When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

Frank Apisa wrote:

You know what is becoming very evident to me, Hawk?

I am beginning to think that you are unable to think rationally when it comes to Hillary Clinton.

Yup...that is what I think.

I still have not seen you point out one single place where all of her years in the elite, many spent in "public service" jobs , has made my life better.


GIve me one Frank, at least then I will know that her time on this planet has not been a total waste.

You know what is becoming very evident to me, Hawk?

I am beginning to think that you are unable to think rationally when it comes to Hillary Clinton.

Yup...that is what I think.

A former State Department staffer who worked on Hillary Clinton’s email server is planning to invoke his Fifth Amendment right to avoid testifying before Congress about it, according to a memo obtained by ThinkProgress.

Bryan Pagliano, who also worked as the IT director on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign, will not testify in order to avoid unsubstantiated attacks from Republicans, who have been frequently accusing Clinton of criminality for using a personal email server while serving as Secretary of State.

Considering there has so far been no evidence of criminal conduct, the memo asserted, it made sense for Pagliano to avoid risking erroneous coverage of his testimony.

“It is understandable that attorneys for Mr. Pagliano have advised him to assert his constitutional right not to testify given the onslaught of reckless accusations of criminal conduct that continue to be made by many Republicans — including several running for President — without evidence to support their claims,” read the memo, sent on Wednesday to the House committee investigating the 2012 Benghazi attack. The memo, sent from the House Benghazi Committee Democrats, cited a letter received on Monday from Pagliano’s attorneys.

According to the Washington Post, that letter also cited the current FBI investigation into Clinton’s email as a reason for Pagliano to plead the Fifth. The FBI is investigating Clinton’s use of a personal email server while serving as Secretary of State, specifically whether the use of that server jeopardized national security information.

The FBI investigation is not criminal and does not accuse Clinton of wrongdoing. No accusations of criminality have been made from the Justice Department, State Department, or FBI.

Despite this, the political environment has indeed been fraught with questionable attacks. The memo itself pointed to several “reckless accusations” by Republican candidates for president, including Donald Trump (“The fact is, what she’s done is criminal”), Mike Huckabee (“This is about her violation of the law”), and Scott Walker (“A complete and thorough criminal investigation is the only way to get to the bottom of this serious matter”).

Accusations of criminality have not been limited to Republicans. Last month, the New York Times reported that Clinton may be the subject of a criminal investigation by the Department of Justice because of her personal email account, but later had to walk that back. A Times editor said the error was due to “sloppiness on deadline.“

Thank you Hawk. By disagreeing with me and calling me a chump you have confirmed my opinion is the correct one.

She not all that progressive. Pro war, pro prison, pro TPP, pro frack, pro Keystone............

I also think she will move left if elected simply because she does not need to triangulate to the center anymore.

Clinton's first two years were a lot more left that the latter six. I think she's learned from Bill's and Obama's terms that the Republicans aren't going to negotiate regardless of any righty moves.

She authored Bill's Three Strikes, prison pay-off scheme to incarcerate blacks, welfare changes... She's behind Bill's cruel right platform. Believe it

Why is the new law so bad? To begin with, it turned out that after all the noise and heat over the past two years about balancing the budget, the only deep, multi-year budget cuts actually enacted were those in this bill, affecting low-income people.

The magnitude of the impact is stunning. Its dimensions were estimated by the Urban Institute, using the same model that produced the Department of Health and Human Services study a year earlier. To ensure credibility for the study, its authors made optimistic assumptions: two thirds of long-term recipients would find jobs, and all states would maintain their current levels of financial support for the benefit structure. Nonetheless, the study showed, the bill would move 2.6 million people, including 1.1 million children, into poverty. It also predicted some powerful effects not contained in the previous year's analysis, which had been constrained in what it could cover because it had been sponsored by the Administration. The new study showed that a total of 11 million families—10 percent of all American families—would lose income under the bill. This included more than eight million families with children, many of them working families affected by the food-stamp cuts, which would lose an average of about $1,300 per family. Many working families with income a little above what we call the poverty line (right now $12,158 for a family of three) would lose income without being made officially poor, and many families already poor would be made poorer.