When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

Thank you. I'm sorry to be part of it. Hope it stops soon.

I think we all have that problem, None of us is entirely immune to it.

Lash is indeed a fierce supporter of ole Bernie, and I suspect that helps us understand the appeal he has to many.

Meanwhile it appears Hillary is continuing to self destruct. She's Clinton with all the sleaze and self aggandizement, but without the warmth and charm. Her best asset is the continuing lack of central focus among Republicans. I remain hopeful the Republican contest will bring the best to the surface before long.

You have any prediction or preference about who will rise to the top of the GOP contest?

Very hard to make a reliable prediction. This has been a year that has challenged my intuition in several areas. I'm not supportive of Paul, Huckabee, Cruz or Trump. However I would Happily support Carly Fiorina, Ben Carson, John Kasich, or Marco Rubio in any pairing or combination.

Kasich looks like he may get props from some of the more liberal-minded Republicans, as does Fiorina.

I have memories of Carson saying some troubling (to me) things, and I remember Rubio coming on the scene a few years ago (I think as a spokesman for the GOP after a State of the Union address, maybe?)

Anyway, I was really curious earlier, so thanks for answering. Always like to know which way people are leaning. People I admire.

I hope you'll let me know as your selection narrows.

I remember a guy Huntsman - years ago. A Republican I was hopeful for.

I'll read up on the ones you named. I only know a smattering of trivia about them.

Which lies would that be. The statement I made about not believing that an ultra conservative who has attacked any liberal for years suddenly sees the light and becomes a liberal. I am very interested to see for whom you vote if Hillery is the nominee as is likely at this time. Yes bob, i know he is gaining in the east but can he keep it up in the middle states and in the west? You Lash HATE Hillery and have gone "psycho" over Bearnie because you see this as the best way to defeat Hillery. I would be willing to bet if Hillery is the nominee you will vote for Trump. I believe that if Bernie is nominated tou will go back to your basic beliefs and vote for Trump. Now crank up your conservative self and post a bunch of crappy lies and distortions about me. Like I told you before lies dont bother me.

Just another couple of acts of gross political incompetence from Hillary Clinton. THe elite really need to be made to answer why they let such a proven loser run unopposed. She is responsible for the skill of her staff, and she is responsible for not being tuned into her audience enough to be able to see that she needed to add lib a tiny section of her stump speech. She says the same speech over and over again, and she cant figure out that this line sometimes needs to be removed? And pledges to vote for her are so 7th grade.

I was just reading this! Can Hillary use those to make bogus votes later?

The big problem here is that we all know that Hillary is smart, that she just did not care enough about a speech to the little people to do it right. If she was talking to someone who might give her PAC a big check or to a dozen elite she would have cared enough. This is why her packagers will fail, we know her too well to suspend disbelief long enough to believe the message she is selling. We know that she does not like hanging out with the little people anymore than she needs to, which is only when she needs our votes. After that forget about it.

Susan Sarandon goes to Burning Man most years, and actually talks to little people throughout the day, because she likes it! Nobody can imagine Hillary doing that.

Ahhh...

...more agreement between Lash and Hawk.

These really is getting good!

I can't wait to read these threads these mornings!

I can see you drooling on your keyboard now. You don't even try to defend your dirty amoral candidate anymore because she's indefensible. So you slither around trying to shut down discussion of her by personal attack against people who criticize her. Coward. You've made yourself an icon here for me of the slimiest underbelly of what's wrong with this country. People like you who know a politician reeks of corruption and you ignore the facts about her and try your schoolyard harassment to stop others from talking about it. Gee. That seems to have the opposite effect...

I don't agree with about half of what hawk says, and he'd likely say the same about me. I Like him a hell of a lot more than I do you- and I respect him as a human being more than I do you.

Hillary Clinton forced attendees to sign a loyalty pledge before they could enter a venue. Stalinesque. That's your candidate? You two fit nicely.

Hillary totally misses the mark with millennials - and adds insult to lameness by forcing them to sign "loyalty oaths" before she'll let them enter. I'm very concerned this is a ploy to use these oaths to cheat people out of their votes later. The clintonmachine ratchets up the slime.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2015/09/07/hillary-totally-fails-to-connect-with-millennials-in-ohio-forces-attendees-to-sign-loyalty-pledge-n2048972

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2015/09/07/hillary-clintons-death-spiral-in-the-polls/

This was the sure thing??!!

I found myself agreeing with Hawkeye and thumbing him up on a couple of other threads. I feel so ....... unclean.

Hillary And The Democrats' Dilemma
by Steve Denning
Forbes
9/8/15

....large snip....

As in the case of General Petraeus, who was found guilty of mishandling classified information merely by leaving notebooks in an unlocked drawer in his house, Clinton clearly mishandled classified information by keeping emails containing classified information in a private server, without appropriate security arrangements to protect the information, and to which people without proper security clearance had access.

Regardless of what other information will be revealed, Clinton is already at risk of prosecution for mishandling classified information. As in the case of Petraeus, no proof is needed that Clinton personally or knowingly revealed classified information to anyone, although that of course would be an aggravating circumstance. All the government would need to show in a prosecution is that Clinton mishandled classified information, because she knew that the information in the private server was classified and should have known that the security arrangements were inadequate.

