2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary has been Branded: "...the ongoing FBI investigation..."
It's a line in every article about her. Those with legal experience suspect the Grand Jury has already been convened (one of her IT guys got immunity in March and the hacker just made an "in exchange for testimony" deal), and it's been leaked that others are being targeted, too.
Every time she says "no, the FBI hasn't contacted me" I roll my eyes. It's disingenuous because they are talking to her lawyer, who is also in danger of being in his own world of hurt because she gave him an electronic copy of all of the emails, and at least 22 of them were Super Bad -- hopefully he didn't leave the stick laying around the office.
Plus, why not pick up a phone, and schedule the interview yourself? Why *let* it drag on?
And now that we know that the "second guy who helped with the server" has already racked up hundreds of thousands in legal fees (being paid by the Clintons at the moment), plus her staff, and Blumethal looked like he has already struck a deal to me, the Washington chatter is being reflected on the cable news shows. They have all turned on her simultaneously. Not even a poorly faked anti-gay smear on Bernie was able to deflect this one -- everyone is now bracing to explain to the public why the candidate they've been propping up might be facing criminal charges.
I think Comey is going to make his bones on this case by cleaning up some serious corruption. I'm good with that.
Meanwhile, the ongoing FBI investigation continues....
saltpoint
(50,986 posts)Findings but what started out as something of a non-issue is becoming increasingly problematic.
You're supposed to follow the rules and guidelines of your office as a public official. You're not supposed to violate the provisions of those guidelines when they're based on law. And you're not supposed to lie about it.
Not that she gives a good goddam, but if Hillary Clinton asks me, I'll tell her to hold a press conference and tell the truth. The voters can take it from there.
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)saltpoint
(50,986 posts)pervasive problems wth Hillary Clinton as a candidate, namely that she is held to be untrustworthy by a significant percentage of the electorate.
IMO that's not her only problem. But it's high on the list of difficulties she faces -- even before this email problem. The baggage is getting heavier and heavier.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)...and that is an unprecedented and historic low in America.
saltpoint
(50,986 posts)behind most of the news... except the gorilla and the 4-yr old in Cincinnati.
Yes -- it would be way too low for confidence. She needs to sit down with her staff, bring in a couple ool-browed observers from outside, and hold a press conference.
She could even get a dog if she wanted. It worked for Nixon. Sort of.
tex-wyo-dem
(3,190 posts)THIS is my main problem with ever supporting Hillary...and it overrides everything else...I don't trust her, at all.
As they say: Trust takes years to build, seconds to break, and forever to repair.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)CorporatistNation
(2,546 posts)These reporters have a reputation to protect and are NOT going to carry any more water for someone who is much more than obfuscating in her answers to their DIRECT questions on network TV!
MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...
Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...
Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"
Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"
Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!
saltpoint
(50,986 posts)a rib-rattling gale.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)Or is this your opinion?
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts).
sarcasm thingy here for those w/o the gene
.
Darb
(2,807 posts)You know, in about 10 days you won't be able to peddle this shit any more right? Jussayin.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)seems like a reasonable paraphrase, especially when people who know what they are talking about (like President Obama) keep saying "endangering national security". (To be fair, his exact quote was that she didn't do it INTENTIONALLY.)
This article is a little bit out of date, but explains things nicely:
ON EDIT: Forgot Link - sorry! https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/02/04/how-did-top-secret-emails-end-up-on-hillary-clintons-server/
The various intelligence agencies since have been arguing about what should be disclosed, with at least seven email chains (22 separate emails) and possibly more labeled as unfit for any public disclosure. Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah), a member of the House Intelligence Committee who says he has reviewed the emails, told Fox News on Feb. 3 that the emails do reveal classified methods, they do reveal classified sources, and they do reveal human assets. Other sources who have viewed the emails do not describe the emails as strongly, though one official said Clintons aides might have put their security clearances at risk.
Hopefully the FBI will finish their investigation soon -- how embarrassing to have to stop supporting a candidate because of violating Federal law when she altered and deleted government records!
18 U.S.C. § 2071(b)(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term office does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.
