Every election is proclaimed to be, “the most important election in our lifetime.” That is, of course, almost never true. However, this election has also been called, “the weirdest election, ever.” That one is true, for so many reasons. But it has gotten to the point where it doesn’t seem worth the trouble.

The parties have come up with the most disliked candidates in American history. That’s bad enough, but now, both candidates are also under investigation of criminal behavior. Donald Trump is preparing to go to trial on charges of fraud and racketeering, regarding Trump University, as well as the charge of rape of a minor, with a hearing set for December.

And Hillary Clinton is always being investigated about something, never really clearly described. The current investigation is about her use of an email server.

So now, the question is, how could we get rid of these two? If we’re headed for an election in which the parties are evenly matched, but neither candidate can even depend on support from his or her own party, we’re talking about having a president who is not only disliked, but has a the support of a minority of a minority—those few of us who vote, and this time, without much enthusiasm.

Since the problems are legal, would it be up to the Supreme Court to decide that both candidates are probably guilty of “high crimes” and/or “misdemeanors,” so it would be a legal travesty to have them elected? There is, of course, no precedent for that, and conversely, there is plenty of precedent for the election of candidates who are under investigation, and even those who have been convicted.

One example is Michigan Congressman Charles Diggs.

The late Rep. Charles Diggs “was indicted on charges that, among other things, he had taken kickbacks from three of his Congressional employees” in 1978, according to The New York Times. As the paper reports, he was found “guilty of all 29 counts against him in October 1978” before winning re-election. He was eventually censored and went to prison.

The courts were not involved. It was up to the House to censure Diggs. So it is unlikely that the Supreme Court could become involved in the current election. It would be considered a violation of separation of powers, in which the executive, legislative, and judicial branches have limited interaction.

The Constitution doesn’t forbid a felon to be elected to office—probably because it wasn’t considered a possibility! The issue came up in 2014.

Nothing in the Constitution disqualifies a felon from serving in Congress. That doesn’t mean he or she can avoid serving time in prison, but conviction doesn’t necessarily mean expulsion. . .

Again, nothing in the Constitution prevents him from serving in Congress despite the conviction, or even “serving” by phoning it in from a bank of federal pay phones. The only requirements (Art. I, § 2) are that representatives must be at least 25 years old, “seven Years a Citizen of the United States,” and an “Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen” when elected. Under Section 5, either house can “punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour,” but it takes a two-thirds vote to expel a member, a requirement that itself implies that neither conviction nor anything else, for that matter, is enough to boot someone automatically.

Under House of Representatives Rule XXIII(10), any member convicted of a crime for which a sentence of two years or more may be imposed—which would include the charge to which Grimm pleaded—”should refrain from participation” in committee business and “should refrain from voting” until and unless vindicated, pardoned, or reelected. Assuming the House enforces that (making “should” into “will”), and assuming that’s constitutional, then Grimm’s district would effectively be unrepresented until November 2016.

Likewise, Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution says a person must be at least 35 years old, a resident of the United States for at least 14 years, and a “natural born citizen,” although we’ll never settle what that means.

Yes, it’s possible to elect a felon. In fact, we can even elect dead people, such as Mel Carnahan, in 2000.

In that Missouri situation, the Democrat Carnahan died in a plane crash on October 16, 2000, and the voters still “elected” him U.S. Senator, on November 7, 2000, with more than 50% of the vote, above the incumbent Republican, John Ashcroft. There was much confusion of what to do. Republicans argued that the candidate had to be a citizen of the state, and Carnahan was no longer a citizen, being. . .dead. However, it was decided that the “Democrat” won, and it was up to the Missouri Democratic Party to come up with a candidate to fill the term. They chose the candidate’s wife, Jean.

OK, so the courts are out, and there doesn’t seem to be a way for Congress to do anything. However, the political parties could do something ahead of the election.

An obvious precedent would be the presidential election of 1972. Democratic presidential candidate, George McGovern, selected Senator Tom Eagleton, also from Missouri, to be his running mate at the Democratic convention. But then, news came to light of Eagleton’s struggle with depression, from 1960 to 1966, which included electroconvulsive therapy.

After insisting that he was behind Eagleton “one-thousand percent” (sic), McGovern tried to find a replacement. His first choice was Ted Kennedy, who refused to “go down with the ship.” Several others also demurred. Finally, Kennedy’s brother-in-law, Sargent Shriver accepted. Although a poll showed that 77% of the public said Eagleton’s medical record would not effect their vote, on August 1, Eagleton resigned as vice presidential candidate. McGovern/Shriver lost to Nixon/Agnew in a landslide. Many thought that the way McGovern handled the situation probably made his loss greater.

There was actually a lot of discussion by Republicans this year, after the release of the 2005 “Access Hollywood” recording of Trump bragging about his predatory attitude toward women. RedState asks why the party didn’t do it, and why Trump didn’t “do the right thing.” But neither acted.

That weekend, dozens of Republicans rescinded their endorsements. There was a concerted, apparently last-ditch effort to usher this charlatan out the door at last. To replace him at the top of the ticket. But the party folded like cowards, and his committed supporters, most of whom claim they don’t like him so much as they hate Hillary, stood by him the whole time with their fake “locker room talk” lie.

But we shouldn’t have backed down. He should have stepped down.

Now, the Chicago Tribune is telling Democrats to have Hillary step down, too.

If ruling Democrats hold themselves to the high moral standards they impose on the people they govern, they would follow a simple process:

They would demand that Mrs. Clinton step down, immediately, and let her vice presidential nominee, Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, stand in her place.

Democrats should say, honestly, that with a new criminal investigation going on into events around her home-brew email server from the time she was secretary of state, having Clinton anywhere near the White House is just not a good idea.

That eliminates the political parties, the Supreme Court, and Congress are out. If one of them is found guilty, Congress could then impeach, and if convicted, the vice presidential candidate would be elevated to president. In that case, we’d need a new vice president, who would just be picked, in about the same manner in which we choose a loaf of bread at the grocery store. It has only happened once—when Richard Nixon resigned in 1974, Spiro Agnew had already resigned in 1973, had been replaced by the unelected vice president, Jerry Ford, who was elevated to president, and he chose Nelson Rockefeller to be the new unelected vice president.

That leaves us with the prospect of two candidates who are not just disliked, but may also be criminals. Is there anything we could do now?

Is there a way for us to vote “no confidence” on November 8? What if we all wrote in “none of the above”—or at least, a majority of us? Could we direct the political parties to schedule a new election next year? In that case, Obama would have to serve an extra year. According to the 22nd Amendment, a president can only be elected twice, but he or she may serve up to ten years.

Imagine if we could have two candidates we could respect. Of course, that would mean a full year of more campaigning. Do we really want that?


  1. Ya officially deleting this app and hope all others do the same. Your obvious spin is completely transparent. The narrative weaving does not work any longer. #draintheswamp

          • Come on… Goethe please do not tell me this is what you ment about addressing the FBI investigation concerning Hillary Clinton. Just 12 days before the election and it appears we may FINALLY be able to prove without a doubt the INTENTIONAL destruction of evidence and attempt to hide from the people she took an oath to serve. Please for the sake of trying to be unbiased take the leap and investigate, use your words, not others and bring to attention the truth that we know too well. Just a few more days to tell the truth and free your soul. I have faith you can do it if you are true to yourself.

            • The point is that we don’t know anything yet. They found a third of a million emails. Comey figured there might be something in there. That’s all we know. If they find something, we’ll cover it.

            • Point is that they FOUND. This is a direct contradiction to Huma and Hillary Clinton turning over all the emails.
              We would NEVER be in this situation, had she not put herself in this situation. She tried to pass off the emails as a personal account, then she stated she did so out of convenience, then she stated no classified emails were on it, then she stated she was told too have her own, etc etc. The truth is that if you want to control information about your actions and PERCEPTION you need to only disclose such information that looks good on you.
              This email investigation was her idea, her way of having no prying eyes and able to justify to no one. That is not a PUBLIC servent. That is a corrupt individual. Transparency was a myth. Much like the ACA promises.

