Re Trump’s legal difficulties, we don’t need to go the snark route. There is a very active case of civil fraud against Trump right now, arising out of the deceptive advertising for Trump University, which cost its deceived students many thousands of dollars each. Every State not only has a civil fraud statute, but also a criminal fraud one. So, Trump could be in very real jeopardy of a State indictment on criminal fraud charges. If that happens, federal RICO charges - civil and criminal - are certain to be explored. But is the political commentariat focusing on any of this or asking Trump about his potential criminal indictments? Absolutely not. Doing so, might hurt their ratings, not to mention Donald’s feelings, and he might never grant them another interview
Even the NYT has documented and reported on Clinton’s corruption at State.
The link is for the lazy TPM trolls who will howl in protest, try to close their eyes and ears. Okay, so NYT --the left’s flagship paper. This is undeniable. The Democratic Party is now openly embracing institutional corruption and voting it into our White House. Utterly disgusting.
Anyone who listens to Hillary is listening to lies, because that’s all she does.
Seriously?
What I find most amusing is that Bernie’s supporters think there won’t be similar “optics” problems with their preferred candidate, once conservative opposition research starts showing up in ads.
It’s not showing up yet because Republickens want Bernie to be our nominee. They’re afraid of Hillary, and rightfully so. That alone was the deciding factor for me.
Don’t mean to be rude to anyone, but if you think that the “optics” will be great for Bernie and bad for Hillary you have not been paying attention for the last 30 years or so.
I have, and I can see what’s coming very clearly…
the comment was regarding the email immunity issue. this is not great optivsfir Hillary because it involves her.
never said benie disnt have optics issues in other places… as the discussion wasn’t about other things, I didn’t feel the need to include a equivalency like I’m the MSM.
sorry you can’t allow for comments about HRC without an equal dig a Bernie.you would do well at msnbc w/ Chuck Todd.
relax.
Gee, thanks for the advice.
Considering your rather vehement support for Bernie in your many posts I thought it was worth pointing out the obvious. I really do feel that Bernie’s supporters have no idea what would be coming were he to win the primary. I believe that Hillary’s supporters understand that much better.
Doesn’t apply to you? My most abject apologies. Do you deny that I’m right?
Email? Just another big fat nothingburger. But apparently there are many, many “liberals” who have nonetheless absorbed Foxy Nooz propaganda - hook, line, and sinker.
Gee, thanks for the cogent, well thought out argument, poster of two posts who joined on February 22.
Or should I just say…troll? Is it a paid gig?
it seems as though you presume Bernie supporters don’t see his faults. Certainly they are pointed out to us, and like with many of HRCs, they are nothing burgers.
We simply have weighed his weaknesses and strengths and came to a different decision than HRC supporters.
you seem to not trust someone who came to the other decision has actually considered pros and cons. That is pretty arrogant.
When I hear “she lies, she always lies”, “she voted for war”, stuff like that, well that is not coming from someone who “has actually considered pros and cons”.
I am not accusing you personally of that, but I am accusing many of Bernie’s supporters of that. I don’t hear reasoned arguments, I hear absorbed propaganda.
I’m curious; what do you perceive Bernie’s weaknesses to be?
Since you’ve been working so diligently with the weights and measures and all…
you acknowledge this isn’t coming from me, so why bring it up?
Seems you want to stereotype all Bernie supporters because you have heard such things. Well, HRC has her fair share of unthinking supporters which think it’s “her turn” and that a major reason to support her is because she is a woman. I find this reasoning as grating as you find the exuberance of some of Bernies younger, less tactful supporters.
I don’t see the need of stereotyping all HRC supporters because I’ve heard these things.
As for Bernie’s issues, the gun votes are not great, (some are a bit old to take at pecieved face value), support for the Crime bill undercuts the more current strive for CJ reform(he’s not alone here), and his refrain regarding Millionaires/Billionaires and wall street can be caricatured in a way that he seems “one note” (as it is the issue holding back real change on a host of issues, it is more of a “1st things 1st” position.)
All that said , I think Bernie is seen as genuine and he will get benefit of the doubt when he mis-speaks.
Fair or not HRC is seen as the opposite, folks will believe almost anything about her. This is why I don’t believe she is as strong as many say she is. I think it would take a Trump(or Cruz) as the Repub nominee to make HRC electable, without that I’m not sure the American people would choose someone they don’t fully trust over a reasonable (sounding, not in reality) Rubio or Kasich.
Once the nomination is settled, I will be a good democrat and shout from the rooftops why it is important to elect a democrat regardless, I hope you would say the same…