Hillary Rodham Clinton: 2016 Democratic Presidential Nominee

[GHScorpiosRule]

23 minutes ago, Ceindreadh said:

I think he's saying he won't issue a blanket pardon in advance. She hasn't been charged, much less convicted of anything, so he can't exactly issue a pardon without specifying something she's to be pardoned for. 

Okay, that makes more sense.

13 minutes ago, Constantinople said:

Ford pardoned Nixon for any crimes he may have committed as President, even though Nixon hadn't been indicted.  I can't remember if Nixon was ever listed named as an unindicted co-conspirator.

Nixon had a pending indictment forthcoming and had been proven to have been involved in the Watergate break in, plus those tapes, and a whole host of other crimes.

Hillary? Not a fucking damned thing has been found. Of her breaking any laws or committing treason. Nothing.

But as @Ceindreadh posted above, it makes sense Obama wouldn't issue a blanket pardon in advance. 

Again a whole lot of nothing to cause distraction. ?????

[partofme]

4 hours ago, qtpye said:

Obama is saying he will not pardon Hillary.  Does this mean there is a chance she will go to jail?  I now wish she never ran for president, for her sake.  It seems like her good name is being dragged through the mud for no reason.

I am surprised at the level of hate being spewed against her.  The so called liberal media made both candidates seem the same, with Hillary being the unlikable one.

Only John Oliver was the only voice of reason.  He said look, if chocolate chips represent something bad this is Hillary's cookie and he held up a cookie with about a dozen chocolate chips.  Then he showed Trump's cookie and had chocolate chips raining from the sky.  They are not comparable and now she might go to jail and he will be president.

I don't really want Hillary pardoned because that makes it sounds like she's done something wrong when she hasn't.  I don't believe for a second that the orange one will ever have her arrested becase there's nothing to arrest her for, he just said that during the campaign because his followers liked hearing it.

[Bastet]

Witch hunt after witch -- I mean, taxpayer-funded investigation after taxpayer-funded investigation found nothing to even charge her with, so there's nothing to pardon her for. 

[BookWoman56]

I fully believe she has done nothing to be charged with, yet I would not put it past this new administration to put her on trial anyway. I understand that Obama doesn't want to issue a pardon because that does make it sound as if she has committed a crime, but I am uneasy at the prospect of her having zero protection if Trump does cave in to some of his supporters and appoints a special prosecutor. I used to believe in the impartiality of the DoJ, the FBI, etc., but no more. The rational part of my brain tells me there is no way Trump would risk the backlash that would occur if she is put on trial, convicted on some BS such as doctored emails, and sentenced to prison. But the rational part of my brain also told me there was no way that Trump would win the election, either.

ETA: I can easily see him letting her be charged with some phony nonsense, and then offering to give her a pardon himself just to inflict as much humiliation as possible.

Edited November 15, 2016 by BookWoman56

[Duke Silver]

3 minutes ago, BookWoman56 said:

But the rational part of my brain also told me there was no way that Trump would win the election, either.

We all need to embrace our reptilian brains to survive the Trump/Pence years.

[Danny Franks]

The only way Trump pursues Hillary is as a distraction when his supporters start to waver in the face of his abject failure as a president. He'll keep it in his back pocket. And even he knows that, if years of concerted Republican efforts haven't been enough to get her more than a telling off for being careless, then he's not going to get anything either. But it'll be a distraction, bread for the mob, nothing more.

[LoneHaranguer]

On 11/14/2016 at 5:44 AM, shok said:

What kind of political system allows the House of Representatives and the Presidency to be occupied by the party that got fewer votes for both?

You can't know that because nobody does. Absentee ballots, which usually skew heavily to the Right, don't get counted when they don't have to be to know the outcome for a state. Clinton's marginal "win" of the popular vote would very likely turn out to be a small loss if someone were to count those remaining votes. Congress works the way it was deliberately designed for good reason.

[zxy556575]

No need to fret! All verified mail in ballots are absolutely counted because there are other races and initiatives on them. Some states count them as they come in, or even first.

