What would Democrats do if Republicans were running a candidate under FBI investigation?

[grasswire]

What would our party do?

The logical strategy would be to hope the candidate is nominated, hold fire until that happens, and then turn loose the hounds.

We would do it.

And so will they. So will they. Scorched earth.

And they will try to destroy the Democratic Party in the process of taking her down.

There's only one exit from this mania.

[Lil Missy]

1. Republicans would consider it a qualification.

in Hillary's case, it's a smokescreen that isn't working because Republicans know she'll win if nominated.

[Unicorn]

14. I have to agree with the republicans would consider it a qualification

But, I do not believe she has the votes on the left to win in the GE. I don't see the independents supporting her. To them, she represents the corporate corruption that made them independents instead of Democrats in the first place.

[Lil Missy]

16. you can speak for yourself, but not for all Independents.

There is every indication she will handily beat Trump (or Cruz) in the General. Wishful thinking cannot change that.

[Baobab]

50. why would they NOT use information they have once she's locked in?

thats the question - do you have an answer to it?

[rbrnmw]

2. Posting the same OP essentially, over and over

Isn't going to make it true, Hillary is not under criminal investigation.

[grasswire]

5. you are wrong

but go ahead with your fantasy world. Can't stop this runaway train.

[pdsimdars]

17. ARE you kidding? If you're serious than that unicorn in your sig is appropriate.

[winter is coming]

3. You're right, but convincing Hillary of that might be impossible.

I don't think she'd withdraw unless the superdelegates deserted her. Tweety's bloviating the other night about Biden possibly replacing her if she were indicted makes me think some supers are already wondering if they can have their cake and eat it, too--get rid of Hillary and her baggage without letting Bernie become the nominee.

[northernsouthern]

4. This is what we would do...

We'd take that to the bank!

[Kalidurga]

6. I would laugh my ass off

Because I know that candidate isn't going to win in the GE

[pdsimdars]

18. That's right. Anyone with a brain would know that. . . . but apparently not.

[winter is coming]

7. What would Dems do?

Conclude that sacrificing puppies to Satan was worth it, after all?

[Aerows]

8. Depends on the Dem.

Harry Ried would full force allow things to go to court.

We are at a crossroads, my friend. It appears as though Hillary Clinton and staff have no idea what they are doing, which, pardon me.

They do know what they are doing and it is not for the public good. It's for show that we have a Democracy. What we have are multitude of good enough actors to grab the paychecks.

[grasswire]

9. they do know what they are doing...

...and the possible reward if they get away with it is (they think) worth the risks.

Untold riches. The world's most powerful military to carry out her wars of aggression to reshape the global map, and to enforce authoritarian designs here at home.

[insta8er]

10. And a less then stellar constituency willing to eat what it's being fed.

Stomping for a millionaire who says she will take on the millionaires, meanwhile the plebs should not have great ambitions that would cost her benefactors their lucrative income stream.

[apcalc]

36. what a bunch of baloney

[Aerows]

44. Well that was a talented rejoinder.

New to political forums?

[apcalc]

51. Aren't you the clever one

[Aerows]

52. Pretty much. n/t

[apcalc]

59. It's still garbage ( better word?).

I was being nice.

[Aerows]

60. Did somebody say Garbage?

Bonus:

[apcalc]

61. Very good

[FarPoint]

11. You don't really care do ya?

So, do ya feel lucky?

[Punkingal]

12. One thing is for sure.

There wouldn't be all the talk about how it's nothing, move along, nothing to see here like there is about Hillary's investigation on this site.

[Onlooker]

13. Probably the same thing they'd do if Republicans were running a candidate who promised tax hikes n/t

[Scuba]

15. If killing the Democratic Party is their end-goal, they're doing a great job of it ...

Debbie's record ...

Lost a bunch of House seats, the Senate, 12 Governors and over 900 state seats while Chair of the DNC
Supported Republicans over Democrats in two Florida districts
Conceded entire districts to the Louis Gohmerts and Joni Ernsts of this world by abandoning the 50-state strategy
Supported a Republican retread for the Florida Democratic Party Gubernatorial candidate (he lost to Rick Scott, again)
Undermined President Obama's treaty with Iran
Shilled for the private prison industry
Shilled for the booze industry
Shilled for the payday loan industry
Blamed the voters for her failures

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. It is not killing the party that is their goal

it is transforming it into a RW business friendly party. It is realignment.

