To all Democrats

[Guest]

This ongoing story relative to the email and the server puzzles me a lot.

Thus far, Ms Clinton has changed her story (lied) a number of times since this became visible to the public. Multiple servers story that varies...her saying there was no regulation dis allowing her behavior, etc....deleting emails that she knew were going to be subpoenaed and then saying she had never been subpoened when she had, etc etc etc

Her staff is now under investigation for using the system also.

The Clinton Foundation also under investigation relative to her husbands speaking and donations.

My question to all Democrats is this....

How can the Democratic party allow this woman to be their candidate for President of the United States based on her awful record for being forthright with the american people. With potential for scandal around so many corners and her past brushes with scandal, how can the party support such a nominee.

I am not accusing her of anything; I simply cannot understand this party supporting such a candidate.

So much is said about the way our political system is warped, with each party accusing the other of nefarious things or implied things.

This situation, i.e.., Ms Clinton, seems to be the poster child for a really whacked out political system.

I see so many on here of the Democratic supporter type, throwing stones and boulders at all the Republican candidates for so many things that are, in comparison to our ex Secy Of State acting so irresponsible, and using such terrible and poor judgment and always acting as if she is hiding something and I just do not understand it at all.

How can the Democrats not be on this forum calling for another candidate or at least acknowledging how incredibly non qualified Ms Clinton is, based on character alone and very poor judgement.

Is the Clinton name itself so powerful that they are calling all the shots here ? Is there some sort of fear within the party not to upset this crowing of Ms Clinton ?

I hope that real Democrats will respond to these questions that i just do not understand. I ask you not to use this to attack the Republicans...start another thread if you wish, but using your GUEST moniker speak to this. It makes no sense. How can this party EVER EVER take the high road on much of anything if she ever makes it to the WH ?

[Guest]

It's what they do.

[Guest]

The end justifies the means. Clinton is a seriously flawed candidate but it doesn't matter as most democrats have selective blindness.

This ongoing story relative to the email and the server puzzles me a lot.

Thus far, Ms Clinton has changed her story (lied) a number of times since this became visible to the public. Multiple servers story that varies...her saying there was no regulation dis allowing her behavior, etc....deleting emails that she knew were going to be subpoenaed and then saying she had never been subpoened when she had, etc etc etc

Her staff is now under investigation for using the system also.

The Clinton Foundation also under investigation relative to her husbands speaking and donations.

My question to all Democrats is this....

How can the Democratic party allow this woman to be their candidate for President of the United States based on her awful record for being forthright with the american people. With potential for scandal around so many corners and her past brushes with scandal, how can the party support such a nominee.

I am not accusing her of anything; I simply cannot understand this party supporting such a candidate.

So much is said about the way our political system is warped, with each party accusing the other of nefarious things or implied things.

This situation, i.e.., Ms Clinton, seems to be the poster child for a really whacked out political system.

I see so many on here of the Democratic supporter type, throwing stones and boulders at all the Republican candidates for so many things that are, in comparison to our ex Secy Of State acting so irresponsible, and using such terrible and poor judgment and always acting as if she is hiding something and I just do not understand it at all.

How can the Democrats not be on this forum calling for another candidate or at least acknowledging how incredibly non qualified Ms Clinton is, based on character alone and very poor judgement.

Is the Clinton name itself so powerful that they are calling all the shots here ? Is there some sort of fear within the party not to upset this crowing of Ms Clinton ?

I hope that real Democrats will respond to these questions that i just do not understand. I ask you not to use this to attack the Republicans...start another thread if you wish, but using your GUEST moniker speak to this. It makes no sense. How can this party EVER EVER take the high road on much of anything if she ever makes it to the WH ?

[Guest]

The end justifies the means. Clinton is a seriously flawed candidate but it doesn't matter as most democrats have selective blindness.

So true....I have several friends that are union members,
and I think they would vote Democratic even if their candidate was in prison!

[Guest]

Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Christ Christie, Rick Perry, and Bobby Jindal al used private e-mail for official government business. In addition, Colin Powell also used private e-mail accounts as Secretary of State, and George W. Bush used an RNC e-mail account and destroyed those messages. Mitt Romney even destroyed government computers at the end of his term as Massachusetts governor. Clearly, Republicans have a double-standard when it comes to Hillary Clinton's e-mail.