Edited November 15, 2016 by lordonia

[bilgistic]

We in North Carolina are still waiting for our gubernatorial race to be called. There were problems in one county with the voting machines on election day; there may be a recount because of those. The absentee ballots are still being counted. Democrat Roy Cooper is in the lead over Republican and incumbent Pat McCrory.

[Duke Silver]

I don't live anywhere near North Carolina, and I am still hoping like crazy that McCrory is ousted.

[ari333]

13 minutes ago, Duke Silver said:

I don't live anywhere near North Carolina, and I am still hoping like crazy that McCrory is ousted.

I wonder how the KKK parade went? BLARG.

[Rum Punch]

Quote

I really have to ask, and hopefully I won't sound stupid or completely naive but: how do we know, deep in our bones, that Hillary really is corrupt? What proof is there that she's a sleazy slime ball? I am serious here and I hope to get a serious answer. Is there documented evidence of corruption? 

I think there is a lot of circumstantial evidence pointing to corruption.  First, she set up a private server, which to me is a strong indicator that she was trying to keep whatever dirty dealings she was up to out of the public record.  Her excuse that it was for "convenience" is utterly unconvincing.   Then, she had that server wiped with the most powerful scrubbing software known to humankind, all, I'm sure, to keep 30,000 plus e-mails pertaining solely to yoga classes and wedding plans from getting out.

Also, she and Bill, after leaving the White House "dead broke", have amassed a 100 million dollar fortune by giving a few speeches and running a charity.  To me, that doesn't add up.  I think an important person could make a nice living giving speeches to Wall Street types, but 100 million dollars?

Finally, she lies and lies and lies.  She lied about Benghazi being incited by a video.  She lied straight to Chris Wallace's face, saying that Comey had backed up all her statements about the e-mails, when actually he did the exact opposite.  

As for documented evidence, I guess she's pretty good at covering her tracks, but don't forget it took a long time to nail Capone, too.  "You can't prove nothin' Copper, I'll be out on the street in an hour."

[bilgistic]

35 minutes ago, Duke Silver said:

I don't live anywhere near North Carolina, and I am still hoping like crazy that McCrory is ousted.

It was very difficult to compose my post without stating my feelings about Pat McCrory. Despite being behind Roy Cooper and despite no (potential at this point) recount ever proving a different outcome, he will not yet concede. I'm having serious Bush/Gore flashbacks.

Topic? I need a glimmer of hope after Hillary lost the presidential election.

[moonb]

Counterpoint from this American Life regarding Clinton's emails, from a reporter who read through the FBI's interviews from their investigation of her. His claim is that it's a completely different scandal from what the public thinks:  the real scandal is the role technology and ignorance of it played in the State Department and in Clinton and her aides' jobs - Clinton used an absurdly old Blackberry, she's very uncomfortable with technology generally, the State Department was far behind in its use of it compared to the private sphere, etc. etc.   Make of it what you will. 

[Keepitmoving]

Quote

I really have to ask, and hopefully I won't sound stupid or completely naive but: how do we know, deep in our bones, that Hillary really is corrupt? What proof is there that she's a sleazy slime ball? I am serious here and I hope to get a serious answer. Is there documented evidence of corruption? 

There is none as far as I am concerned. 

 But there are decades of proof that she and her husband share quite a bit of there so called "corrupt" wealth with the citizens of this country since we've seen their tax returns. They've contributed their fair share pf their wealth to the common pot which is more than I can say for the grand dragon wizard of the KKK who is going to be taking the oval office in 2017.

Edited November 15, 2016 by Keepitmoving

[PrincessEnnui]

4 hours ago, moonb said:

Counterpoint from this American Life regarding Clinton's emails, from a reporter who read through the FBI's interviews from their investigation of her. His claim is that it's a completely different scandal from what the public thinks:  the real scandal is the role technology and ignorance of it played in the State Department and in Clinton and her aides' jobs - Clinton used an absurdly old Blackberry, she's very uncomfortable with technology generally, the State Department was far behind in its use of it compared to the private sphere, etc. etc.   Make of it what you will. 