[Aerows]

45. This. You nailed it Nadin

that is exactly what it is about. They don't care about politics, principles or voting rights - it is win at any cost.

I refuse to be a part of it.

When did our party become so shallow on ethics?

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. The last time it was a business party was c 1900

[amborin]

19. KNR

[qdouble]

20. You do realize that being under investigation doesn't mean you were guilty of anything right?

The FBI tracked Martin Luther King's every move....he surely was a corrupt individual as well?

[winter is coming]

26. Who'd they give immunity to when they were following MLK? n/t

[qdouble]

64. you're dancing around the fact that being investigated

in no way shape or form means that the public should treat you as guilty or a crook

[winter is coming]

66. So no one, then.

And the general public, unlike jurors, are under no obligation to assume innocence. They can judge the available information as they see fit.

[qdouble]

68. Typically only people who already have a negative opinion of a person will assume their guilt

People who are biased against Hillary thinking she's guilty of everything of the sun is nothing new...but more typical of republicans than so called democrats.

[winter is coming]

72. It has nothing to do with "bias against Hillary". If you'd been here at

the height of the Benghazi flap, you would have seen that the vast majority of DUers, regardless of their opinion of HRC, thought that scandal was total crap.

Benghazi is a nothingburger. The emails aren't, despite repeated attempts to conflate Hillary's email problems with Benghazi.

[qdouble]

73. Bernie skirted discussing it because it's not a criminal issue...

it may have shown a lack of judgement, but that's about it.

[Kalidurga]

67. What the public should do and what it will do are two very different things.

The public should be concerned for the general welfare of all citizens, yet the general public is not. Which is why we are still fighting for things that should be a given. Single sex marriage just happened not to long ago. We need to deal with the reality of how this is going to be received by the public if this investigation drags on and if people start dropping scandal bombs in the middle of the GE should Hillary be the nominee.

[qdouble]

69. well being under investigation shouldn't disqualify anyone from anything...

unless you already a negative opinion of the person. Also, I'm sure most democrats could give two shits about her emails in general, let alone feel that it's worthy of criminal charges.

[Kalidurga]

70. Shoulds and Shouldn'ts don't work on public opinion so good luck getting people to care about that

And good luck to you in extracting your head from the sand. I hope you don't get any in an unfortunate place.

[qdouble]

71. If enough democrats actually cared about the emails, she wouldn't be winning in the primaries...

Bernie Sanders himself doesn't think it's an important issue. Of course, we'll hear about it and host of other things in the GE as Hillary has been in the spotlight for 20-30 years and there's very few if any people who have in the spotlight as long as she has who would enter the primaries spotless with no accusations or blunders that could be ammo for the opposition.

[BernieforPres2016]

56. Hillary shill with 12 posts comparing her email scandal to MLK being wiretapped

Last edited Sun Apr 24, 2016, 04:29 PM - Edit history (1)

Looks like Brock has unleashed the paid hounds on DU.

[qdouble]

65. Nope...

but I'm sure more than a few republicans are posing and Bernie supporters on this forum. Never seen so many supposed democrats attack Hillary more viciously than republicans and using right wing smears.

[Jitter65]

21. I thought the FBI said it wasn't a CRIMINAL investigation? nt

[grasswire]

22. wake up. look around.

Get past the talking points.

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. Here from MSNBC

since you will not believe this from any body else

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/fbi-formally-confirms-its-investigation-hillary-clintons-email-server

By the way, the FBI does not engage in CIVIL investigations.

[pnwmom]

39. You left this part out of your link:

Baker says the FBI has not, however, “publicly acknowledged the specific focus, scope or potential targets of any such proceedings.”

The FBI, while investigating whether they may have been any criminal act involving her server -- which could include hacking, for example -- has never said Hillary is a target. All the haters have jumped to the conclusion that investigating the email server means she is targeted, but the FBI repeatedly has refused to do so.

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. Once again the FBI does not

Do civil investigations.

[frylock]

28. The FBI doesn't do audits.

[pnwmom]

41. The FBI has never said who is the target of the investigation, and one of things we know

that has been investigated is whether there was any hacking.

So all we know is there is some investigation involving her email server, but we don't know she or any other specific person is the target.

[frylock]

46. Okay.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. Test shots have already happened

I was there when that happened.



Yes, it is going to be a huge issue. at this point I am just going to sit back and enjoy the show.

[Trust Buster]

27. What would the Republicans think if a faux Democrat couldn't beat another Democrat under

FBI investigation ? You lost. Deal with it.