The only shit that has been peddled is that this was allowed, and the State Department smacked that down hard this week. Now we wait for the Intelligence Community IG report to come out -- but the preview has already been released:https://oig.state.gov/system/files/statement_of_the_icig_and_oig_regarding_review_of_clintons_emails_july_24_2015.pdfThe IC IG (Intelligence Community Inspector General) found four emails containing classified IC-derived information in a limited sample of 40 emails of the 30,000 emails provided by former Secretary Clinton. The four emails, which have not been released through the State FOIA process, did not contain classification markings and/or dissemination controls. These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Department; rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today. This classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.
Of course we now know that over 2,000 classified emails were found on her system, with over a hundred written by her personally and the above mentioned 22 "Super Bad" ones. (And that doesn't include the ones they recovered that she deleted!)
You can count the days until a message board becomes a Hillary-is-Awesome echo chamber, but with these issues, Trump-the-Asshole is a definite danger.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)If they come out after Hillary " has the votes". Because it will be big news that will affect the campaign. Will the findings be able to even be reported? In LBN or the Sanders group?
Sticking one's head in the sand @ this is a monumental mistake. There's been some Hillary supporters who have begun to understand the unease and why this matters. Will they be forbidden from discussing this?
Trump and the Republicans are going to hammer this. Having accurate facts to counter this will be critical but in the current interpretation of "supporting" Hillary during the campaign, this issue appears to be officially treated as a giant CT because Hillary says so.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)But you'd think you'd like to see it coming.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Partisans...
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)And then they would get Blumenthal to flip on the Clintons?
leveymg
(36,418 posts)As the person who received and forwarded to Hillary the TS-SAP information gathered by Tyler's CIA associates, he can be prosecuted under the felony provisions of Sec. 793 sections (c) and (e), and the associated conspiracy charge, 793(g). For her part in reading this obviously classified info and failing to report its unauthorized possession and transmission, Hillary Clinton may be prosecuted under the felony provision of 793(f)(2).
Note that Hillary may not declassify any information that originates with another agency.
Here are the above-referenced parts of the statute:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
(c) Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, receives or obtains or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain from any person, or from any source whatever, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note, of anything connected with the national defense, knowing or having reason to believe, at the time he receives or obtains, or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain it, that it has been or will be obtained, taken, made, or disposed of by any person contrary to the provisions of this chapter; or
(d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
(g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)monica, bill,....and all the other nonsense drivel...
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)Other than the word, and that it is a place in Libya?
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Along with catchphrases and one-liners, that's what most of the bots know about her actions as Secretary of State.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)prior to them being sent elsewhere for torture, I suddenly was okay with all of the "investigations".
I still don't know if that was going on, but one day I ended up somewhere on the internet where they were saying Benghazi happened because the "bad guys" were rescuing prisoners from being sent for torture. I have no idea if it's true. Part of me doesn't want to know. Part of me believes i already do.
Sigh.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)I count 14 large storage units to the upper-right of the CIA Annex. Given that one of the CIA contractors killed was involved in gathering MANPADs (shoulder-fired anti aircraft missiles), and that joint CIA-DOS operation was widely known inside Libya, it is more than likely that was what the attackers were after. We also learned shortly after the attack a Libyan freighter loaded with MANPADs and anti-tank weapons set sail from a nearby port in Libya for Turkey, where these weapons were fought over by various Syrian rebel groups. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/9/28/1137620/-Times-of-London-Shipload-of-Looted-Missiles-From-Libya-Arrives-in-Turkey, citing, http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/middleeast/article3537770.ece
hedda_foil
(16,375 posts)I don't think I'm alone in having missed these critical backgrounders at the time, so I'm particularly grateful that you redirected us to them now. They really are essential to understanding what the hell was going on and how the state department was involved.
Although it's probably not relevant to the election campaign going on at the same time, I'm curious about the role played by Romney middle east advisor and FOX News contributor, Walid Phares. He's mentioned in one of the pieces you posted at dKos, along with now-former congresswoman Myrick ( R. NC) and Jamie Smith, a former director of Blackwater and then-current head of what sounds like a Blackwater shell company.
http://www.salon.com/2011/10/07/romneys_scary_middle_east_advisor/
The reference to Phares grabbed my attention because on the night of the Benghazi attack, a seemingly well-briefed, and curiously disheveled Romney raced to the nearest camera to accuse Obama (and tangentially Hillary's State Department) of mishandling the attacks there and in Egypt.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/12/mitt-romney-obama-libya_n_1877406.html
I'm wondering if there was supposed to have been at least an element of intended October Surprise in the odd happenings around September 11, 2012 ... starting with the "movie" whose only purpose seems to have been to set off anti-American riots.
Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #28)
Post removed
TwilightZone
(25,479 posts)greymattermom
(5,754 posts)Trump University
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)I am not minimizing it, but FBI does criminal investigation, with a special focus on national security and public corruption.
These are not the types of flesh wounds we want our public officials to be experiencing.
emulatorloo
(44,182 posts)"Not even a poorly faked anti-gay smear on Bernie was able to deflect this one -- everyone is now bracing to explain to the public why the candidate they've been propping up might be facing criminal charges."
Bernie Sanders Did Not Play DMX's 'Where the Hood At'; Video Creator Speaks on 'Social Experiment'
http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/7386067/bernie-sanders-dmx-where-the-hood-at-video-fake
"Everyone seems to be very easily fooled by anything they see on the Internet. On one end we have a majority of the Twitter community going crazy and some going as far as even saying they're 'switching allegiances' and 'I was never going to vote but this just changed my mind' to some people in the LGBT community saying they knew all along that Bernie Sanders is a 'gay basher' and to be honest, if I wanted that to be the message the song would have started completely different. Instead, what we hear is 'Where the hood at?' At the end of it all, I wanted to show the world that politics are not something to fool around with and to prove it, I faked this video," Acuna said.
He continued: "Bernie has always made it a point that the youth needs to get more involved in the political process, and as funny as it may be that DMXs 'Where the Hood At?' might have swayed them into doing so, it's still very disappointing at the same time. I've observed each candidate very closely, and regardless of what people may think of Bernie Sanders and their stance politically, there's no denying he is a man of the people, and there is more than enough evidence to prove that. With all that being said, I hope everyone realizes that we still live in the real world, not the Internet."
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)is that they've created an automatic sceptiscm about anything "bad" about Bernie that seems nonsensical.
A 74 year old man loving anti-gay rap music?
Pope-Gate was hilarious, Nevada Chair Riot was infuriating (because videos of people sitting and yelling - argh!), but frankly, they really blew it with "he's a racist who faked photos of supporting civil rights".
emulatorloo
(44,182 posts)Mr. Acuna just sounds like a naive guy who took a couple social science courses and got carried away. He seems to think he was doing something good by "proving" Twitter isn't the real world. But in the end turned out to be dumb and misguided.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)The Clintons personally? The Campaign? BCCI, er, The Foundation?
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)He was formerly an aid to Bill, has no security clearance, and was the guy who worked at the Clinton's house.
From the Timeline http://thompsontimeline.com/Latest_Timeline_Entries#/editor/0
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)vintx
(1,748 posts)Imagine Trump getting her to tapdance around the truth for a while before slamming her with some stupid bullshit thing she could have avoided reflecting on her so badly if SHE'D JUST BEEN HONEST.
I mean, people just loooooove hair-splitting, dishonest lawyers, right? Right?
MaeScott
(878 posts)asuhornets
(2,405 posts)She has 3 millions votes more than Sanders...If anyone is being branded it is Sanders...Sanders is someone who is very hard to get along with and now millions of people see it every time he opens his mouth. Yea this email nonsense will drag on unfortunately. But when this primary is over, Clinton will be the winner, and Sanders will go back to Vermont as an Independent. Sanders said once we get to know him we will like and vote for him. That has not happen. I wonder why? Have you ever asked yourself: Why?
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)have ANYTHING to do with Sanders.
The writing is on the wall for her; she's toast. She should have withdrawn when the FBI recovered her deleted emails last October. She could have played kingmaker.
She didn't.
Whatever happens in the Democratic nomination process is a separate issue. I expect Bernie to get it, but he is anti-establishment, so maybe Biden will be put in (but I doubt it).
Americans will not willingly vote for liars who betray America either via incompetence or corruption. Even the fear of Trump ending the world is not going to change that; faced with destroying the Democratic brand as "criminal enablers" for a generation, odds are good she will not be the nominee.