Have you (general) ever worked in government environs in the US? It's always been 5 years or so behind private sector tech. A few years ago the IRS was still using Windows 7. They use programs to replicate Expedia, but are 5 times harder to use. Depending on your status you can't even reserve a room on a US base online. That was an issue when Obama took office. I find it hard to believe Hillary was competent enough to have an entire private email server setup and still use a blackberry by choice.

Edited November 16, 2016 by PrincessEnnui

[theredhead77]

5 hours ago, bilgistic said:

Topic? I need a glimmer of hope after Hillary lost the presidential election.

She's leading the popular vote by nearly 1,000,000 votes (maybe more).
A glimmer that people are trying to stop this hostile take-over anyway they can https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/provide-electoral-college-vote-mr-trumps-tax-returns-do-due-diligence-potential-conflicts-interest

[Constantinople]

38 minutes ago, theredhead77 said:

She's leading the popular vote by nearly 1,000,000 votes (maybe more).
A glimmer that people are trying to stop this hostile take-over anyway they can https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/provide-electoral-college-vote-mr-trumps-tax-returns-do-due-diligence-potential-conflicts-interest

thedailybeast.com is reporting that she now has a 1M+ lead in the popular vote.

[backformore]

7 hours ago, Rum Punch said:

I think there is a lot of circumstantial evidence pointing to corruption.  First, she set up a private server, which to me is a strong indicator that she was trying to keep whatever dirty dealings she was up to out of the public record.  Her excuse that it was for "convenience" is utterly unconvincing.

I don't have the time or inclination to address all of your points.   But my understanding about the private server is that it was set up in their house when Bill was president, and it was the server their devices were set up to use.  

I think Hillary, like most people, use the internet and email without a thought as to what server they are using, or switching between two servers for different purposes.   I have never given a thought to what server I use.  I use two different computers and a phone for both personal and business use, and my business clients trust me with confidential information - it's on a password protected site, I know all the logins and passwords, but I have no idea how to figure out what the server is. 

I really don't think there is reason to believe that she had nefarious purposes for her use of the server.  I believe that Hillary is an imperfect person, but that she is a good person with good intentions. 

[film noire]

10 hours ago, Rum Punch said:

I think there is a lot of circumstantial evidence pointing to corruption

There's plenty of media hype and a lack of tech savvy involved, but no corruption: 

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/4/13500018/clinton-email-scandal-bullshit

Edited November 16, 2016 by film noire

[kokapetl]

13 hours ago, Rum Punch said:

I think there is a lot of circumstantial evidence pointing to corruption.  First, she set up a private server, which to me is a strong indicator that she was trying to keep whatever dirty dealings she was up to out of the public record.  Her excuse that it was for "convenience" is utterly unconvincing.   Then, she had that server wiped with the most powerful scrubbing software known to humankind, all, I'm sure, to keep 30,000 plus e-mails pertaining solely to yoga classes and wedding plans from getting out.

Also, she and Bill, after leaving the White House "dead broke", have amassed a 100 million dollar fortune by giving a few speeches and running a charity.  To me, that doesn't add up.  I think an important person could make a nice living giving speeches to Wall Street types, but 100 million dollars?

Finally, she lies and lies and lies.  She lied about Benghazi being incited by a video.  She lied straight to Chris Wallace's face, saying that Comey had backed up all her statements about the e-mails, when actually he did the exact opposite.  

As for documented evidence, I guess she's pretty good at covering her tracks, but don't forget it took a long time to nail Capone, too.  "You can't prove nothin' Copper, I'll be out on the street in an hour."

They averaged about $200,000 per public speaking event. Bill has earnt the vast majority of their fortune, he's had 16 years to do it. 

[Pollock]

10 minutes ago, Kokapetl said:

They averaged about $200,000 per public speaking event. Bill has earnt the vast majority of their fortune, he's had 16 years to do it. 

Yeah, if Sarkozy makes 70 000 euros a speach (when he sucked and never did anything for our economy nor social politics... who's willing to pay that loon to talk when I would pay good money to send him to Mars is beyond me...) when we fired him after one term 4 years ago, I think the retired two-terms President of the United States and Madam Secretary/First Lady can indeed make a pretty buck! 