.....snip....Democrats now face a dilemma. With Hillary Clinton as the presumptive Presidential nominee, she is at risk of being indicted for the crime of mishandling classified information any time between now and the election in November 2016.

If such an indictment were to occur in the near future, Democrats could presumably re-group and find an electable replacement, such as Joe Biden.

If on the other hand, the indictment were to occur at a later period, say, in the middle of 2016, after Clinton had effectively secured the Democratic nomination, the indictment would threaten, if not doom, the Democratic Party’s chance of winning the election, even if the Republican candidate were to be flawed.

The maddening thing for Democrats is that there can be no clarity on the matter. The threat of a prosecution will be ever present, no matter what any official says, since no one knows which government agency might emerge from the shadows at any time with a duly authorized prosecution....

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2015/09/08/hillary-and-the-democrats-dilemma/


This is indeed a dilemma. From The Daily Beast a while back~

....snip....Although it will be months before intelligence agencies have reviewed all Clinton emails, counterintelligence officials expect that the true number of classified emails on Hillary’s servers is at least many hundreds and perhaps thousands, based on the samplings seen to date.

Excuses that most of the classified emails examined to date are considered Confidential, which is the lowest level, cut no ice with many insiders. Although the compromise of information at that level is less damaging than the loss of Secret—or worse Top Secret—information, it is still a crime that’s taken seriously by counterintelligence professionals. Most of the classified emails that Hillary and her staff seem to have compromised dealt with diplomatic discussions, which is a grave indiscretion as far as diplomats worldwide are concerned.

“Of course they knew what they were doing, it’s a clear as day from the emails,” opined one senior official who is close to the investigation. “I’m a Democrat and this makes me sick. They were fully aware of what they were up to, and the Bureau knows it.” That Hillary and her staff at Foggy Bottom were wittingly involved in a scheme to place classified information into ostensibly unclassified emails to reside on Clinton’s personal, private server is the belief of every investigator and counterintelligence official I’ve spoken with recently, and all were at pains to maintain that this misconduct was felonious.

It’s clear that many people inside the State Department had to be aware, at least to some degree, of what Clinton and her inner staff were engaged in. How far that knowledge went is a key question that the FBI is examining....

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/02/will-hillary-clinton-s-emails-burn-the-white-house.html


We just have to hope this all is let go, an unfortunate mistake to learn from and not repeat. What a mess...

*******************


eta - From today's Daily Beast~

A new review revealed that two emails Hillary Clinton received on her private account while at the State Department were determined by the intelligence agencies’ inspector general to contain highly sensitive information, senior intelligence officials told The New York Times on Monday. The Central Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency review concluded that the emails were “top secret,” which is the highest government intelligence classification, when they were sent to the then-secretary of state in 2009 and 2011.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2015/09/08/review-classified-info-in-hil-s-email.html


Its now a major dilemma.

Clinton says no email apology: 'What I did was allowed'
Source: AP

By CATHERINE LUCEY

CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton says she does not need to apologize for using a private email account and server while at the State Department because, "what I did was allowed."

Clinton spoke to The Associated Press during a Labor Day campaign swing through Iowa.

The front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination says the lingering questions about her use of email while serving as President Barack Obama's first secretary of state have not damaged her campaign for president.

She says, "It's a distraction, certainly. But it hasn't in any way affected the plan for our campaign, the efforts we're making to organize here in Iowa and elsewhere in the country."

Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/14ed951e367e408eab9a1a1a60a976e1/clinton-says-no-email-apology-what-i-did-was-allowed

Frank,

You appear to be dealing badly with the accumulating news about Hillary's collapsing campaign. It's not over for her, but she has certainly seen serious and still accumulating setbacks. That the views of Hawkeye and Lash coincide on a particular point is no more significant than if (say) yours or anyone else's do. There's no conspiracy indicated.

I'm more worried about the DNC et al (seems calcified to me so far) and their power, plus the up-until-now apparent media favoritism, than I am about Hillary herself, whom I'm pretty long time sick of.

Makes me concerned about the media as such though. Reading actual newspapers is rather out of style, but their websites still are important. But so are blogs and political websites. Do DNC types read all that? Dunno.

You've got some personal problems on display there, Lash.

Get a grip.

We disagree on our choice of who should be the Dem presidential candidate.

No big deal...no need to get as knotted up and nasty as you are getting.

Well, she is right, it was allowed to use a private email server in the State Department. They may want to reconsider now and perhaps that will be the result of all this. The email I find troublesome is the one concerning North Korea. That one should have not been passed through an email at all and perhaps some others of which intel is worried about. Moreover, I thought she said not long ago that perhaps it wasn't a good idea or something like that?

I know you are for Bernie, but I am hoping Biden will actually get in the race and endorsements and people who are on the Hillary side, switch to Biden. Then I am hoping once he is nominated for the democratic ticket, he chooses Warren as a running mate.