Call me Cassandra, and give my opinion all the weight you think it deserves. I am not a pundit, I don't work in Washington, and I am only a middle class mom with a professional IT background whose current hobby is lowering infant mortality and helping special needs children.
I could be wrong.
But I'm not.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)Your only hope for a Sanders Administration is this so-called indictment of Hillary Clinton. Newsflash: Millions more have already voted for her. What happened to Sanders revolution? His campaign access Hillary's database and he sues the DNC! His reaction to certain situations not favorable to him is: self-righteousness on his part. He's done...
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)and proved that both sides could access the other side's data. I work in IT, so I find the explanation credible, and the panicked response from DWS to be pure damage control (which they lost).
But your candidate is being investigated by the FBI, and has already been proven by three Inspector Generals to be lying and spinning and lying some more.
I like Bernie. Hillary is going to be too busy dealing with her legal problems to be campaigning much more.
Hey, did you read where she's probably going to be put under oath in the first two civil lawsuits about FOIA? Only 36 more after that!
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)Clinton gave Sanders a pass on the database access. If reverse, we would still be hearing about it on DU this very day. You make excuses for Sanders--which does not help him at all. Campaigning will be over June 7th-period. Sanders has insulted AIDS activists, lifelong Democrats, etc. What a political revolution..
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)a lack of understanding what the true battle is about. It's part of the bubble mentality, and that's okay for now. Sanders will be fighting all the way through the convention; he's an honest guy, so I believe him.
Have a nice day, and thank you for kicking the thread!
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)A "rigged" system that he lost fair and square. You bought into the notion that Sanders is perfect in every way-he is not. He blames the Democratic Party for his mistakes and DWS. He should have told his supporters which states had open and closed primaries. Sanders wants to get rid of closed primaries because they do not benefit him--you do understand people can see through that. Later
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)asuhornets
(2,405 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)This is not about Sanders...your party could nominate the man on the moon..I think he is over 35, but I don't think natural born citizen... for all I care, after an entrail reading and the sacrifice of goats and sheep. This is how much I don't care who your fucking party nominates...but this is a historic mistake...not exaggerating when I compare it to Weimar level ok. This email issue is not going away, and your party is risking, seriously toying, with indirectly electing a fascist.
You think this is going away, go ahead, close DU, continue going down into that bunker mentality (actually a marker of a real scandal). But this is not going away. Historians will not be kind. Those of us who tried to warn you, will hold you personally responsible ...for the record, I went from this is nothing to this is damn serious after reading four of those 22 emails. I knew it was damn serious at that moment. None of you has even done that. Those four were born classified, tne moment somebody typed them up. You partisans cannot get that through your damn skulls.
The difference between you and me is that I am not a damn partisan.
So yes, hide yourself from this ongoing scandal. And it has nada to do with Sanders. He could concede and suspend tonight, in the middle of the coliseum, naked (assures a viewing public,) this email issue is not going away. It will continue to roll on. Alphabet soup agencies do not work on your fucking political calendar
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)You made a grand mistake of thinking Sanders (I) was going to change the Dem Party he just joined over night.. Not happening. Just like that indictment won't be happening. You & others can talk about it until u are green in the face. Sanders has shown his tru colors through out this campaign and it ain't pretty. As far as this fucking political calendar you speak of---the date is Jun 4th, yea I moved it up 3 days because-Puerto Rico.
There is no smear campaign that Hillary Clinton can not handle. Where's Jane Sanders by the way--when the media started talking about Burlington College and that loan---she went into hiding.
Face it people over 30 are not buying what Sanders is selling. It just doesn't sound right.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It could be O'malley. It could be the man on the moon. The agencies are on their calendar. And you guys got lucky. Sanders decided not to touch this. You think Trunp will not touch this? I cannot wait for your hard core bunker mentality hyper partisans to go into the fetal pisition. Trump will not be kind.
It will be damned entertaining. There is a shitstorm coming..and it was herself shooting her foot. This is an own goal, an unforced error. Choose whatever fucking metaphor you want.
Oh and who I pretend to vote for is truly dependent on who counts the votes. That fear I had after 2000, and your party does not care either, has been utterly confirmed. Go ahead, make that historic mistake historians won't be kind.