And also, there is "My Life" from which he got a 15 millions dollars advance and which sold 2 millions copies around the world for another 30 millions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Life_(Bill_Clinton_autobiography)

[Rickster]

8 hours ago, backformore said:

I don't have the time or inclination to address all of your points.   But my understanding about the private server is that it was set up in their house when Bill was president, and it was the server their devices were set up to use.  

When Bill was President, they lived in the White House and did not have another house.

[sleekandchic]

MSNBC carrying Hillary's speech at Children's Defense Fund.  Introduced by Marion Wright Edelman.

(Hillary, no makeup, no styled hair! )

Pundits today said Hillary should address her loss, or her call for unity, or her support of Trump!  She just mentioned her loss, but this speech is about children.

Also, she mentions President Obama several times, with great respect and affection.

[sleekandchic]

12 hours ago, Rickster said:

When Bill was President, they lived in the White House and did not have another house.

Not sure about timing of server setup,  but Hillary left DC for NYS before Bill's presidential tenure was over.  She wanted to run for Senate and needed to establish NYS residency.

Just saw that info on some show in last couple of weeks.

[slf]

My objections to HRC have always been about policies as she's a moderate lib and a hawk and I'm very much neither of these things (Sanders is a better representation of my politics). The server and the emails never struck me as more than politics. Is there a more investigated politician? I don't think so. And what have those investigations uncovered? Jack shit. I'm sorry but it's ludicrous to say, "well, how do we know that all the incriminating evidence wasn't on that server, huh?!" 'Cause...really? As long as she's been in the game, as corrupt as she's supposed to be, and the only incriminating evidence happens to be on her own server? I'm looking at her history, especially how she's been targeted in a way almost no other politician has been in at least the past twenty years (and think about that, think about all the obviously, blatantly corrupt politicians we have and most of them have never had so much as a "hey, knock that shit off" much less been the focus of over half a dozen investigations) and I'm thinking I'd not only have my own server, too, but I would've regularly purged my emails because fuck knows what people would try to use against me.

And the way people who lean on the emails and servers have framed their suspicions and accusations have only made me care less. It's all so pearl-clutching "well it COULD BE SOMETHING". Yeah, or it could not be. But what we do know is it very much is something with a whole lot of other politicians and somehow not half as many people go after those guys. I'll care about her sever when people actually give a shit about that guy (just elected mayor?) in Richmond who had sex with his intern when she was underage and got her pregnant (but denied paternity), and then married her the moment she became legal. Or anything to do with Christie, Perry, Giuliani, Trump, etc.

[film noire]

21 hours ago, Kokapetl said:

They averaged about $200,000 per public speaking event. Bill has earnt the vast majority of their fortune, he's had 16 years to do it. 

Facts, how I love them.

[Keepitmoving]

16 hours ago, sleekandchic said:

MSNBC carrying Hillary's speech at Children's Defense Fund.  Introduced by Marion Wright Edelman.

(Hillary, no makeup, no styled hair! )

Pundits today said Hillary should address her loss, or her call for unity, or her support of Trump!  She just mentioned her loss, but this speech is about children.

Also, she mentions President Obama several times, with great respect and affection.

Forget that, she did her part on Nov. 9 the with regard to graciously accepting that thing that got elected to the presidency. 

What I did hear her say in all her awesomeness, was to implore that the audience never stop fighting for this country and our values.

And we're going to need to since white supremacist Bannon holds none of those values and Trump doesn't even know what the hell those values are period. 

I was watching Maddow and the ACLU is ready, they said their donations are way up.

Edited November 17, 2016 by Keepitmoving

[windsprints]

Quote

Pundits today said Hillary should address her loss, or her call for unity, or her support of Trump!

http://imgur.com/a/aJkao

Would they be saying that about Rump if HRC won? Nope. He'd be screeching "LOCK HER UP" and no one would say a word.

[stormy]

Now I want Hillary to give speeches and get paid a boat load of money.

[ari333]

26 minutes ago, stormy said:

Now I want Hillary to give speeches and get paid a boat load of money.

