Sanders is negative about her? She's been in national politics for twenty years. He's the most courteous opponent she's ever had.
Meanwhile, a writer at the Huffington Post says that she should concede the contest.
Yes, federal prosecutors will interview Hillary Clinton, in addition to her close associates.
At what point will establishment Democrats admit this fiasco is horrible for a general election?
When federal prosecutors are interviewing your candidate for president, even Donald Trump has a good chance at the White House.
Furthermore, former U.S. attorney general Michael Mukasey believes A Criminal Charge is Justified. Former Obama intelligence official Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn says that “If it were me, I would have been out the door and probably in jail.” Former NSA director Michael Hayden called Clinton’s email setup “stupid and dangerous.” Even Edward Snowden, the antithesis of America’s intelligence community in many ways, says it’s “ridiculous” to think Clinton’s emails were secure.
It’s time for Democrats to deal with reality, not just allegiance to a political icon, and rally around the only candidate not linked to an FBI investigation...
Also, nothing in the Rolling Stone piece endorsing Clinton mentions the ongoing FBI investigation. The Christian Science Monitor clearly states the nature of the FBI’s investigation, stating “The FBI is indeed conducting a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information on the private email server Clinton used for State Department communications.”
Yes, Hillary supporters, “The FBI is indeed conducting a criminal investigation.”
3 comments:
"It's time for Democrats to deal with reality..." Hehehehe.
Sometimes you really crack me up. If reality doesn't fit the narrative, then reality must be changed. It has worked for years. Cynics will claim that it can't last forever, but it certainly can. A far worse denial of reality persisted in Russia for 70 years. Progressivism can go on for decades more. I don't predict that it will, merely that it could.
Does this seem to be their motto? "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." (George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903) "Maxims for Revolutionists")
If so, apparently sticking fingers in your ears and chanting "La la la!" is adapting the world to yourself.
And, of course, being unreasonable is seen a great virtue, perhaps the highest one.
I draw a sharp distinction between adapting the world to myself (shorthand for most of civilization) versus pretending the facts already are as I would prefer them to be (not a recipe for progress).
Post a Comment