Jackilope
(819 posts)Nope. You and the DNC have put all your eggs in the HRC basket. The email investigation, her judgement, the huge distrust of HRC have so many holes in the basket, she will lose in the general.
She is so incredibly weak and flawed she cannot clinch the election.
This is not going away.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)It will not change the outcome of the Demo. Prim., and thanks for being a loyal Democrat.
Jackilope
(819 posts)Seriously, the accusing someone of being a republican mantra is hollow and meaningless. It doesn't make HRC any more honest or less flawed.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)she is going to make an excellent president.
Jackilope
(819 posts)Just ignore those angry people getting tired of corruption. Calling them "republicans" is far better than demanding or desiring a candidate that won't sell you out.
Darb
(2,807 posts)This investigation will clear her and it will go away and you will have to eat big flocks of crow.
Jarqui
(10,130 posts)US history with 18 million more votes than McGovern (roughly closer to 30 million with today's population)
Sometimes the popular vote margin doesn't mean as much as people think - particularly when Hillary's margin ignores the larger populations represented by caucuses.
This was supposed to be a coronation cakewalk for Hillary. Here we are in June and it's looking like she won't be able to put it away until the convention - if she's not indicted.
Sanders started out a year ago about 50-60 pts behind. His trajectory has been upward since the start. He's running neck and neck with her. Have you ever asked yourself why?
And she's allowed Trump to close the gap. Why is that? How come she can't beat Trump handily like Sanders?
But we agree on one thing: this email thing is not going away. Lots more to come on that and not much of it good for her poll numbers.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)"Hillary's margin ignores the larger populations represented by caucuses." See the Washington state primary..yes, I know it was non-binding. But Hillary's win speaks volume. She also won the Nebraska primary after Sanders won the caucus.
Your words: "coronation cakewalk for Hillary" the only people who have said this was Sanders and his supporters---no one else.
Sanders has done well, but his best was not good enough---he is losing.
The email nonsense does not have to go away--many see it for what it is---nonsense, right-wing smear and Hillary very familiar with that--have you seen her sweat about this? The answer is NO.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)They outsmarted themselves while becoming fabulously wealthy.
Herman4747
(1,825 posts)...what's more, Independents like Bernie more than they like Hillary, she with the 55% disapproval rating.
And -- get this -- Independents will vote in November.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)Trump or Clinton?
Herman4747
(1,825 posts)Independents tend not to prefer liars, so the key question for them is "Who is the worst liar, Trump or Hillary?"
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)They may vote 3rd party.
saltpoint
(50,986 posts)'ongoing.'
Connect that dot with 'investigation' and then, on to 'by the FBI.'
Now go back to 'ongoing.'
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)unless she's not in the race. Otherwise Drumpf wins.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)the front. Now it appears we are going to have a deeply flawed candidate and very possibly a Pres Trump.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)creatures like the Koch Bros do.
What could go wrong?
B Calm
(28,762 posts)Arneoker
(375 posts)So that Bernie could have won more contests?
Sure Hillary has weaknesses. But you're fooling yourself if you think Bernie has none:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/04/polls_say_bernie_is_more_electable_than_hillary_don_t_believe_them.html
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/05/bernie_sanders_electability_argument_is_still_a_myth.html
B Calm
(28,762 posts)Around 50% of voters no longer feel their party represents them anymore. Many are now registered as independent. Along comes a candidate that inspires them and the door is slammed in their face. Seems to me as tax payers and they are paying for the primary, they should have every damn right in the world to vote, especially if you want them to vote in the GE for your party's candidate! If you were a true democrat, you'd open the doors and grow the party.
WhiteTara
(29,722 posts)nolabels
(13,133 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)Now, her lawyer does have a clearance and a SECRET-rated safe where he kept the stick. So he's probably not in too much trouble.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)"Nothing to See There....Just Move Along."
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Unfortunately, his notion of polite society is better known for cowboy boots, armbands, crushed beer cans, and white sheets.
Response to IdaBriggs (Original post)
Autumn Colors This message was self-deleted by its author.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Ask tomorrow, we might see that tomorrow
Uncle Joe
(58,417 posts)Thanks for the thread, IdaBriggs.