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 ?

It's what they do.

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

Originally Posted by 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 ?

Originally Posted by 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!

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.

Originally Posted by 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?

Originally Posted by 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.

Originally Posted by 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.

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

Originally Posted by 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.

Originally Posted by 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 ?

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

Originally Posted by 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.