Me too. And I think that's what rump  really wanted... not to win. Just to tour and scream his hate at crowds of cheering turds. .... and profit.

[Keepitmoving]

9 minutes ago, ari333 said:

Me too. And I think that's what rump  really wanted... not to win. Just to tour and scream his hate at crowds of cheering turds. .... and profit.

Good lord, could you imagine if she starts giving speeches again and Reid, Maddow, Hayes and O'Donnell start showing them regularly on their shows. Good lord, the soon to be white supremacist run White House would lose their shit. Let Chris Hayes air another public speaking engagement of Hillary's and I guarantee "the thing" and hell the entire republican party will start shouting lock her up again. 

But you know what you're on to something, if she starts getting air time when and if she gives speeches, OMG, he'll lose it, the republicans will lose it. They want her silenced.

Because it's just so nice to hear her and president Obama. Her voice yesterday was just so calming.

Edited November 17, 2016 by Keepitmoving

[ari333]

5 minutes ago, Keepitmoving said:

Good lord, could you imagine if she starts giving speeches again and Reid, Maddow, Hayes and O'Donnell start showing them regularly on their shows. Good lord, the soon to be white supremacist run White House would lose their shit. Let Chris Hayes air another public speaking engagement of Hillary's and I guarantee "the thing" and hell the entire republican party will start shouting lock her up again. 

But you know what you're on to something, if she starts getting air time when and if she gives speeches, OMG, he'll lose it, the republicans will lose it. They want her silenced.

Because it's just so nice to hear her and president Obama. Her voice yesterday was just so calming.

YES.I do hope to hear her speak.... often. It will be a YOOOGE thorn in Agent Orange's side.

BIGLY!

[Keepitmoving]

Quite frankly, the dems. shouldn't be willing to work with Trump at all, he's a white supremacist sympathizer end of story. Bernie, Elizabeth Warren and Co. should be out touring the country and whatever else they can do including when Obama leaves and he and Eric Holder try and work on redistricting, that is the shit they should be doing for the next four years. Dems. are always looking to give a little, oh if he does this then we'll be willing to work with him on it, fuck that. You don't work with nazi sympathizers you obstruct them. You don't find consensus with white supremacist and their sympathizers and that includes Ryan and McConnell. Not to mention the dems. have no power in those chambers on the hill anyway. What they need to be doing is mobilizing and upstaging that thing that will be taking over the white house in 2017. They should be trying to get themselves on liberal media five fucking nights a week or as often as they can as if they are running another country. They need to act like we don't have president without actually saying so.  They need to go on tour, come on Bernie, go on tour again, bring some opening acts, the progressives need some concerts. 

Because any press or love from big crowds that they get will drive the dictator insane, to act out,  hastening his ousting from our oval office. 

Edited November 17, 2016 by Keepitmoving

[MulletorHater]

24 minutes ago, Keepitmoving said:

Good lord, could you imagine if she starts giving speeches again and Reid, Maddow, Hayes and O'Donnell start showing them regularly on their shows. Good lord, the soon to be white supremacist run White House would lose their shit. Let Chris Hayes air another public speaking engagement of Hillary's and I guarantee "the thing" and hell the entire republican party will start shouting lock her up again. 

But you know what you're on to something, if she starts getting air time when and if she gives speeches, OMG, he'll lose it, the republicans will lose it. They want her silenced.

Because it's just so nice to hear her and president Obama. Her voice yesterday was just so calming.

That's the other thing for me.  When I look at the hot mess that is posing as a Coral Caligula administration, I realize that I will miss having someone at the helm who is sane.

This whole, "I voted for Drumpf to upset the establishment" has me positively seething.  Part of that "establishment" includes people who actually know how to run shit and understand the importance of an orderly and seamless transition from one administration to the next.  Instead, we have glorified Klansmen (Bannon, Sessions, etc.) being considered for important positions, the horrifying elevation of a son-in-law who is as vile and despicable as his wife and her father and a dead-eyed vice president who wants to turn the country into a theocracy.  Gee, what could go wrong?

I hope everyone of those anti-establishment voters, as well as the ones who sat on their asses and have the audacity to be out protesting now get the schadenfreude they so richly deserve.  