[Guest]

Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Christ Christie, Rick Perry, and Bobby Jindal al used private e-mail for official government business. In addition, Colin Powell also used private e-mail accounts as Secretary of State, and George W. Bush used an RNC e-mail account and destroyed those messages. Mitt Romney even destroyed government computers at the end of his term as Massachusetts governor. Clearly, Republicans have a double-standard when it comes to Hillary Clinton's e-mail.

What is your source for these allegations?

[Guest]

Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Christ Christie, Rick Perry, and Bobby Jindal al used private e-mail for official government business. In addition, Colin Powell also used private e-mail accounts as Secretary of State, and George W. Bush used an RNC e-mail account and destroyed those messages. Mitt Romney even destroyed government computers at the end of his term as Massachusetts governor. Clearly, Republicans have a double-standard when it comes to Hillary Clinton's e-mail.

Did they send and/or receive 'Top Secret' information via email? I don't think so.

[Guest]

Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Christ Christie, Rick Perry, and Bobby Jindal al used private e-mail for official government business. In addition, Colin Powell also used private e-mail accounts as Secretary of State, and George W. Bush used an RNC e-mail account and destroyed those messages. Mitt Romney even destroyed government computers at the end of his term as Massachusetts governor. Clearly, Republicans have a double-standard when it comes to Hillary Clinton's e-mail.

You obviously don't have a clue regarding the use of email for business purposes. There is no problem with them doing it, because they weren't transmitting classified information over an unclassified/uncleared network. Hilary broke the law. What she did is a felony, period. We are talking about FEDERAL GOV, not local or state gov business. Try again.

[Guest]

This is a perfect example of a "strawman argument". Typical democratic move when faced with the truth. This is very disingenuous.

Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Christ Christie, Rick Perry, and Bobby Jindal al used private e-mail for official government business. In addition, Colin Powell also used private e-mail accounts as Secretary of State, and George W. Bush used an RNC e-mail account and destroyed those messages. Mitt Romney even destroyed government computers at the end of his term as Massachusetts governor. Clearly, Republicans have a double-standard when it comes to Hillary Clinton's e-mail.

[Guest]

Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Christ Christie, Rick Perry, and Bobby Jindal al used private e-mail for official government business. In addition, Colin Powell also used private e-mail accounts as Secretary of State, and George W. Bush used an RNC e-mail account and destroyed those messages. Mitt Romney even destroyed government computers at the end of his term as Massachusetts governor. Clearly, Republicans have a double-standard when it comes to Hillary Clinton's e-mail.

I must assume, since the FBI, the Justice dapartment are NOT, DID NOT, investigate or did investigate any of those you are accusing of breaking the law, then the problems with Ms. Clinton are simply another vast right wing conspiracy ?

[Guest]

Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Christ Christie, Rick Perry, and Bobby Jindal al used private e-mail for official government business. In addition, Colin Powell also used private e-mail accounts as Secretary of State, and George W. Bush used an RNC e-mail account and destroyed those messages. Mitt Romney even destroyed government computers at the end of his term as Massachusetts governor. Clearly, Republicans have a double-standard when it comes to Hillary Clinton's e-mail.

It is revealing that a poster would reply on a thread that accused Ms Clinton of nothing, and simply called up the obvious hypocrisy of the Democratic party in lauding her as the leader with accusations against Republicans. I might add even though the OP asked not to do that but asked if you wanted to bash Republicans to start your own thread.

It appears that the talking points or in this case, the talking defense just pops out.

Listen the question was about her overall character, not just the email which is current.

So, again....I am the OP and this was not started to gang up on her...the question was...

"How can the Democratic party allow this woman to be their candidate for President of the United States based on her awful record for being forthright with the american people. With potential for scandal around so many corners and her past brushes with scandal, how can the party support such a nominee."

It is an honest and sincere question, one which is based not on how I feel or some political ploy but based on the facts as we know them...ie. her record and her parties stands on issues. Is she THAT powerful within the party because I just do not understand it.

Just wanted to hear from Democrats and find if they are frustrated. I was surely frustrated with McCain/Palin and said so on the old forum but maybe I am asking too much of fellow posters.