            • You would be right if Huma had withheld the emails. But the fact that Comey had to get a court order proves that he had not previously requested Huma’s emails.

              As I said in the last note, that’s his fault. He should never have closed the investigation months ago.

            • Exactly,… But his version of the law is questionable.

              “of how government secrets got onto the server, Comey said, the FBI found “evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information,” but he said, “we are expressing to [the] Justice [department] our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.””
              Wait what???? But it goes on to say,……..

              “In the American system, justice depends not only on judges and juries, Comey said, but also on the decisions of investigators and prosecutors. Law enforcement officials “weigh a number of factors before bringing charges,” he said, and to make those decisions responsibly they must consider “the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.” Normally those calls are made behind the scenes, but Comey said because the case had received “intense public interest” he had decided to lay out why Clinton’s actions didn’t justify prosecution.”

              Interesting, isn’t it. You see because at the following congressional hearing that he HAD to appear and defend his actions..that action forced him to make a promise to keep us informed of any new developments. Because, the truth is that those violations in themselves should have been reason to bring charges, and intent would be taken up in court…. By our US Attorney Loretta Lynch. Oh crap, nope that can’t happen can IT? Because she has gone and visited Billy on the plane. A new Special States Attorney will need to step in. And if they HAD NOTHING TO HIDE they would have. And then it goes on to say,…….

              “Comey brings nonpartisan credibility to that decision. As described in a TIME profile last March, he investigated Bill and Hillary Clinton in high profile controversies over the years, including the failed Arkansas real estate deal known asWhitewater, Bill Clinton’s last minute Presidential pardons in January 2001, and now the e-mail investigation.”

              Remember the special prosecuter that was brought in for Billy????

            • This is not about Comey, this is about HILLARY. The decision to create a private server was the WORST idea ever!!! Her intent was to hide & control, she stated she did so out of convenience.
              Anyone and everyone who works for the government understands FOIA. Correct? How easy would it be to provide and separate emails for the Justice Dept. How easy was it for Hillary and her lawyers? How much time and money was wasted because of her decision to have a personal server?
              And lastly, how secure was it? We now have emails in everyones hands ment for just her eyes. Protecting such bad behavior is disgraceful and not to make an article about it is even more so. As the chief editor of this website and to talk about Trump being “womanly” but not talk about Hillary being wrong is horrible and frankly biased.

            • The “womanly” article was about what was written elsewhere, and as a woman, why do you consider that an insult???

              As for Hillary, we have said it, and even she has said it–that it was wrong. And, at this point, Comey has said there is no evidence that would lead to conviction on any charge. Yes, we find, there were actually more than 2/3 of a million emails they are now looking at. And that’s all Comey said—there are more emails to look at. Why is that a story?

            • I am not insulted because I am a woman. Lol. My apologies if that is what you inferred.
              I am hoping that you rise above these articles. The betting and the off ops like the womanly article.
              I am hoping that the substance based conversation that we have, is what people read and that you, in the future, write about.

              In no way is an apology of that magnitude sufficient for the destruction of evidence, time, and money wasted on her decision. That action alone is enough to ask her to step down.

            • No, you suggested it was an insult to Trump that language experts say Trump uses language the way a woman does.

            • As the chief editor of this website and to talk about Trump being “womanly” but not talk about Hillary being wrong is horrible and frankly biased.

              I am talking directly to you, Goethe. Not to anyone else. You ARE Election Central.

            • Again, you are saying that being like a woman is an insult to Trump. It is not. The piece referred to how people use language, and the main article we pointed to said that it may explain why Trump hasn’t been hurt worse by the things he has said about women–because he “speaks their language.” There was nothing at all negative in that article, unless you want to say that women are bad.

              And, by the way, I am not “chief editor” here. I do not decide what is printed, or when. I am not “in charge.”

              And again, YOU are wrong to say that I did not say Hillary was wrong. I have said so a number of times. There is absolutely nothing new in that story. You only see what you want to see. End of discussion.

            • I guess I do, as do you.
              I will continue to comment. I will continue to post articles that challenge the Hillary supporters and you. I respect your opinion. But I feel like being a DT cheerleader is also inline with me being a HRC hater. In all companies and large organizations that employ talented and experienced people, the document protection and preservation is vital. It is also vital for organizations like EPA, OSHA, and FDA. If she worked for me, I would have fired her immediately. Her lack of judgement even after repeated warnings would have been sufficient evidence enough to not pay for her unemployment benefits.

            • I just don’t understand all the hatred. I don’t like any of the presidential candidates. I think Rand Paul was worthy. So was Jim Webb. The rest are goofballs, but I don’t “hate” any of them, and it distresses me to read all the name calling and other horrible nasty things people think are acceptable. As Trump would write: SAD!

            • I LOVED JIM WEBB!!! He was out choice for a Democrat. 🙂
              Rand Paul was good also, in fact at work he was our top contenders for the GOP.
              Because we are about to elect our next president and the country is a mess.
              We have the supreme Court up in the air and balance of power is being corrupted.
              It’s like the more you know the more freedom of choice we lost. Technology should put our election closer to an even playing field where wealth and the elites do not control. But that is a farce… It is all about the Benjamins, and I am tired of it. I am tired of sitting back and letting our media dictate what and who we need to choose. The answer “I’m just doing my job” isn’t good enough. This is in reference to the CNN reporter being confronted by a black Trump supporter. When he turned the tables on him. I can provide the link later if you like.
              Got to go… Busy again.
              I wish you the best Goethe, you are in the thick of things, immersed day in and day out in this election. It is almost sickening to have to follow it every day.

            • Why do you hate Hillary so much? Do you have a problem with women? Are you gullible enough to fall for Breitbart conspiracy theories? Seriously, where’s the attitude coming from? It seems delusional and unhealthy.

              Jim Webb’s only memorable moment in the primaries was making a creepy comment about murdering a person. I’d vote for Mickey Mouse ahead of that psychopath.

              Rand Paul is a Libertarian. In other words, he’s an idiot.

            • Where do you get “hate”??? She is the worst Democratic candidate, at least since McGovern–and the least popular Democratic candidate in history–back to Jefferson.

              I usually get slammed for being pro-Hillary. Or pro-Trump.

            • I get it from the fact that you keep declaring how terrible she is, without even attempting to explain what’s so terrible. In other words, you’re displaying dogmatic hatred.

              I don’t think you support either candidate. I believe you when you say you support racist enablers on the right, such as Paul and Webb. That’s been pretty obvious all along.

            • I’ve never said Hillary is “terrible.” Zealots interpret words to mean whatever they want. Likewise “hatred” is bizarre. Ask the Trump fans how much I love Hillary.

              No, I don’t “support” either candidate. I’ve said that all along. As for Paul and Webb being “racist,” you make words like “hatred” and “racist” meaningless when you throw it around carelessly like that.

            • You said she’s the worst Democratic candidate since McGovern. But you take offence when I conclude from your own statement that you think she’s a bad candidate?

              Have you considered taking responsibility for your own words?

              Rand Paul, like all Libertarians, believe that the government should allow for racial discrimination, as well as all other kinds of discrimination. Jim Webb is on record calling slave owners “honorable men” and defending the use of the Confederate flag.

              If you don’t find any racism in these people, you might be a racist.

              As for overusing and watering down words, you should probably cut down on your use of “zealots.” If accepting facts and defending democracy is zealotry, then what does the word really mean?

              I will note that you once again fail to state your objection to Hillary Clinton as a candidate for President. Until you manage to express valid reasons based in reality, I will assume your aversion comes from dogmatic hatred, misogyny, and gullibility.