[grasswire]

31. ridiculous

Watching too many Saturday morning cartoons?

[griffi94]

29. I'm not a Republican

And I'm not going to waste any of my time worrying about what
the party of bat shit crazy may or may not do since the Republicans have the political equivalent of Mad Cow Disease.

I'm a Democrat and so I voted for the best Democrat in the race. As did a majority of
Democrats and that's why HIllary is cleaning Bernies clock.

There's no way I can care any less about an FBI investigation.

If an indictment happens I'm sure Hillary and her team have a backup plan.
Until then tho speculation about what may or may not happen and what Republicans may
or may not do is just so much balloon juice.

Bernie isn't going to be the nominee.

[grasswire]

30. a backup plan??

I hate to tell you this, but Hillary's future will be decided by the FBI, and her autonomy will cease. She's not in charge of this. She CREATED the mess and is responsible for any damage it does to the Democratic Party, but she has zero control over the FBI.

[griffi94]

32. I expect for a backup plan

Hillary and Bill will get Goldman Sachs to buy them out of any trouble.

The Clintons are way too connected to the 1% to ever go down.
Hahahahahahaha

[grasswire]

33. I hope they try that.

Let's see them try to buy Comey.

: :

[griffi94]

34. They will not only try it. It will work.

Hillary isn't going anywhere but the whitehouse.

[Gothmog]

35. Waiting for a Clinton indictment? Don’t hold your breath

Last edited Mon Apr 25, 2016, 10:44 PM - Edit history (1)

I am amused by the Sanders supporters and republicans praying for an indictment http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/waiting-clinton-indictment-dont-hold-your-breath

The fact remains, however, that such a scenario is pretty far-fetched. Politico’s Josh Gerstein took a closer look today at the legal circumstances, and the reasons Clinton’s foes shouldn’t hold their breaths.

The examination, which included cases spanning the past two decades, found some with parallels to Clinton’s use of a private server for her emails, but – in nearly all instances that were prosecuted – aggravating circumstances that don’t appear to be present in Clinton’s case.

The relatively few cases that drew prosecution almost always involved a deliberate intent to violate classification rules as well as some add-on element: An FBI agent who took home highly sensitive agency records while having an affair with a Chinese agent; a Boeing engineer who brought home 2000 classified documents and whose travel to Israel raised suspicions; a National Security Agency official who removed boxes of classified documents and also lied on a job application form.

Politico’s examination seems to have only been able to find one person who sincerely believes Clinton will face prosecution: former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R), who was a prosecutor and a Justice Department official before his partisan antics made him something of a clownish joke.

Among more objective observers, the idea of Clinton facing an indictment seems, at best, implausible. This is very much in line with a recent American Prospect examination, which reached the same conclusion.

TPM’s Josh Marshall published a related piece in February, after speaking to a variety of law professors and former federal prosecutors about the Clinton story. “To a person,” Josh wrote, they agreed the idea of a Clinton indictment is “very far-fetched.”

[JoePhilly]

37. + 1

[rock]

38. I always laugh

When BSers cannot distinguish: found guilty of, charged with (indicted) , or questioned about. It's all one to them.

[boston bean]

40. Hillary Clinton is NOT under FBI investigation.

[grasswire]

42. ok

::tip-toeing away from the delusional::

[boston bean]

43. you are tip toeing away from yourself?

[frylock]

47. It's a security review.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

53. Why, they would politely refuse to discuss it and express sympathy for those accused.

Well....maybe not.

[Aerows]

62. I swear, the depravity on display this campaign season

borders on a snake handling televangelist.

Do they honestly believe the American public is this damn stupid? It's insulting, to be honest.

Heavens. Crook on the left, kook on the right and we are in the middle of such astonishing bullshit.

[Blue_In_AK]

54. Is that why no one is talking about Trump

and slave labor in Dubai?

[Major Hogwash]

55. We would ignore it by not criticizing them in the mainstream media.

The very same way the mainstream media is not criticizing Hillary now.

Boo-yah!

[Adrahil]

57. It was a politically motivated witch hunt. It still is.

Your efforts have failed.

[grasswire]

58. so outdated talking points. nt

[speaktruthtopower]

63. The question is who controls the hounds, what do they have on her behind the scenes..

and could they rationalize the timing.

A lot of people on both sides of the aisle would dislike an October surprise caused by law enforcement, unless the timing was forced by the candidate's own actions.