[Guest]

It is innocent until proven guilty. It is not that hard for the Democrats to support her. What they are doing is looking at the accuser, the Republican party. Everything that this president, and the Democrats have done for the past six years is a scandal.

The Republicans have harped over trumped up scandals, and have proven next to nothing. Benghazi is a perfect example. Since the current prosecution is so far from the original reason, the families of the four dead Americans, it is nothing more than a political witch hunt. If you are looking for a witch, Hillary is the perfect candidate. She really fits the bill.

You don't give up on your strongest candidate for president, because the other party doesn't like her/him. Concerning acting in the best interests of the American people, stop with all the negative ads, and start telling people what your policies will be. Do it in detail.

[Guest]

It is innocent until proven guilty. It is not that hard for the Democrats to support her. What they are doing is looking at the accuser, the Republican party. Everything that this president, and the Democrats have done for the past six years is a scandal.

The Republicans have harped over trumped up scandals, and have proven next to nothing. Benghazi is a perfect example. Since the current prosecution is so far from the original reason, the families of the four dead Americans, it is nothing more than a political witch hunt. If you are looking for a witch, Hillary is the perfect candidate. She really fits the bill.

You don't give up on your strongest candidate for president, because the other party doesn't like her/him. Concerning acting in the best interests of the American people, stop with all the negative ads, and start telling people what your policies will be. Do it in detail.


I appreciate your post, I honestly do.

What I am curious about is the involvement of the Justice Department, the FBI and other groups looking into her activity.

In addition, do we just forget her past ?

Not being a wise guy but again it is the "vast right wing conspiracy", which and again not being a wise guy, but now involves FBI and Justice department among others.

The trumped charges, in your mind are which...I can supply a list of all of the potential scandals coming up if it will help.

I honestly am not trying to be a wise guy but I think you are making my point. The Democratic party has, at least for the last six years, held themselves up as the moral high ground to which everyone should aspire, yet their candidate for President comes not close to what they say in words.

[Guest]

She's not the candidate, yet. She's the front runner. I think that if charges are brought she would be out of the running, at least I hope that would be the case. I'm not a big fan of Hillary but, for now, it is her or whomever the Republicans ultimately select and I find the present group even more unpalatable than Ms. Clinton, excepting maybe Rand and he has the proverbial snowball's chance.

[Guest]

This ongoing story relative to the email and the server puzzles me a lot.

Thus far, Ms Clinton has changed her story (lied) a number of times since this became visible to the public. Multiple servers story that varies...her saying there was no regulation dis allowing her behavior, etc....deleting emails that she knew were going to be subpoenaed and then saying she had never been subpoened when she had, etc etc etc

Her staff is now under investigation for using the system also.

The Clinton Foundation also under investigation relative to her husbands speaking and donations.

My question to all Democrats is this....

How can the Democratic party allow this woman to be their candidate for President of the United States based on her awful record for being forthright with the american people. With potential for scandal around so many corners and her past brushes with scandal, how can the party support such a nominee.

I am not accusing her of anything; I simply cannot understand this party supporting such a candidate.

So much is said about the way our political system is warped, with each party accusing the other of nefarious things or implied things.

This situation, i.e.., Ms Clinton, seems to be the poster child for a really whacked out political system.

I see so many on here of the Democratic supporter type, throwing stones and boulders at all the Republican candidates for so many things that are, in comparison to our ex Secy Of State acting so irresponsible, and using such terrible and poor judgment and always acting as if she is hiding something and I just do not understand it at all.

How can the Democrats not be on this forum calling for another candidate or at least acknowledging how incredibly non qualified Ms Clinton is, based on character alone and very poor judgement.

Is the Clinton name itself so powerful that they are calling all the shots here ? Is there some sort of fear within the party not to upset this crowing of Ms Clinton ?

I hope that real Democrats will respond to these questions that i just do not understand. I ask you not to use this to attack the Republicans...start another thread if you wish, but using your GUEST moniker speak to this. It makes no sense. How can this party EVER EVER take the high road on much of anything if she ever makes it to the WH ?





You poor Cons are scared to death of Mrs C - you seem to have a severe case Of Hillary Derangement Syndrome.

But to answer your allegations - and that is exactly what your post is full of - how about you post some facts. I realize facts is not something Cons are overly familiar with. But just try - post some FACTS ! You know, as in PROOF.