            • Again, words have meaning. I never used the word, “terrible.” You implied that I meant she was a bad person, which couldn’t be further from the truth. I have said she is the worst least liked Democratic candidate in history, which is objective fact. I’ve also been around to see elections since Truman, and I can tell you, as a candidate, yes, she is “terrible.” Not only does she have baggage, but she’s the worst campaigner, with the possible exception of Dukakis.

              As for racism, I assume you think that you are not? Only a racist thinks so.

            • Words do indeed have imbued meaning. I never said you used the exact word “terrible”. You expressed that meaning, using various other words. What’s confusing you about this?

              No need to lie about what you said. I can easily scroll up and see that you wrote that she is the least liked, but also “the worst Democratic candidate since McGovern.” You said both these things separately. If you dont’t believe me, you can scroll back up and re-read your own comment. This is also far from the first time you’ve expressed your dislike of the candidate, and in fact you even go on doing so in the very comment and replying to right now. So what was the point in lying about this?

              You are being very vague in your criticisms, as I expected you would be. What “baggage” does she have, other than debunked Republican conspiracy theories? What’s bad about her campaigning? Be specific. These vague accusations are no more useful than saying she’s got cooties.

              I gave specific examples of Rand Paul’s and Jim Webb’s racist ideas. If you want to claim that I’m racist, it would be better if you could provide any form of evidence. Only idiots make accusations without evidence. Are you an idiot?

              You should also try to avoid using tu quoque fallacies. It’s a kindergarten level mistake and it makes you look unintelligent.

            • It turns out that he requested all her devices. This one was left out. It was used as a shared laptop that Huma would archive her phone emails. A backup. She is now working with the FBI agents. Hopefully these are the same as the ones found in her phone but I doubt it. These will be a complete archive of all her emails most likely not tampered with. Oh how I wish I could read them.

            • Just seen your post was longer than one paragraph. Sorry.
              In regards to Comely closing the case UNDER pressure by the Lynch well that was a complete mess. First the impropriety of the meeting with Bill Clinton on the plane, then she stated that she was going to follow the recommendation of the FBI, and lastly it seemed his investigation was being streamlined.
              Here is an article about it… Do you see any irregularities? Please do not forget Issa is the one that took bill down.

            • That article doesn’t help your argument:

              “law enforcement officials have set a high bar for prosecuting violations of those laws, looking for clear criminal intent, ”

              Where is the “criminal intent”? What is the “motive”? What was to be gained?

            • I accidentally responded to your comment up above.
              Lol. Too bad I couldn’t create my own app that worked with you. Those would be some great articles on POLICY with a little spice that these two people bring. ?

            • Angelica, you’re letting your cheerleading cloud your vision.

              Hillary was Secretary of State from 2009 to January of 2013. The link you just provided gives only one item of relevant information during that time:

              2009–“Government employees are allowed to use private emails for government work.” Yes, it was “discouraged,” but that’s not the same as “forbidden.”

            • Again you stink at this… It reads:
              Government employees are allowed to use private emails for government work. However, this practice is strongly discouraged. If using a private email, “the agency must ensure that federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency record-keeping system.”

            • “Stink??” Daddy always used to say, “a skunk smells it’s own self first.”

              Read the words, not what you want them to say.

              (1) “ALLOWED to use private emails for government work.”

              (2) “The AGENCY must ensure. . .”

              If you want to argue wrongdoing, it was the agency that did not do what it “must.”

            • Precisely my point!!! The SOS did not comply with that. Hence, this was a willful misconduct. And the word STRONGLY indicates a strong stance.

              I like your dad… Maybe I should rethink that stinky comment. 🙂 My apologies.

            • It’s been my understanding that the matter was not officially closed; therefore it couldn’t have been ‘reopened’.

            • And that is my main complaint. IF Comey genuinely felt that he should notify Congress that additional emails were found, that is exactly what he should have said: “additional emails have been found, we will review.”

              By saying he was “reopening” the case, he was saying (a) that it had been “closed,” which is not true, and (b) that something dramatic happened to change the situation.

              Nothing at all has happened. In fact, Newsweek has reported that NONE of the emails were either from, nor to Hillary.

            • 1. DOJ Loretta Lynch has the only authority unless she appointed a special prosecuter. She did not. Instead she said she would follow the recommendation of the FBI. (Thus was after the tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton).
              2. Comey then had to be in the position to announce his recommendation NOT to prosecute.
              3. A few Congressional hearings why he chose not to prosecute happened. And testimony from several key players were called upon.
              4. During that time Comey stated if anything changes he would keep the Congress informed.
              5. Wiener sexted a teenager, and the world found out. FBI was called in.
              6. Upon confiscating all devices he used to get evidence, the meta-data was seen. This is the to/from etc…
              7. Hillary Clinton email address was found in alot.
              8. Comey informed the Congress.

              Huma is Hillary Clinton top aid. She had stated to the FBI that she turned over ALL devices she might have had SOS data on. She would be better off testifying against Hillary then to face jail time and leave her child with her husband, who also maybe going to prison. Wow. This is big news with not alot if coverage.

            • Angelica, Angelica, Angelica. . .

              Just because it’s being said by everybody doesn’t mean it’s not being said by somebody.

              Newsweek 10/28/16:

              “There is no indication the emails in question were withheld by Clinton during the investigation, the law enforcement official told Newsweek, nor does the discovery suggest she did anything illegal. Also, none of the emails were to or from Clinton, the official said. Moreover, despite the widespread claims in the media that this development had prompted the FBI to “reopen” the case, it did not; such investigations are never actually closed, and it is common for law enforcement to discover new information that needs to be examined.

              As of Friday night Comey had only said the bureau is seeking to determine whether these newly discovered emails involved classified material.”


              Apology accepted.

            • I just can’t apologize. Sorry, I did read that article while I was looking for a Newsweek article that would support your position. That wasn’t close to supporting anything. Lol. The “official” spoke based on anonymity, this person could have been anyone from Obama to Loretta or the guard in the office.
              You know I am right.
              It could also been a fellow committee member that by all accounts should not have any information.
              If we are talking about spreading innuendos and “sources” as fact, then I have a TON of them!!!
              I am right… No, you don’t have to say it… Just nod your head. ?

            • We have had more “influence” in our election from the beginning of this election. Starting with the very first debate with Mr Webb. At one point he was begging to answer.
              It went on so much that Mr. Sanders was screaming the biased DNC.. I am not positive but I believe that he was going to sue them at one point. Thanks to Wiki leaks, Debbie and Donna were PROVEN to have favored Hillary. There were many people that were fired and or stepped down. Now we have Veritas doing undercover work and again a few more people are either going to jail or were let go.
              My point is simple, if this year long history has taught us anything, it is to not trust the Media.

            • As my astute uncle who work in such field cites, “SETTLEMENT IMPLY GUILT.” FRAUD RACKET is extreme serious.

              Hence either way by way of jury in few days saying guilty/liability applied, or by settlement either way the worse presidential candidate in America, shall be impeached. Judge know it too. Transcript proof is clear that i have… His own lawyer cites,”If this go to trial it can hurt my client’s presidential-run judge…”

              This was in official transcript.Judge still schedule(rightfully so)victim’s day in court for 2 weeks from now… Hence, either way?Trump is done…Either way… he is going to be impeached. I am counting the days this piece of sh-t is impeach.

              PENCE is a bum but Trump will be out the w.house in no time.”

            • wow. that’s what i like to hear. Thank uncle for us. For me and i am reviewing the info now breaking news on Trump near-impeachment and Joshua i just pm ya on fb thx for this info

  2. The fact that Hillary Clinton has been accused of everything including bearing an alien child does not make her guilty. She had a personal email server, and the only server that doesn’t seem to have been hacked I might add. That was a mistake if only in that it gave republicans something to investigate. But as always. Like Bengazi, like the Clinton Foundation, like whitewater, lots of investigation, no crime. The point is that the republican’s hate does not make her guilty. She does have many supporters who admire her strength and determination that has carried her through all that has been thrown at her, and believe she will fight for us just as untiringly.

