When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

I think that repeated lying and malfeasance in public office is a bit more real and serious an issue than the content of a spouse's pro forma speech. Oddly they appear to get the same response from you and e beth.

There's no shortage of good material and arguments to use against Trump. Given that fact, your apparent agitation over this matter is a bit odd and suggests some unstated needs. Do you have hidden doubts about Hillary?

Probably because when you actually look at the facts vs the allegations, Clinton has not repeatedly lied or committed malfeasance. Also, the sins Trump commits every day strike directly at the heart of our democracy and our stated principles. Things like treating people fairly regardless of race or religion and respecting the Constitution.

Not in the least. On one side, we have a knowledgeable and experienced candidate with years of exemplary service in the Senate and as Secretary of State. A candidate with a deep and nuanced background in the issues of the day from civil rights to the economy to foreign policy. On the other we have a mediocre businessman with numerous bankruptcies to testify to his business acumen who routinely makes racist statements, publishes false facts to support his ever changing positions and lies so often and he sometimes can't keep up with his own stories from one morning show to another. You worry about Clinton sending emails on an unsecured server? I worry about putting a man in charge of the country who has no grasp of fact vs fiction and has no interest in correcting his ignorance.

I take Chris Christie's lying and malfeasance very seriously.

I find Melania's Obama-appropriation wildly funny.

Not at all the same response.

Good on ya engineer. Many on a2k support your thesis.

A not completely fool-proof but nearly so means of discerning the good guys is to find where Ari Fleischer sits and turn away from that. Recall, for example, how he tried to bully the press and other Bush critics re the war in Iraq implying that such criticism of a "war President" would be an act close to treason. Mind you, the Republicans and right wing press have stood on principle and refused to criticize Obama because he too is a war President.

From Politifact:

Rubio accused Clinton of lying. Where did he get his 'facts?'

Wrong again, george. It's not her anti-Hillary position (Joe holds it too) that makes her responses/posts so commonly poopish (Joe's are not).

You mean the "lesser of two evils" thesis?

Pandering to the oligarchy. It's what faithful servants do.

I continue to appreciate both JoefromChicago and JPB - and, yes, edgarblythe.

People vary, as we all know.

Did she not stand a few feet away from their dead bodies and tell the families that their loved ones died because of an internet video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSooz2wXpes

She starts the BS at the 1 minute mark...

I have met and know and appreciate all of you as friends.

The Clintons = dishonesty/criminality.

That this is held nearly universally on the right is no surprise. It is the fundamental theme pushed up originally from right wing agents in Arkansas through to Bill's run for the WH and now to the present. The consistency is decades in duration. Jeff Toobin's book details that story up to the time of publishing http://amzn.to/29S1yHw A lot of colorful characters in this story like David Bossie (of Citizens United fame) who was forced to resign by Gingrich because he was guilty of deceit in his "investigations" of Clinton. Or there's Lucianne Goldberg (Jonah's mommy) who was a Nixon plant at the LA Times. Even Ann Coulter plays a bit part (on the night she found out about the blue dress, she happened to be in bed with the son of the founder of Penthouse magazine).

Conservatives who attend to conservative media (thus most of them) have been swimming in this swamp for decades. To them, this is all as obvious and true as American exceptionalism or that Jesus looked like he was born in Belgium. We're not going to change the minds of many about all this.

The brighter ones (like Kagan) have already publicly stated that their vote will be going to Clinton this cycle. But boy are they rare.

The video did have a role in the Benghazi attacks, I know that is an inconvenient fact which destroys the accepted attack points against Hillary/the Obama administration, nevertheless it is true.

FACT: Intelligence Community, The Suspected Attackers, And Eyewitnesses All Linked The Inflammatory Anti-Islam Video To The Attacks

We do vary. How nice that we do. If we were all alike, for example if all women looked just like Kim Kardashian, American farmers would be even harder pressed to make a living because the increased cost in materials needed for tractor seats of that size.

It's held "universally" because it's true. Comey's 12 minute statement laid out a stunning and total disputation of all of her lies about her e-mail.

Assuming he could prove what he stated, she broke the law.

The statute doesn't require intent, gross negligence (aka extreme carelessness) is enough.

I think he decided that he presided over a significant moment in history and allowed that to influence his decision. It should have of course because that's not in his job description. More than one very successful federal prosecutor said they would have been happy to take the case, so the nonsense about no prosecutor being will to pursue a criminal charge was just that.

It certainly possible that a jury might have refused to convict her absence evididence of intent, but that was by no means a sure thing. If they did, however, Comey didn't want to be the guy who killed her presidential chances and deprive almost half of the nation the candidate of their choice...all for naught.

Kagan hates Trump. He would vote for Fidel Castro.

It's laughable that you rely on anything from the propaganda machine Media Matters.

All, I needed to read was "some intelligence sources suggest" Hardly a statement of fact.

But you can always be relied upon to promote the latest from the Dem spin machine.

And even if this is the case, Clinton e-mailed her daughter and the Egyptian foreign minister telling them it was a coordinated terrorist attack. So is she an idiot?

Anyone who knows any of the details of this attack knows it couldn't possibly have been a spontaneous reaction by a mob to a video.

Re the clear plagiarism in Mrs Trump's speech (it's not 'similarities')...

This isn't a big crime, in her case. If she was an academic or a person in media, then it almost surely would be. If she cribbed the passages and imagined no one would notice, then she's just not very bright. And a bit of a sneaky liar. If the quotes were put in by a speech-writer, then that dude is a jerk of magnitude and it would be a good thing if everyone discovered who he is.

The big fat problem lies with the Trump campaign's incredible incompetence (and this is just one small piece of that story) and the attempts by the campaign to forward ridicule-worthy excuses and lies in response.

I suppose I ought to say "thank you" here.

We can bet our lives she didn't write her speech and I would bet my house the guy who did has been fired.

Would you like to take a stab at defining, as fully and precisely as you can, what differentiates "propaganda" from public relations? As you likely know, the term "propaganda" held a different meaning prior to WW2 but after that war and Goebbels, it gained the connotations we now associate with it.