Hint, hint - investigations and / or allegations are NOT facts.

[Guest]

You poor Cons are scared to death of Mrs C - you seem to have a severe case Of Hillary Derangement Syndrome.

But to answer your allegations - and that is exactly what your post is full of - how about you post some facts. I realize facts is not something Cons are overly familiar with. But just try - post some FACTS ! You know, as in PROOF.

Hint, hint - investigations and / or allegations are NOT facts.

Keep telling yourself that. Use the mantra "Not facts, not facts, not facts...." If you trust Hilary, you will trust anyone so don't cut on the other candidates, because you are just being a hypocrite. She could punch you in the face and you would say "it wasn't her, it wasn't her..."

No big deal, because she has no chance now. She won't get the Independent vote, and without their vote, she can't pull it off.

[Guest]

You obviously don't have a clue regarding the use of email for business purposes. There is no problem with them doing it, because they weren't transmitting classified information over an unclassified/uncleared network. Hilary broke the law. What she did is a felony, period. We are talking about FEDERAL GOV, not local or state gov business. Try again.







How do you know they weren't transmitting classified information - because they said so?

And what proof - not allegations - do you have that Mrs C did? How about you post the proof?

[Guest]

You don't have to apologize for anything. There isn't a vast right wing conspiracy. What we have now is constant attacks by each party against each other. Now they are just so far apart, how do you get anything of substance done? You can't.

When you had a bipartisan immigration bill die in the House, you know that the House is the problem, that can not be corrected. You don't fire yourself. Gerrymandering will not be addressed in time for the next census.

I have never defended Hillary. She has been running for president forever. You don't suffer the world wide humiliation like she did, and stay with your husband unless you need him for your own political ambitions. She is not going to get convicted of anything. She will become more open knowing the path she was on hurt her. Benghazi is going to help her, and not hurt. The Republicans have gone overboard on it. This might be a fact of life the Republicans are going to have to live with. Somewhere along the line they are going to have to stop preaching to the converted.

Why do the Republicans have such a low opinion of John Kasich? If it is because he accepted Medicaid under ACA for the people in his state, that's sick, and petty.

[Guest]

How do you know they weren't transmitting classified information - because they said so?

And what proof - not allegations - do you have that Mrs C did? How about you post the proof?

Because they didn't have access to classified information. Do a little research. A gov has no access to classified information. Business folks don't have access to classified information. Federal employees go through a background investigation and vetting to be granted different levels of clearance. She is being investigated for mishandling Top Secret SCI material. SCI has to be secured in a guarded federally approved storage facility and only by those that are cleared TS/SCI can even guard it. If you think that it's a GOP conspiracy then why is the FBI investigating it?

[Guest]

You poor Cons are scared to death of Mrs C - you seem to have a severe case Of Hillary Derangement Syndrome.

But to answer your allegations - and that is exactly what your post is full of - how about you post some facts. I realize facts is not something Cons are overly familiar with. But just try - post some FACTS ! You know, as in PROOF.

Hint, hint - investigations and / or allegations are NOT facts.

You just keep on taking big deep breathes of the kool aide vapors while you read this:

I (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/17/hillary-clinton-white-house-too-much-baggage)

[Guest]

She's not the candidate, yet. She's the front runner. I think that if charges are brought she would be out of the running, at least I hope that would be the case. I'm not a big fan of Hillary but, for now, it is her or whomever the Republicans ultimately select and I find the present group even more unpalatable than Ms. Clinton, excepting maybe Rand and he has the proverbial snowball's chance.

Of course you do. So sad, the mislead. Please feel free to compare Clinton's policies with any of the GOP candidates and show me where they are "unpalatable" in comparison.

Also, be kind enough to compare criminal actions of the two, Clinton and the opposition. Compare ethics if you are up to it.

We can prove where you are wrong. Prove we are wrong and then maybe you will reinforce your position.

[Guest]

Tell us how anyone in their right mind could think that you could deport 11+ million with 15,000 immigration agents! That is what Trump is putting forward. !5,000 is half the size of the New York police department. These 15,000 miracle workers are going to find all the illegals, and process them through our court system. How could anyone swallow that one? Just add a little sugar, and it will taste fine.