    Trump, on the other handseem to have much that looks to be serious and since he brags about the behavior, it seems likely that he is guilty. Throw in his calls for violence, his racism, his sexism and it doesn’t give you confidence in how he would behave in office.

    Here in Ohio we hear that our governor Kasich was approached by Trump Jr and offered “the most powerful vice presidency ever”. Meaning that he would be president in all but name while Trump soaked up the glory. While I’m not a Kasich fan, this speaks well of him that he refused, it speaks volumes about Trump.

    • HRC seems to get away with everything. She said she couldn’t recall 39 times upon questioning under oath. If DT had done that, she would be making a huge deal of it. American citizens died in Benghazi and she has shown no remorse. She ruins everything she gets involved in, the same as Obama.

        • The FBI etc don’t do witch hunts. Their job is to get the truth. Your comment does not take into account the fact that she said “I don’t recall” – 39 times under oath upon direct questioning. HRC sets one set of standards for herself and another for DT. I stand by my comments. She needs to be accountable and made accountable for her actions.

          • If the FBI doesn’t do witch hunts, then why did Comey announce that he had New emails relevant to Clinton investigation two days before he hafld a warrant to exam in the newly found device, which he aknowledged was not connected to Clinton. The only possible reason is to smear Clinton late in the race. It looks like the joke may well be in Comey, if he is found guilty of using his position to effect the outcome of an election, in violation of the Hatch Act.

            You scream about four American lives lost in service to their country, but you fail to mention thousands who died and many thousands maimed as a result of the Bush/Cheney war of choice in Iraq.

            Incidentally, do you think it might be possible that Trump might be held accountable at the Trump University fraud trial beginning Nov 28 ? Or maybe at the rape of a 13 year old girl trial beginning Dec 16? Or maybe one or more of the twelve women who came forward to validate his bragging on the access Hollywood tape? Or maybe the bribe to the Florida AG, now under investigation , which was paid through his charitable foundation. Using money donated by other people. And that was just shut down by New York AG for operating outside the law. Yeah, narcissist, misogynist, racist, homophobic, sexual predator, that is one check of a guy you are idolizing. I hope you enjoy the coming humiliating defeat. I know I will.

          • It is more than accusations, she conveniently can’t recall things when she has no evidence to prove that she is innocent – upon direct questioning under oath. As a lawyer, she thinks that she can get out of these accusations by merely dismissing them – but she can’t. She is very quick to accuse DT and Russia of things but she doesn’t like it when she is accused.

            • INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. Hasn’t happened. Won’t happen until they accuse her of something she has actually done.

            • According to the trump supporters, they don’t care “innocent until proven guilty” Because they already have it in their head that she is guilty and wish to dismiss the justice system so they can punish hillary for opposing trump. If she did not run for president, nobody would care about her emails or any of her scandals

            • Is that how it works? Is that Justice? You see Jilly they are Lawyers and graduated from a prestigious university. Truth is that a smart person will always be more dangerous than an ignorant one. They know how to tow the line… They know all the tricks of the trade. Best criminals are Lawyers for that matter I think they are probably the best actors too.
              We are supposed to live in a country where Justice is blind, where in the courthouse riches and power do not matter. But we have always known…. The truth….

            • Please reread the comments. I was referring to the Clinton’s..
              I want our justice system to be Blind. Meaning everyone regardless of status is treated the same.
              I want our Representatives to hold their oath in the highest regard.
              We must stop peddling our country for gain. The Clinton’s made millions on the influence of the White House and SOS.
              They did not produce, did not invent, did not manufacture, or build.

            • If they accused her of ALL OF THE THINGS she has actually done it would be the LONGEST CRIMINAL COURT CASE IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND. It would go on for years and years.

            • It has gone on for years. The accusations have been ongoing for a quarter century or so, and have accomplished nothing except to make the accusers liars and to squander hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars in proving their dishonesty.

            • Lmbo, no…
              By creating a private server.
              By using bleach bit
              By lying and getting caught.
              By not disclosing the Qutar 1million dollar gift.
              By not taking a more active role in her job as SOS. That killed 4 Americans.
              By lying to the public, and forcing Condoleezza to lie. We were watching it stream. We knew what was going on was not a protest over a video.

            • Seriously?

              I’m shocked you didn’t hock up the $1.8 billion to Qatar (note the spelling) lie too.


        • Maybe because of COMELY???
          “Comey brings nonpartisan credibility to that decision. As described in a TIME profile last March, he investigated Bill and Hillary Clinton in high profile controversies over the years, including the failed Arkansas real estate deal known as Whitewater, Bill Clinton’s last minute Presidential pardons in January 2001, and now the e-mail investigation.

        • I and millions of Americans have not been deceived as we know she is a liar. Her attempts at deception have not worked with me.

            • Jilly, I assure you that I am not. I even tried to tell you that I liked you. ?
              But I think you are do deeply blue that seeing anything wrong is treasonous. Right?
              All i am saying is that if you looked at the election objectively, and the shoe was on the other foot, you wouldn’t be so lenient.
              Michael Jackson-Man in the mirror

              Just an FYI- you may say what you want. But DT was given plenty of awards along with other great people for being kind. From the ELLIS ISLAND AWARD to the RAINBOW PUSH.
              I hate to leave this conversation with this but I happen to love Trey Gowdy. If you have time you should YouTube him. But here it goes…

              Trey Gowdy on Morning Joe

              Thank you Jilly

            • You have not looked at anything objectively, the only sources you have ever cited have been the most prejudiced and right wing crazy sources available.

              Anyone who supports Trump either tacitly or overtly supports racism,islamophobia,xenophobia and homophobia. Trump OVERTLY speaks to those people. Take a good look at the KKK newspaper.

              The fact that you love Trey Gowdy speaks volumes about your attitude and our worldview. Gowdy to be polite, could not find his way out of a corn maze, after the harvest. He spent millions of dollars investigating Bengazi, and the only thing he turned up was the private server. (the only server in government that hasn’t been hacked) He spent more millions investigating that and Clinton was found not guilty of any crimes. The previous two Secretaries of State were also found to have used private email accounts, Powell’s was actually hacked. But I guess since they were republicans, that didn’t count.

              Do you remember the day that Kevin McCartney said on tv that the investigations were for the express purpose of bringing Hillary Clinton’s numbers own?

              By the way, do you think the money for these endless investigations doesn’t add to the deficit?

            • I have cited congressional hearings, Pro Democratic news stations, and even Archives from the White House. How about you?
              Nothing, just plenty insults and accusations.
              You think Trey Gowdy is bad? Lol. No, he isn’t. He is doing his job well.. like he said in the end, we are in the position we are in because of “time”. If we knew 2 years ago what we know now I am confident that Hillary Clinton would not run. On top of that I also believe that Trump would not have run.

            • In a 2012 email that WikiLeaks says was sent to John Podesta, now chairman of the Clinton campaign, Voices for Progress president Sandy Newman writes that “there needs to be a Catholic Spring, in which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the Catholic church” and proposed that the Clinton team “plant the seeds of the revolution” to change Catholic teaching. Podesta replies, “We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a moment like this .?.?. Likewise Catholics United.” He adds, “I’ll discuss with Tara. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend is the other person to consult.”

              So members of the Clinton’s inner circle created front groups to foment a “Catholic Spring” — because, as their dear leader had announced, “deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

              g about what Agoing to do.” (Reuters)
              That’s not all. In another email exchange with the subject line “Conservative Catholicism,” Clinton communications director Jennifer Palmieri and Podesta co-author John Halpin appear to mock Catholics and evangelical Christians for their “backwards” views. Halpin ridicules Fox News chairman Rupert Murdoch for raising his kids Catholic, declaring “Friggin’ Murdoch baptized his kids in Jordan where John the Baptist baptized Jesus. Many of the most powerful elements of the conservative movement are all Catholic (many converts) from the SC and think tanks to the media and social groups. It’s an amazing bastardization of the faith. They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy.”