[NextIteration]

Hill's is up 1.35 million votes over tRump.  The "Others" received 2.3 million votes in the swing states.

[Deanie87]

20 hours ago, slf said:

My objections to HRC have always been about policies as she's a moderate lib and a hawk and I'm very much neither of these things (Sanders is a better representation of my politics). The server and the emails never struck me as more than politics. Is there a more investigated politician? I don't think so. And what have those investigations uncovered? Jack shit. I'm sorry but it's ludicrous to say, "well, how do we know that all the incriminating evidence wasn't on that server, huh?!" 'Cause...really? As long as she's been in the game, as corrupt as she's supposed to be, and the only incriminating evidence happens to be on her own server? I'm looking at her history, especially how she's been targeted in a way almost no other politician has been in at least the past twenty years (and think about that, think about all the obviously, blatantly corrupt politicians we have and most of them have never had so much as a "hey, knock that shit off" much less been the focus of over half a dozen investigations) and I'm thinking I'd not only have my own server, too, but I would've regularly purged my emails because fuck knows what people would try to use against me.

And the way people who lean on the emails and servers have framed their suspicions and accusations have only made me care less. It's all so pearl-clutching "well it COULD BE SOMETHING". Yeah, or it could not be. But what we do know is it very much is something with a whole lot of other politicians and somehow not half as many people go after those guys. I'll care about her sever when people actually give a shit about that guy (just elected mayor?) in Richmond who had sex with his intern when she was underage and got her pregnant (but denied paternity), and then married her the moment she became legal. Or anything to do with Christie, Perry, Giuliani, Trump, etc.

And that is the best argument for Hillary's scandals.  These guys have almost literally been frothing at the mouth in a way reminiscent of The Crucible (seriously, I remember seeing "I saw Goody Clinton down by the River" on Twitter during one of Trump's first rallies and cracked up!) for 30 plus years.  If there had been ANYTHING that they could have gotten her on, she would be wearing orange right now.  The conclusion is that either they can't find anything, or that they are 100% guilty of the exact same thing and then some.  

Bill Clinton was the first person I ever voted for and while my admiration for him over the years has really waned, my admiration for her has grown.  She has taken every bit of shit that has been thrown at her and risen above it.  If nothing else, she is fearless.

[Ceindreadh]

I have this wish that Hilary would do something TV related e.g. narrate a documentary or host a political panel. Anything that could be potentially Emmy nominated, and that she'd win and could rub Trump's nose in it. But then I'm petty like that. 

[Calvada]

Best idea ever.  Let's have her guest star on as many shows as possible.  Ooooh, let's have her play a former POTUS on Designated Survivor.  Or play herself on Madam Secretary.  Or maybe a serial killer on Criminal Minds, who targets people who are addicted to spray tanning. 

An Emmy for HRC in 2017!  We can do it, America! 

[windsprints]

I want her to have a show where she can use a tagline "you're hired!".  Something like helping women & minorities prep for interviews for promotions/ better jobs. A segment about the people, the company, HRC offering tips then at the end she gets to say "You're Hired!" if they get the job. Add in "America has always been great!". They can even sell blue hats with the slogans with the money being donated to Planned Parenthood.

Edited November 18, 2016 by windsprints

[NextIteration]

The only positive thing about Hillary losing is that CGI and the Foundation will remain intact.  Hopefully they'll set their sites on helping Americans with some of the policies, ideas and funding that reflect what Hillary proffered during the campaign.

[Deputy Deputy CoS]

I am still haven't processed what happened, I probably never will as long as I live. That sick feeling as the night dragged on and states he shouldn't win got called for him might remain with me forever. 

However, I can see how her losing could personally be a blessing in disguise for Hillary. Being a public figure, the president, senator etc,  is one way in which one can use their skills to lead. One can accomplish so much without public office and maybe be more effective because they are not weighted down by burden of the office. I can foresee her being more effective in whatever venture she embarks on next. She will definitely have the support and respect of over half the country. 

You know how people said Trump will be martyr if he lost, well .......