Repeal and Replace the Affordable Care Act. Have you heard word one about the replacement other than letting health insurance companies cross state lines? Tell us How 22 million people losing their insurance would feel eating Republican pettiness.

You can't prove anything to people who refuse to listen! That is exactly where the Republicans are.

[Guest]

Tell us how anyone in their right mind could think that you could deport 11+ million with 15,000 immigration agents! That is what Trump is putting forward. !5,000 is half the size of the New York police department. These 15,000 miracle workers are going to find all the illegals, and process them through our court system. How could anyone swallow that one? Just add a little sugar, and it will taste fine.


Repeal and Replace the Affordable Care Act. Have you heard word one about the replacement other than letting health insurance companies cross state lines? Tell us How 22 million people losing their insurance would feel eating Republican pettiness.

You can't prove anything to people who refuse to listen! That is exactly where the Republicans are.

What the heck are you trying to do? You are trying to make facts to Republicans and that just doesn't happen.

Of course Trump says what he will do but doesn't give explanations. He will not get the GOP nomination- and we can hope he runs as a third party so Mrs. Clinton is easily elected.

[Guest]

What the heck are you trying to do? You are trying to make facts to Republicans and that just doesn't happen.

Of course Trump says what he will do but doesn't give explanations. He will not get the GOP nomination- and we can hope he runs as a third party so Mrs. Clinton is easily elected.

Sounds very Obama like to me!!

:duck:

[Guest]

The vast majority of democrat voters couldn't care less about their candidates' morals. All they care about is winning and the right to abort babies.

[Guest]

Tell us how anyone in their right mind could think that you could deport 11+ million with 15,000 immigration agents! That is what Trump is putting forward. !5,000 is half the size of the New York police department. These 15,000 miracle workers are going to find all the illegals, and process them through our court system. How could anyone swallow that one? Just add a little sugar, and it will taste fine.


Repeal and Replace the Affordable Care Act. Have you heard word one about the replacement other than letting health insurance companies cross state lines? Tell us How 22 million people losing their insurance would feel eating Republican pettiness.

You can't prove anything to people who refuse to listen! That is exactly where the Republicans are.

Google is your friend. Illegals were deported in the past. Thousands of them at a time. Are you saying that with our technology we can't deport illegals? You are kidding right?

As far as anyone losing insurance, how many thousands/millions had to find new insurance after Obamacare? The Democrats hosed it up on purpose, knowing it sucked. They want socialized medicine so they hope Obabamcare fails/

You are right about one thing, you can't prove anything to those that won't listen. Hellooooo, you aren't listening.

[Guest]

Gotta love it when liberals (probably can't even vote here) cry about how we don't care about the people. I'm laughing at the audacity. They don't care about America. They want anarchy, and will do anything to achieve it.

[Guest]

So you are saying with technology we can deport 11+ million? You are the one that's kidding! Thousands are the same as millions. Right! You are kidding yourself. As far as listening, it might help if you take your hands out of your ears.

Democrats want socialized medicine; therefore, they want the ACA to fail. So, the Republicans are doing the Democrats job for them. Wow, are the Democrats tricky, or maybe the Republicans are just that dumb! You are trying to sell this nonsense to who?

Listen to you! I would only do this to confirm what we shouldn't be doing.

[Guest]

Tell us how anyone in their right mind could think that you could deport 11+ million with 15,000 immigration agents! That is what Trump is putting forward. !5,000 is half the size of the New York police department. These 15,000 miracle workers are going to find all the illegals, and process them through our court system. How could anyone swallow that one? Just add a little sugar, and it will taste fine.


Repeal and Replace the Affordable Care Act. Have you heard word one about the replacement other than letting health insurance companies cross state lines? Tell us How 22 million people losing their insurance would feel eating Republican pettiness.

You can't prove anything to people who refuse to listen! That is exactly where the Republicans are.

"Repeal and Replace the Affordable Care Act. Have you heard word one about the replacement other than letting health insurance companies cross state lines? Tell us How 22 million people losing their insurance would feel eating Republican pettiness."

"Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker proposed "The Day One Patient Freedom Plan"

"Florida Sen. Marco Rubio wrote an op-ed titled "My plan to fix health care."

"Gov. John Kasich's position on the issue, which it titled "Kasich-care: Priorities like Obamacare, without mandates."