              Palmieri responds that Catholicism “is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion. Their rich friends wouldn’t understand if they became evangelicals.” “Excellent point,” Halpin responds, adding that “they can throw around ‘Thomistic’ thought and ‘subsidiarity’ and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they’re talking about.” Podesta is included on both emails.

              The hostility to people of faith here is simply breathtaking. Apparently when Clinton aides speak in private, their basket of “deplorables” includes faithful Catholics and evangelicals who believe in the sanctity of human life. If they had made such comments about any other group, they would be politically excommunicated.

              Yet the mainstream media has, for the most part, ignored these revelations of anti-religious bias. After Donald Trump’s disgusting comments about women were leaked, his vice-presidential running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, was besieged with questions of whether he would leave the ticket. Has anyone asked Clinton’s running mate, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who professes to be a faithful Catholic, whether he will quit the ticket over this? Does he agree that Catholics are “backwards,” that the Catholic Church is a “middle ages dictatorship” and that it is the job of politicians to foment a “Catholic Spring”? Does he agree that Democrats should be creating front groups to launch a “revolution” against the bishops? Does he share Clinton’s belief that the “religious views” of American Catholics “have to be changed”? He should be forced to answer.

              Imagine what might happen if people with these kinds of bigoted views gain the levers of power. Trump’s behavior toward women is appalling, but the republic has survived with sexual miscreants in the Oval Office (see Clinton, William Jefferson and Kennedy, John Fitzgerald). If Clinton is elected, she could be the most consequential president in history in terms of reshaping the nation’s highest court. She will immediately get to pick a Supreme Court justice to replace the late Antonin Scalia. And if other justices retire — such as Ruth Bader Ginsburg (83), Anthony Kennedy (80) and Stephen Breyer (78) — she could select as many as four new justices. Does anyone imagine that Clinton and her team will pick justices who respect religious liberty? Not a chance.

              Speaking at the American Enterprise Institute’s annual dinner, Professor Robert P. George pointed out that while our Founding Fathers were a mixed lot when it came to religion, they all understood the importance of religious freedom. That is why, he said, “our Bill of Rights begins with the words ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.’ We get that principle .?.?. before we ever get to ‘or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to assemble peaceably [and to] petition the government for redress of grievances.’ ” They knew that religious liberty was essential to “dignity of the person,” he added.

              The Clinton campaign emails have thus put the stakes of this election in sharp relief not only for Americans of faith but also for all those who care about human dignity. Clinton’s presidency would be a threat to the religious freedom of all Americans. Let’s see if all those on the left who have complained about bigotry this election season call out Clinton and her team — or give her a pass.

            • Anyone who supports Clinton is anti-Christian and anti-Catholic.

              Please see article below.In a speech not long before she launched her 2016 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton made a stunning declaration of war on religious Americans. Speaking to the 2015 Women in the World Summit, Clinton declared that “deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

              Religious beliefs have to be changed? This is perhaps the most radical statement against religious liberty ever uttered by someone seeking the presidency. It is also deeply revealing. Clinton believes that, as president, it is her job not to respect the views of religious conservatives but to force them to change their beliefs and bend to her radical agenda favoring taxpayer-funded abortion on demand.

              This is the context in which we must read a recently released trove of emails — which, according to WikiLeaks, come from the accounts of Clinton staff — showing the rampant anti-Catholic bigotry that permeates Clinton World.

            • I’ll need to look into this, and I’ll comment. However, did you know that the Catholic Church has excommunicated Trump? It is the strongest rebuke the Church can give. It is saying that he is not allowed to be part of the Church, and the Catholic Church views itself as the “pastor” of all Christian churches.

            • I shall look into this BUT Trump is a Christian – there is a difference.
              I have not heard of the Catholic Church viewing itself as the “pastor” of all churches before.
              The two faiths are different, however there are some common beliefs too – if that makes sense.

            • The “Nicene Creed” lays out what Catholics are supposed to believe, including this:

              “We believe in one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.”


              According to the Catholic Church, there is only ONE Christian church in the world. The word “catholic” actually means “universal.” [Late Middle English: from Old French catholique or late Latin catholicus, from Greek katholikos universal from kata with respect to + holos whole.]

              I’m not arguing the point, I’m just stating it. The idea is that Martin Luther and others did not form new churches, but rather, set up “sects” within the true church. And so, excommunication from the Catholic Church is seen as separating a person from all of Christianity. It is similar to, but not as extreme as fundamentalist religions, which “shun” people.


            • We are not a “Christian nation” and never were. We are a nation that was founded, in part, in the principle that every person is allowed to worship according to their own belief, or not to worship at all. That no law would be made either establishing a state religion, or outlawing the practice of any religion. Or any law compelling anyone to observe religion at all.

              By the way, you get violently angry when anyone slights your chosen religious beliefs, how will you treat me when I tell you I was born and raised in a “good Christian” family, but now I am an avowed athiest? Will you defend my right to my chosen belief, or will you look down on me from now on and discount me as a person because I am not “enlightened”?

              I will tell you as a father and grandfather and admirer of children in general, abortion is distasteful to me in general. That being said I would never put myself in the position of deciding whether any woman, my wife, my daughter, an aquaintence or a stranger should carry a baby or terminate a pregnancy. I would believe that woman would be responsible and would make the right decision for all the circumstances. Only she knows all the surrounding facts. I would then support her decision with all my heart. Supporting a woman’s right to choose is not supporting abortion as birth control for a careless lifestyle, it is faith in women.

              By the way, while you are busy striving for that Christian nation, ask yourself how you would like it if Muslim people managed to attain enough power to claim this as an Islamic theocracy? Or do you think we should stay secular as a nation?

            • Sarah: This is in reference to your comment which begins “Clinton is anti-Christian.” The way these comments fall, sometimes it’s hard to know what the comment is answering.

              Anyway, I looked into your quote. The conservative CNS quoted a little more of the speech. I was able to find a little more of the speech. Note that she’s talking about WORLDWIDE treatment of women, including refusal to let girls go to school, genital mutilation, and other abuses.

              Yes, we’ve nearly closed the global gender gap in primary school, but secondary school remains out of reach for so many girls around the world. Yes, we’ve increased the number of countries prohibiting domestic violence, but still more than half the nations in the world have no such laws on the books, and an estimated one in three women still experience violence. Yes, we’ve cut the mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth.

              All the laws we’ve passed don’t count for much if they’re not enforced. Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper. Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will. And deep seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.

              As I have said, and as I believe, the advancement of the full participation of women and girls in every aspect of their societies is the great unfinished business of the twenty-first century, and not just for women but for everyone — and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.”

              –Note also that she does not say anything at all about “Christian” anything.

              Full speech here:


              Regarding the Obama quote, again, it’s out of context. So-called Christians, who constantly cry about being abused victims of society, are always trying to push their hegemony on the rest of our people.

              Even this anti-Obama YouTube proves the argument wrong, if you ignore the idiotic and hateful captions.

              The message was that we are much richer than just one set of beliefs. Obama continued, “at least, not JUST (a Christian nation). We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, and a Buddhist nation, and a Hindu nation, and a nation of non-believers.”

              Then, he went on to point out that it is very dangerous for someone who thinks he or she is “Christian” to dictate that belief to everyone else, because even Christianity is divided among wildly divergent beliefs, such as Adventist, Mormon, Catholic, Baptist, and a hundred different sects which disagree.

              Whenever you hear a quote of only seven words, you can be pretty sure that it’s a lie–that the excerpt seems to convey the exact opposite of the larger passage.

            • Thank you Goethe I confess I am new to this discussion and comnent platform. Plus I am typing on my smartphone which is tricky – as you might imagine.