[pivot]

Worst Dem candidate in my lifetime and probably the worst since McGovern. Thankfully, the media is finally calling out the BS that Hillary was not responsible for her loss. She ran a terrible campaign. It was arrogant and lazy. She spent too much money on ads and not enough money on ground game. She and Bill still think it is the nineties. She abandoned Obama's winning game plan of ground game being run locally with emphasis on personal touch. According to multiple people on the ground in Nevada, she only won that state because Reid's operation took over running the GOTV effort because her team was counting on out-of-staters and ads to do all the work. She ignored the Midwest outside of Iowa. Obama mentioned that in his call to Dems. He won Iowa because he was there 136 times. Hillary barely bothered to do public events in Iowa during the primary or general. She spent too much time at private fundraisers and with rich celebrities than with the general public. She served as an anchor to downticket Dems.

My two hopes are that establishment Dems realize the problem was with a terrible candidate who couldn't generate enthusiam and not due to "identity politics" like some are pushing and that the Clintons finally go away so the Dem party can be free of them.

[pivot]

On 11/17/2016 at 3:53 PM, Keepitmoving said:

Good lord, could you imagine if she starts giving speeches again and Reid, Maddow, Hayes and O'Donnell start showing them regularly on their shows. Good lord, the soon to be white supremacist run White House would lose their shit. Let Chris Hayes air another public speaking engagement of Hillary's and I guarantee "the thing" and hell the entire republican party will start shouting lock her up again. 

But you know what you're on to something, if she starts getting air time when and if she gives speeches, OMG, he'll lose it, the republicans will lose it. They want her silenced.

Because it's just so nice to hear her and president Obama. Her voice yesterday was just so calming.

No one is interested in Hillary's speeches. They aren't going to cover them live or really at all. Those speaking fees weren't for speeches but access. She is a terrible speaker. They paid her so they'd get access to the next president. Now that she holds no power, the interest in her will fade. She could go on a sore loser tour, but I'd hope she has more dignity than that. It's time for the Clintons to step aside and let the Dems have new leaders rise up. They couldn't do that while the Clintons had such a stranglehold on the party.

Edited November 19, 2016 by pivot

[Ohwell]

She could always work for the Clinton Foundation.  Or has she forgotten about that?

[pivot]

4 minutes ago, Ohwell said:

She could always work for the Clinton Foundation.  Or has she forgotten about that?

The money and attention coming into the Clinton Foundation was driven in part by the assumption that she'd be president. It will be interesting to see what comes of it. 

[Jordan27]

Hillary Clinton is one of the sleaziest politicians we have ever seen. 

She used her personal server for gov't emails and then lied about.  How many did she delete and why?

The wikileaks emails proved that she is that witch we always thought she was.

She conspired with groups to cause violence at Trump rallies and all with her blessing.

She conspired to deny Sanders the nomination.

And you can be sure these manufactured protests going on now are with her blessing. 

Thanks God we are done with her and the national nightmare of the Clinton's is done.

Next stop...maybe jail...but maybe Obama will pardon her. 

[ari333]

1 hour ago, Jordan27 said:

Hillary Clinton is one of the sleaziest politicians we have ever seen. 

She used her personal server for gov't emails and then lied about.  How many did she delete and why?

The wikileaks emails proved that she is that witch we always thought she was.

She conspired with groups to cause violence at Trump rallies and all with her blessing.

She conspired to deny Sanders the nomination.

And you can be sure these manufactured protests going on now are with her blessing. 

Thanks God we are done with her and the national nightmare of the Clinton's is done.

Next stop...maybe jail...but maybe Obama will pardon her. 

IMO , the national nightmare is just beginning with rump at the helm .

[LoneHaranguer]

On 11/17/2016 at 5:05 PM, Keepitmoving said:

Quite frankly, the dems. shouldn't be willing to work with Trump at all, he's a white supremacist sympathizer end of story.

If that's what you want to call someone who respects a person's right to hold whatever opinion they want, no matter what anyone else may think of it. That's a founding principle of this country that Clinton and the Democratic leadership don't seem to understand.

[Deputy Deputy CoS]

There goes my finale happy political place.