"Gov. Bobby Jindal last year released what U.S. News & World Report called "the broad strokes of a plan full of popular goals – lowering costs, reducing Medicare and Medicaid fraud and wellness incentives"

Republican presidential hopefuls release Obamacare alternative health care plans | Local News | lancasteronline.com (http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/republican-presidential-hopefuls-release-obamacare-alternative-health-care-plans/article_6e2d9830-45b0-11e5-89e1-57c1c1d9424d.html)

You may not like them...you may, no wait...you WILL make fun of them but stop saying nobody is offering anything.

And save a trip for those of you who are on the 'list" of the talking points from the left....THINK PROGRESS, that staid old bipartisan America first site already is on the attack.

Just stop with the crap about no alternatives.

[Guest]

So you are saying with technology we can deport 11+ million? You are the one that's kidding! Thousands are the same as millions. Right! You are kidding yourself. As far as listening, it might help if you take your hands out of your ears.

Democrats want socialized medicine; therefore, they want the ACA to fail. So, the Republicans are doing the Democrats job for them. Wow, are the Democrats tricky, or maybe the Republicans are just that dumb! You are trying to sell this nonsense to who?

Listen to you! I would only do this to confirm what we shouldn't be doing.

Since you are too lazy to use a simple search such as Google, here is and information sample for you:

Hoover deported about 121,000
Truman deported about 3.4 million/MILLION
Eisenhower deported about 2.1 Million

Those are examples of old time tactics and technology available. Imagine what could be done with today's technology and resources.

So before acting like something can't be done. Why don't you just admit that it can't be done by Democrats. OR, it won't be done, don't want to do it, by Democrats.

We are a country of laws, regardless of what the Clintons and the rest of the liberals think. Liberals like the laws when they can get the Supremes to back their agenda. They hate the laws when it comes to drugs, murder, national security, immigration and taxes.

Like I said before, anarchy is more the liberal style. If they can't have it, then nobody deserves it.

[Guest]

You poor Cons are scared to death of Mrs C - you seem to have a severe case Of Hillary Derangement Syndrome.

But to answer your allegations - and that is exactly what your post is full of - how about you post some facts. I realize facts is not something Cons are overly familiar with. But just try - post some FACTS ! You know, as in PROOF.

Hint, hint - investigations and / or allegations are NOT facts.

I am curious about this poster......

Do you ever read newspapers ? Do you ever read magazines ? Do you watch any news broadcasts at all ?

On what planet are you getting your information.

The WH is very concerned.....she violated, at minimum, the 2009 government regulation, she has lied so much on this, as recently as yesterday. Pundits ON BOTH SIDES are calling her a liar, et. etc. When such staunch Democrats as Chris Matthews and writer Eugene Robinson are saying such things, what the heck do you know that they do not ?

Most Democrats know she is lying, and yet you want her as President.

I am not sure what your sources are to make such statements. If you want proof, just read the news, READ...it will cleanse your soul

[Guest]

I am curious about this poster......

Do you ever read newspapers ? Do you ever read magazines ? Do you watch any news broadcasts at all ?

On what planet are you getting your information.

The WH is very concerned.....she violated, at minimum, the 2009 government regulation, she has lied so much on this, as recently as yesterday. Pundits ON BOTH SIDES are calling her a liar, et. etc. When such staunch Democrats as Chris Matthews and writer Eugene Robinson are saying such things, what the heck do you know that they do not ?

Most Democrats know she is lying, and yet you want her as President.

I am not sure what your sources are to make such statements. If you want proof, just read the news, READ...it will cleanse your soul

Trolls don't utilize facts or news. They just agitate and disrupt conversations.

[Guest]

You poor Cons are scared to death of Mrs C - you seem to have a severe case Of Hillary Derangement Syndrome.

But to answer your allegations - and that is exactly what your post is full of - how about you post some facts. I realize facts is not something Cons are overly familiar with. But just try - post some FACTS ! You know, as in PROOF.

Hint, hint - investigations and / or allegations are NOT facts.

Does Clinton look guilty by wiping her email server? Does a murder suspect look guilty when he wipes the fingerprints from his gun and throws it into the river? Both will assure you of their innocence.

[Guest]

Hillary Clinton has been targeted by partisan investigations since 1992. And she still walks free. End of story (at least for me).