              My comment was in answer to an above comment about Trump being homophobic.

              As a Christian conservative, Trump is called a homophobe but where is the respect for the beliefs of his faith?

            • I appreciate your apparent desire to hear opposing views. There is way too much name-calling here and across the nation.

              I don’t see Trump as homophobic. In fact, he made a point of inviting Caitlin Jenner to Trump Tower to illustrate the fact (and said she could use any bathroom she likes).

              However, I don’t believe that Trump holds any deep-felt beliefs, such as Huckabee. Trump uses “whatever works at the time.” I don’t mean that as a criticism, it’s just how he works–and how he always survives.

            • Jsilcot above has accused Trump of being a homophobe.

              Just fyi, not all Christians or Catholics are as “open or vocal” about their faith. Some people prefer to keep their faith private which is perfectly acceptable.

            • Yes Goethe, Jesus did say to pray privately, but he also said to share the gospel (tell others about Him) and to NEVER deny Him or be ashamed of our faith in front of others. To NEVER be ashamed of Him.

            • Just a few for you;

              Romans 1. 16-17
              Mark. 8. 38
              Luke. 9. 26
              Mark. 16. 15
              Philippians. 1. 17
              Matthew. 24. 14
              Matthew. 10. 33
              Colossians. 1. 28
              Colossians. 1. 5
              John. 3. 16
              Romans. 10. 8-9
              John. 5. 24
              John. 8. 31-32

            • Romans was Paul speaking only for himself.
              In Mark 8:21, Jesus told them NOT to talk of Him. 8:28 uses the word “ashamed,” but I’m not so sure that equates to the current usage of the word.
              Luke 9:26 is a carbon copy.
              Mark 16:15 says to spread the gospel, but it was just to convey information, not to impose upon people.
              Philippians is again Paul, speaking for himself.
              Matthew 24 just says the gospel will be preached, it doesn’t exhort anyone to do so.
              Matthew 10 just says you shouldn’t deny Jesus, not that you should hawk him, like a Veg-O-Matic.
              Colossians 1:28 is just Paul, speaking for himself.
              Collosians 1:5 is the same.
              John 3:16 is irrelevant to this discussion.
              Romans 10:8-9, again Paul, speaking for himself.
              John 5:24 just says to believe, not to talk about it.
              John 8:31-32, again, just says to believe, not to talk about it.

              None of these say we should run around, like a Jehovah’s Witness, peddling the faith.

            • I’m afraid that The Bible HAS to be read prayerfully and with a view to truly trying to understand it.
              Telling people about Jesus Christ is NOT done to hapless victims. People have a choice of whether to engage in a conversation or not. The Christian church (which does not recognise JW’s btw) tells people about Jesus Christ for one reason and that is with a view to informing them that it is ONLY by accepting Jesus Christ as your personal saviour in your heart that you will have eternal salvation and everlasting life.

              I don’t expect you to understand this. The Bible and the scriptures are quite complex to understand.
              Also, Christians do not impose their beliefs on others.

            • That’s what this whole discussion was about. Should one be modest and pray privately, as Jesus said, or use religion as a bludgeon to manipulate people for political purposes.

              Years ago, we had a rash of Jehovah’s Witnesses coming to the door. One day, in particular, it was nasty out, so I invited the poor fellow in, gave him hot chocolate or something, and let him give his sales pitch. After that, the house was flagged, I was inundated, and finally had to say I have my own beliefs, thank you very much.

              But our discussion here was not about sharing faith (which should be done by example, not words). It was about those who use religion as simply a crass tool of political power.

            • Re: your last para;

              When I was young, it was ONLY BECAUSE people shared their faith with me by using words (at school and church etc) was I able to learn about Jesus Christ. I ALSO learnt from their example.
              Words are very important in learning about the Christian faith. There is a lot to learn and, now, many years later I am still learning about it and growing in my faith.

              You are right Goethe this discussion is not about faith.

            • James: Angelica can only see one side of an argument, but she’s not “consumed by hate.” In fact, she has offered an olive branch. You probably think that was condescending and facetious, but from my experience, she is genuine. Try to back off with the hostility. It doesn’t help your case.

            • No. I am definitely not brainwashed. Millions of us Republicans can see right through HRC. Its high time that we took our Christian country back and made a stand against the anti-Christian rhetoric of the Dems. Billions of dollars presently given abroad – mainly in the form of weapons would be saved and spent on American people under a Trump administration.

            • Glad I have another intelligent woman on here!!! 🙂 Let’s pray the people will hear our message, our voices, and we elect Donald Trump to be our President of the USA!!

            • Another reason to vote FOR TRUMP
              Under Obama not only has the US debt, which now stands at $22 trillion – the highest of any US president leaving office but the Afro Americans who Obama and HRC are encouraging to vote Dem – they are now worse off after 8 years of Obama. Home ownership and income in this group has fallen in this group and unemployment has risen. HRC and Obama in their campaigning have accused DT of making America racist etc but the fact is racism and poverty have become much more pronounced under the Obama administration amongst the Afro-American group in particular

            • You can’t look at the deficit in a vacuum. Deficits have arisen due to two major causes: war and recession. Adjusted for inflation and GDP, the worst deficit we ever had was due to World War II–almost 30% of GDP. It We simply chose to do anything and everything to defeat Hitler. The second worst deficit was due to World War I–over 15%. The third worse was due to the Civil War–at 10%.

              When he entered office, we were in free-fall, with the world heading for a second Great Depression. So most of the new debt was due to the economy and businesses refusing to spend. Add to that our unconditional wars in the Middle East, and there was no way to avoid huge debt–topping out in one year at about 10% of GDP. However, even with the continuing wars, the debt increase has slowed to about the rate it was in the Bush era.

              Regardless of who wins the election, deficits are expected to remain at this level through at least 2021.


            • Yes you are right but I forgot to mention one crucial point. Was it wise of Obama and Clinton to get involved in so many other recent conflicts and to GIVE FREE OF CHARGE brand new military equipment to foreign nations when those nations could afford to buy their own weapons? Not to mention the IRAN DEAL where the US will PAY IRAN billions of dollars?? These decisions and actions have FURTHER increased the inherited debt which Obama got.
              Was it and is it wise as an adminstration to NOT HELP the American people, particularly its own poor people and those in poverty? This is bad decision-making in the extreme. Surely you agree with this? A TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WOULD PUT AMERICA AND ITS PEOPLE FIRST AND NOT FREELY GIVE MONEY TO FOREIGN NATIONS – either in the form of cash or weapons.
              A wise incoming President would have made different choices in the face of an inherited increasing debt. A wise Sec of State would not have negotiated the Iran deal and given BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND weapons to foreign nations for their own internal conflicts.
              Very unwise decisions indeed.
              TRUMP is absolutely right, Hillary has very bad judgement and she has proved this time and time again. She should not be elected as Commander in Chief as she is completely and utterly untrustworthy. TRUMP would put America and it’s people first and he really wants to make America great again. He would be more trustworthy as a President.

            • I thought brainwashing covered it, but you have gone even further than that. Your “facts” are not only not factual, they are some of the most rediculous tripe ever put out by Trump. The national debt stands at 19 Trillion, not 22. The losses in home ownership happened to many Americans, black and white, as a consequence of the crash under GW Bush, who inherited a balanced budget and a surplus from Bill Clinton. He turned that surplus into deficits with his war of choice in Iraq. Most of the increased deficit under Obama is result of fixing Bush’s mistakes.
              Obama’s legacy includes fixing Bush’s economy, much more equality, and covering millions with under the ACA and expanded Medicaid. Trump would turn back the clock with his hate speech and his plan to destroy the ACA with no plan to replace it.
              Hillary Clinton has promised to improve ACA, has many plans that would improve the economy, and does not “dog whistle” all the racist themes that Trump does.

