 100% of their stories (as many on this board are doing). Sure, they print a lot of bogus, far out stories, but, because they occasionally get a real scoop, you can’t legitimately disqualify everything they run. By the way, it is Edward Klein’s book, “Unlikeable(sic) ” that is the source of the article. Both National Enquirer and Drudge are basically pointing back to that.

          • Bill Bartles

            And Edward Klein is?

            Klein has been criticized for his biography of Hillary Clinton, titled, The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It, and How Far She’ll Go to Become President, which was released on June 21, 2005. Politico criticized the book for “serious factual errors, truncated and distorted quotes and overall themes [that] don’t gibe with any other serious accounts of Clinton’s life.” The book was attacked not only by liberals, but by conservatives as well. John Podhoretz wrote in the New York Post, “Thirty pages into it, I wanted to take a shower. Sixty pages into it, I wanted to be decontaminated. And 200 pages into it, I wanted someone to drive stakes through my eyes so I wouldn’t have to suffer through another word.” In National Review James Geraghty wrote, “Folks, there are plenty of arguments against Hillary Clinton, her policies, her views, her proposals, and her philosophies. This stuff ain’t it. Nobody on the right, left, or center ought to stoop to this level.

            So, that makes it what exactly? Gossip, bullshit and some guy with an agenda. Probably a financial agenda as well as a political one.

          • Cullen Hanson

            Wow Bill, unattributed copied and pasted quotes from Wikipedia? You never even addressed your earlier straw man assertions.

          • Bill Bartles

            Unattributed? I gave you some attribution. No comment on it? Look, Ed is a bullshit artist. He sells information to the lowest common denominator or those who will believe anything without checking facts first. That usually fits the conservative mind and or base. They don’t check facts, they usually go by flashy click bait titles and headlines, because that’s about all they can comprehend. All they go by are buzzwords and sound bites and 140 character twitter speak.

            By the way Cullen, do you have the latest edition of NewsSpeak lol? Sorry if you feel its ad hom lol..

          • Bill Bartles

            How about this review of Klein by conservative Peggy Noonan:


            We need a serious book about Hillary Clinton. Ed Klein’s isn’t it.

            If that is the source, then it’s just another in a long line of gossip and bullshit from Klein. So, again, Drudge makes it his headline and suddenly it is gospel. Hillary is Sick because Ed Klein says so. Puuleese.

      • marrabella

        Well The National Enquirer also broke the John Edwards and Gary Hart stories. Their accuracy rate is pretty good.

  • Froddoislost

    Yeah . . . the Enquirer sure used some aweful pictures to take down John Edwards. Because the MainStreamMedia never ever dumps a story to protect a democrat and the Enquirer never ever gets it’s story correct.

    • Inquiring Minds

      I would say that relying on the Nat Enq as a source for a news story is about as low as one can go. It’s a grocery store gossip rag. If you read it or rely on it, then Drudge has a story to sell you today.

      • Froddoislost

        Not aware of how Edwards was taken down then, are you?

  • BrianH1972

    Would that be the same NE magazine that broke the John Edwards story a year before it was revealed to be true?

    Me thinks it is.

    • No Sale

      Are you parroting Cullen? A stopped clock is right at least twice per day lol.

  • Böcker

    Wow, Druge uses National Enquirer as a f**king source? Really? Give me a break!

  • gtgunn

    she has a documented episode of blood clots. no she is not well! notice her brilliant glib speeches are non existent! yeah its her BRAIN!

  • Susan Creger

    Who the Fuck cares… Out with the old and Go Trump!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Donald has landed!!!!! DEAL WITH IT !!!!!!!!!!!!