[Guest]

Hillary Clinton has been targeted by partisan investigations since 1992. And she still walks free. End of story (at least for me).

Does this mean she is innocent?

Forget the partisan part because there are several within her own party that are beginning to question what they are being made privy to at their level.

One has to be very careful when either of the Clintons, both lawyers, state they have done nothing illegal.
That statement does not mean they have not done anything wrong.
As an example Bill can say he done nothing wrong as there is no law on the books to state it is illegal to play with the help in the oval office....hence he did nothing illegal.

Ditto goes for ANYTHING the other Clinton claims to have done nothing illegal.

They are trained to use, abuse and hide behind the law whichever makes their case.........GUILTY OR NOT!!!

[Guest]

Hillary Clinton has been targeted by partisan investigations since 1992. And she still walks free. End of story (at least for me).

So, she wipes the gun clean of her fingerprints and that makes her trustworthy to you? Just wondering what kind of voter she attracts.

[Guest]

Hillary Clinton has been targeted by partisan investigations since 1992. And she still walks free. End of story (at least for me).

It's convenient to be a rich lawyer when suspected of a felony.

[Guest]

The current investigations are hardly partisan (FBI and Justice).


Hillary Clinton has been targeted by partisan investigations since 1992. And she still walks free. End of story (at least for me).

[Guest]

It's convenient to be a rich lawyer when suspected of a felony.

Bee-eye-en-gee-oh!

[Guest]

The current investigations are hardly partisan (FBI and Justice).

And even then, there is the smell of Obama influence. Not exactly leaning to the right.

[Guest]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy

As Democrats what are we supposed to do about this? If there is concrete evidence and the FBI or whoever makes charges against her she will probably have to give up on her campaign. That does not mean she is guilty. A jury or plea bargain determines that.

I have not found Donald Trump to be honest about much of anything but so many Republicans praise him for telling it like it is.

[Guest]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy

As Democrats what are we supposed to do about this? If there is concrete evidence and the FBI or whoever makes charges against her she will probably have to give up on her campaign. That does not mean she is guilty. A jury or plea bargain determines that.

I have not found Donald Trump to be honest about much of anything but so many Republicans praise him for telling it like it is.

I was the OP and this thread has strayed and your post is the closest to the answer to may question.

I see your concern and share it.

From my perspective, after hearing all the moral high ground being taken by the Democratic party on EVERY ISSUE, not just a couple, but ALL OF THEM, it seems to me to be the most hypocritical choice that could have been made.

Forget for a minute whether she has charges filed against her. As I said in the OP, I am not accusing her of anything illegal. BUT...

She has lied and that has been documented on this email story.
She did violate a number of regulations of the US government and State Department
She continues to stonewall, and the more we know, the more we know how much she has lied.

She illustrates the worst possible judgement in this story, so bad you need to stretch your mind to encompass it.

This is her history...I am not speaking of any Benghazi investigation, as that will be heard publicly I hope in congress. I am not speaking of anything but what she has shown over the years....a egotist, elitist who absolutely trashes at every chance those she considers to be egotists or elitist. She trashed Wall St while she has been a cozy friend for years and continues.

She has shown in inaction how she is not some women rights leader at all, fact is if you read her history, you will find the opposite.

It just strikes me strange that this party would allow her to be out there representing a party who in their words over the past years stands against everything that she is.

Once the Republican field is narrowed down there can be some serious conversation on those candidates. BUT it seems the Democrats are going to allow this woman to take the mantle next November and that is something I just do not understand.

[Guest]

She will not be the democratic candidate no matter what the die hards are clinging to and saying/hoping.

HER PERSONAL STOCK IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE WORTHLESS THAN IT WAS WHEN THE PARTY DUMPED HER IN 2008.

[Guest]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy

As Democrats what are we supposed to do about this? If there is concrete evidence and the FBI or whoever makes charges against her she will probably have to give up on her campaign. That does not mean she is guilty. A jury or plea bargain determines that.

I have not found Donald Trump to be honest about much of anything but so many Republicans praise him for telling it like it is.

What should you do? Vote for her, of course. It's what you do. She is guilty. It's just a matter of how guilty she is and whether or not she hid it well enough for her to be able to buy her way out. Of course, she has made a lot of enemies in her own party, sooooooo..........