            • You are wrong I’m afraid. The national debt was 19 trillion a few years ago but it is now 22 trillion.
              I know my comments are true facts as I stated.

            • But you’re thinking two-dimensionally. Yes, this number is bigger than that number. But why? Because we were in total free-fall in 2008, headed for an entire, catastrophic, world-wide Great Depression. I assume you’re old enough to remember that.

              The debt increase was totally due to that, with large spending the few years after the crash–coupled with the problem greatly decreased tax revenue, due to business contraction.

              Facts here:

              The deficit has returned to pre-crash levels, despite the drain of the wars in the Middle East.

            • What do think of the Iran deal? Is it a good idea that America gives BILLIONS of dollars to Iran – for nothing? When America has a huge national debt and its own citizens living in poverty?

            • I have not read enough about the actual deal, itself.

              However, we didn’t “give” any money to Iran. We just allowed them to remove the money that was already theirs. And the reason we had to send cash is that we are not allowed to have any banking relations with them.

            • Yes. I agree the loss of home ownership happened to both white and black Americans. My point was that the VERY PEOPLE who HRC is claiming to be able to help more than DT and who she and her camp are targetting heavily are the black Americans. Claiming that DT is racist is wrong etc etc.

  3. Correction: Hillary is not under investigation of criminal behavior. She has already been cleared of wrongdoing. The claims of her having shared classified documents have been proven false, since those documents were only retroactively marked as classified after the fact. This isn’t Minority Report where you can accuse people of future crimes or crimes that could’ve possibly been committed in an alternate reality. In this reality (the real reality) she did not engage in criminal behavior.

    However, spreading the lie that she’s a criminal could in itself be criminal behavior. Oops.

    The reopened investigation pertains to emails that were sent by other people – not by Hillary. She can’t be guilty of someone else’s actions. That’s not how the law works.

    Republicans have already admitted that the constant fabrication of controversy around Hillary is a deliberate strategy. Kevin McCarthy slipped up and admitted this in relation to the Benghazi nonsense, and was quickly removed from the limelight.

  4. Now that the GOP’s constant lies about voter fraud have resulted in actual real life people trying to vote for Trump twice in order to balance out the imaginary voter fraud on the other side, which Republicans have tricked them into believing is real…

    …can we at least acknowledge the fact that all Republican elected officials and pundits are accomplices to treason?

  5. Goethe, I’m surprised.

    I’d’ve thought that you, of all people, would understand the difference between censor and censure.

    Next thing we’ll see is your confusing tenant for tenet I suppose.


    • The copy blocks are shaded to show that we have copied and pasted from another article. We don’t correct what they’ve written, although sometimes the typos are horrible.

      The next thing would be to write about former Director of the CIA, George Tenant.

      • I understand about the copy blocks, although when I copy-and-paste I’ll (sic) it to let the reader know that the error wasn’t mine.

        But then you write far more than I daily.

        I was just giving you a hard time for perpetuating that author’s error.

        I noticed you fixed it, btw. ??

  6. The parties have come up with the most disliked candidates in American history. That’s bad enough, but now, both candidates are also under investigation of criminal behavior. Donald Trump is preparing to go to trial on charges of fraud and racketeering, regarding Trump University, as well as the charge of rape of a minor, with a hearing set for December. Is anyone concerned about his child rape charges? A self described Groper of women’s genitals because he’s a star therefore can do anything he wants? Trump supporters? That’s being ignored in a horrid way. A LIAR OR A CHILD RAPIST?

    • Correction: a person who lies 20% of the time, or a person who lies 70%, abuses women and rapes children.

    • He has not been charged formally with being a child rapist. They are allegations, that will prove to be just that.

      Re: comments about groping women – he apologised. He regretted those comments.
      They were a long time ago.

      • There’s a hearing in December. It was a wild party. The host has/had no scruples. The girl claims she was forced. Her age is the real problem. But no, at this point, it’s just an allegation, and it will be a matter of “he said, she said,” since there wouldn’t be any physical evidence, and not likely to be able to find witnesses.

        She was going to have a news conference this week, to tell her story, but she got so many death threats that she has gone into hiding.

        • Yes. Thank you. I know about the hearing and the alleged death threats.

          What was a 13 year old girl doing at an adults only wild party??? Did she report any crime against her at the time?

          I strongly suspect that the “death threats” are non-existent. There is no solid proof that she has received death threats. This is all just very very underhand and yet another strategic tactic by the democrats in an attempt to discredit Trump so close to the election.

          HRC is behind all this because this is the ONLY
          tactic she is using – that of trying to discredit Trump. She ought to be sticking to the issues and policies.

          • Ha! Now who’s peddling unlikely conspiracies? It was not shown that any of the other women who came forth had any contact with HRC. She would be stupid to touch this whole issue with ten-foot-pole, since when this stuff came out, her poll numbers dropped, too, because of claims against her and Bill.

            Likewise, I doubt that HRC would have anything to do with the former 13-year-old. But once her name was released to the public, you KNOW she must have received threats. Come on! People are threatened for a lot less than this!

            I don’t think any of the women charging Trump have any political purpose. I think they are either genuinely trying to get justice, are deluded, or are out for publicity. To claim some sort of political conspiracy is, well, another crazy conspiracy theory.

            • I am just giving MY opinion. WHAT I PERSONALLY THINK. Hence, my comment, ” I strongly suspect…”. I also questioned ” why would a 13 year old girl go to an adults only wild party?” I note that you make no mention of the latter point.

              Why have all these women just all of a sudden come out and stated these allegations? Have YOU any proof that any of them reported these “incidents” to the police at the time? I SUSPECT THAT THEY DID NOT!!! Surely if they were the victim of any criminal wrongdoing by another person (especially an assault) they would have done so?
              Does this not seem odd? It does to me.

            • I didn’t comment on why the 13-year-old girl was at the party, because, obviously, she shouldn’t have been there. It’s like asking, why was the toddler in the middle of the road when he was run over by a car? Duh.

              As for motive, I just gave you two excuses you could use: that they may be deluded, or are out for publicity.

              But you are a woman, right? Are you unaware of the awkwardness–and even shame–of sexual abuse? It is a horribly under-reported crime, because who wants that stigma hanging over them? Who wouldn’t want to just forget it? Who would dare challenge a rich, powerful, famous man–especially with how the world was a few decades ago.

              I think the answer to why they are coming out now is just as one of them said: one had the guts to come forward, she was trashed, and so others decided to come out, to show that the first one wasn’t lying or at fault. We saw the exact same scenario with Bill Cosby. No one complained for many years–then suddenly all these complaints? They can’t possibly be true if they waited so long, right? Same for Roger Ailes. Even Megyn Kelly has belatedly come forward.

              Of course, this assumes the allegations in these cases are true, and I am not taking a stand on that.

            • I was molested… I told on them. You are neither a woman nor a victim of rape. So please do not tell me that sad freaking story. The truth is that GIRLS TELL ADULTS!!! Some do not do ANYTHING. You just got to keep telling until someone listens.

              It is on record that Trump told the press about the young people on Epstein’s “wild” parties. That comment could have brought investigation and media attention back then and possibly saved a girls or boy from danger.

              And so what…. We seen what a good defense lawyer could do to a rape victim. Hillary Clinton laughed about it.

            • Now you Goethe stated before that the rapist has a right to an attorney. That he has the right not to be punished for his actions. By those standards Hillary Clinton is who she should be. A person who can lie about small to large things and separate herself to win the case. Even if that means destroying the evidence.

            • Hillary attacked a 13 year old that was raped in her home. She traveled with them to find a scientists that stated it didn’t have enough evidence on them to even test. She destroyed her, I mean pretty much raped her all over again and she KNEW he was guilty. But she made sure went above the call of duty to make sure he would walk free once again. Goethe you know that was not justice.. so yes call it twisted logic or whatever…

            • Not every woman can tell about it, I have several friends myself included, who have been ssexually assaulted. And like goethe said, I just wanted to forget about it. And the girl trump raped has even more of an excuse not to report it, since she would be going against a rich powerful man with numerous thugs who would try to silence her, don’t presume to speak for all woman Angelica. Perhaps she dropped the case because she knew Trump’s thugs would try to kill her

            • No she probably dropped the case because she had made it all up. If it was true, I doubt that she would have dropped the lawsuit. There is NO EVIDENCE AT ALL about thugs.

            • If a bunch a trump supporters were threatening to murder me if I don’t stay silent, I would drop it too. If she made it all up to harm his chances, why would she drops it before the election ends. People will send death threats for less of a reason, I mean hell, a woman received death and rape threats for having a feminist view on video games, so it doesn’t surprise me that a bunch of riled up trump thugs would send death threats if she doesn’t stay silent.

            • The girl that accused him was a woman. She stated that when she was a teenager she traveled to NYC to become a model and was picked up by a woman who paid her $600 to give a man a hand job at Epstein’s home. She returned home then traveled back again and received quite a bit more.
              I was younger, in Fifth grade (12) at the time I told a school counselor. It is HARD to talk to the investigators. There is dolls and they tend to want details. Then you get to go to court and testify all over again. You repeat your story and you get hundreds of eyes on you and your family well it just SUCKS. If I had to deal with Hillary like Kathy Shelton did… Omg. I would have probably killed myself. The only reason I finally spoke to someone other than family was I found out my older sister was being abused also. She later went in and out of hospitals. The memories I try to forget, it takes effort. I forgave them all if them the ones who knew and said nothing, and the ones that did it. I found my peace.
              I wish you would condemn Hillary for being crass enough to laugh and use this as one of her stories.
              If this happened to you, I hope you find peace in your life also. I just had to tell. I was pissed and angry and well I thought I was protecting my sister… I did just that. Because I was the one many got mad at. And she was thankful for me. I’m still the protector.
              I hope you are too.

            • Well your stronger then me if you forgave the scumbags. I can never forgive my sexual assaulter. But I care more about my best friend who went through worse. I tried to protect my friend from the scumbags, but as hard as I tried, they still got through. Sometimes I wish there is a hell, so they can rot in the deepest corner of it

            • No, not strong. I was asked a few years ago to retract my statement and to say it was a lie for the purpose of getting them off of the list. By the same person I first went and asked for help. It all came rushing back, all those memories. It made me sick. I was livid. Kicked them out of my house. I apologized afterwards because I have no doubt that they really didn’t understand what I had truly gone thru. Should I perpetrate the hate and tell them everything, have them carry all those horrible memories also? Well I didn’t. Instead I just let it go and so did they.

              Your right, not everyone comes out of it the same. My sister found herself in an abusive relationship. That changed when she too forgave them, then forgave herself and reclaimed the power they took. It isn’t easy. It isn’t fair, it is just selfish.
              I hope you all find peace. If the memories sneak back, face them and switch the topic. You can control your thoughts. You can control your spirit. I wish life was easier and without hate.

            • Nobody deserves to be harmed like that, I don’t care who you are, or what you believe, nobody should have to go through that.

            • I agree… Right now in the Middle East and Africa we have female mutilation, young marriage, and sex slaves some boys and girls perfectly legal. We are facing horrendous civil right violations. Do you want to read a sad story?


              I’m having trouble locating her account she has made a couple different accounts, the first I read was 2 then 4 if she did go to a Party of Epstein then I’m positive that she was raped or molested. By Trump, that I’m not sure of. He was not a frequent attendee.

              We really do need to love more and forgive each other and ourselves. It is never a funny issue when we deal with the rape if anyone. Hillary Clinton laughed about the case. I’m sorry but she knew 100? he was guilty.
              I need to sleep. Ttyl.

            • Angelica, nobody could shut you up. But most abuse victims are not as bold as you.

              I had an “episode” with an older boy when I was young. That was a half century ago, and I don’t think I’ve ever told anyone about it, and I won’t give details here. But I was embarrassed and shocked and felt guilty and didn’t want to get him in trouble, and didn’t want anyone to know anything like that ever happened to me.

              Regardless of what you think, statistics show that the overwhelming majority of abuse victims do not tell anyone.

              And finally, you are being disgusting about saying Hillary laughed AT the victim. It was CLEARLY not the case. She was bemoaning the system that was “laughably” inept. I will thank you not to mention that lie on here further.

            • I believe I ment to say laughed at the stupidity of the lie detector failing to accurately reflect his guilt. That shouldn’t even have been admissable in court.
              I have told no lie about that Goethe. Her laughter was a sad reflection on a case that hurt someone, that changed their lives forever. I would never laugh about anyone’s rape story. But that is just me.
              Yes some people would bury it and try to forget. Unfortunately, this causes problems in the future. Facing your past, acknowledging, and let it go. You really don’t need to tell anyone if you rather face it alone. I was a different sort of person. I had a protective streak about me. To say it didn’t affect me in a negative way is a lie. I delved into books and tried to forget about it. I could not act out to much because we had only enough insurance for one child. Bad right. But I had my father, and his talks about girl power, he said in America you can overcome anything. He taught me how to wire up a house and lay tile… I worked and I read and went to school and tried to talk to counselors in school. I am not ashamed of my past, because I should not be. If I dwell on that it has power. That is why I always acknowledge the memory and then change the subject (In my head)..
              I will say this, sometimes if you don’t address the issue you will attract more perverts in your life. I’m not sure how this works it is simply an observation.
              Thank you Goethe for letting me share this personal information… I guess if I can help one person by my story then it will be worth it.
              Take care everyone, in a couple of days we will all have to wait 2 years to revisit this site and each other.

            • Well, no, that was my complaint. A number of times, you said that Hillary laughed AT the victim, which is a lie.

              I listened to the recording several times. The interview was about the state of the law. And when she “laughed,” it wasn’t a guffaw. It was a sign of resignation and discouragement about how bad the system can be.

              As for the site, we don’t shut down on election day. There are always many issues to discuss. We don’t draw as large a crowd in between elections, but we’re here.

            • I went ahead and watched it again. Seems pretty stupid that we are talking more about “personality” “lies” and “character” then policy and management. Past performance of each. Etc. I still think Trump would win. She keeps on attacking him and I just can’t stand it. Like doesn’t she feel any remorse and humility? Even her remarks about the email crap… She is like WTF, I APOLOGIZED.
              She does that all the time. I watch her and listen to her speeches… They sound like Trumps previous speech. Seriously. That is freaking strange.
              Then her “oversight” of all the donations she had gotten from foreign countries that she DID NOT disclose. I mean she promised the congress.
              They still have not separated from the foundation. She said she would AFTER she won the presidency.
              She fails to keep her promises… Time and time again.. and she still wants us to trust her.

            • Well up until a she took a photo op nobody knew her name or had a picture of her. She just sold her story. That changed after she dropped her lawsuit.
              ? Hmmmm

        • No she dropped her lawsuit. She had a better chance suing Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton they rode and took trips on the Lolita Express often.

    • She DROPPED her lawsuit!
      Bill Clinton rode in the Lolita Express more times than Trump, for that matter so did Hillary Clinton.

  7. What a garbage website. Moderators get themselves into quagmires in the comment section and then delete all comments in order to save face. I’m deleting this from my bookmarks and trying a different site where criticism of Trump is allowed.

  8. You don’t have to vote “none of the above”. You can vote for Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, or my pick – the most decent, honest candidate this season IMO, the Constitution Party’s Darrell Castle (castle2016.com). There may be other write-in candidates out there who have been marginalized by our constricting ballot access laws and so forth – which only serve to keep the Democrats and Republicans in power. Do your research and don’t just go with the media-spoon-fed candidates that have been shoved down our throats.

Comments are closed.