Is the whole email situation a witch hunt?

[Joe Biden is your president. Deal with it.]

How long will republicans beat this dead horse?

[Dr. Arch]

How long will republicans beat this dead horse?

After the 9th investigation, maybe they'll stop. MAYBE.

[Edu]

Of course, just ask Mr Ben Ghazi

[Hammy]

Has this ever not been a witch hunt? It's just sad that they got so much mileage out of this instead of going the way of the rest of Clinton's fake scandals.

[Confused Democrat]

How long will republicans beat this dead horse?

Until January 20, 2025

[Lincoln Republican]

No, this not a witch hunt.

This is a very legitimate investigation relative to classified documents.

 

[Dr. Arch]

No, this not a witch hunt.

This is a very legitimate investigation relative to classified documents.

 

What happened today has nothing to do directly with Hillary, let alone classified documents.

[Meclazine for Israel]

I would like to see the 33,000.

It will be interesting to see if they show up on Wikileaks in the next few days.

Even then, Hillary has got this in the bag.

Just as the Republican voters held sway during Trumps' unfortunate disclosures, so will the Democrats.

Two things we probably wont see before the election:

Trumps' tax returns and Hillarys' emails.

[SirMuxALot]

General Petraeus will be pleased to hear you all think this kind of stuff is just a witch hunt.

[eric82oslo]

General Petraeus will be pleased to hear you all think this kind of stuff is just a witch hunt.

And Donald will be extremely happy that we happened to decide not to execute him by guillioyine by the way. Agree? Of course.

[Crumpets]

Yes. If Alex Jones's spectral evidence of demonhood were permissible, Jason Chaffetz would surely have had her burnt at the stake by now.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Of course it's not. 

When you delete 33,000 e-mails AFTER a congressional subpoena is issued for them, the thing stops becoming a witch hunt. 

Again:  If Joe Biden had been the Democratic candidate, there would be no weeping and gnashing of teeth by the red avatars here.  They'd be sittin' pretty.  But, no, they just had to pay their debt to the Feminist Left by going into the tank for a female candidate with the most liabilities going forward.  Otherwise, they'd be sexist.  Oh, my!

In truth, the Democratic Party "establishment" either IS the Clintons or is indebted to the Clintons.  That begs the question of why you'd want a candidate from a party so indebted.

[Gustaf]

Of course it's not. 

When you delete 33,000 e-mails AFTER a congressional subpoena is issued for them, the thing stops becoming a witch hunt. 

Again:  If Joe Biden had been the Democratic candidate, there would be no weeping and gnashing of teeth by the red avatars here.  They'd be sittin' pretty.  But, no, they just had to pay their debt to the Feminist Left by going into the tank for a female candidate with the most liabilities going forward.  Otherwise, they'd be sexist.  Oh, my!

In truth, the Democratic Party "establishment" either IS the Clintons or is indebted to the Clintons.  That begs the question of why you'd want a candidate from a party so indebted.

Don't be so upset about gender equality. Your deplorable sexism is on its way out.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You wish.

[Brittain33]

How long will republicans beat this dead horse?

On Atlas, in the real world, or both?

[Person Man]

How long will republicans beat this dead horse?

On Atlas, in the real world, or both?

Actually, that is a really good question. I only wish the Bush-era Democratic rump party didn't fold so fast...but oh. Right. Now Hillary and the Donald know what they need to have that happen. Not that I am a truther, but the Bush administration didn't take the terror threat that seriously at first. It got them a 5 year hall pass, though. During that, all who thought that XLIII's Administration was crooked were 10 million protesters, Michael Moore, and Dennis Kucinich. Even John Kerry was quiet until the May of 2004 and the best zinger he could come up with was "Weapons of Mass Deception".  By January 2003 people suspected and by December 2004, everyone knew the Democrats were just a protest party  Food for thought.

[BlueSwan]

How long will republicans beat this dead horse?

Until January 20, 2025

[mark_twain]

I think this latest piece of news will wake people up to see that the entire e-mail controversy is indeed a witch hunt (I like that term, by the way!), especially undecided voters who originally had doubts because of the e-mails.

Now, people are finally seeing that the e-mail controversy was overblown from the beginning.

Who knows, if all those FBI hours were spent on combating terrorism, we might have had one less terrorist attack...

[Hermit For Peace]

After this election is over, American is going to need to be treated for PTSD.

[Lincoln Republican]

One thing is certain, crooked Hillary brought all this on herself, like Nixon.

Hillary has no one to blame but herself, like Nixon.

Hillary is Nixonian in nature, therefore, we know what to expect if she is elected, one massive cover up after another.

[TDAS04]

Yes, but one that many are stupid enough to buy into.

[Virginiá]

Of course it is, and by 2020 there is most likely going to be a whole slew of threads like this. Congressional Republicans have been using their majorities in Congress (and thus government resources) to go after their political enemies for years. The only way this stops is if 1) they lose their majorities, or 2) a Republican is elected president

[Fuzzy Bear]

Of course it's not. 

When you delete 33,000 e-mails AFTER a congressional subpoena is issued for them, the thing stops becoming a witch hunt. 

Again:  If Joe Biden had been the Democratic candidate, there would be no weeping and gnashing of teeth by the red avatars here.  They'd be sittin' pretty.  But, no, they just had to pay their debt to the Feminist Left by going into the tank for a female candidate with the most liabilities going forward.  Otherwise, they'd be sexist.  Oh, my!

In truth, the Democratic Party "establishment" either IS the Clintons or is indebted to the Clintons.  That begs the question of why you'd want a candidate from a party so indebted.

Don't be so upset about gender equality. Your deplorable sexism is on its way out.

The Democratic Party has no lack of capable female officeholders who could have run for President without the specter of an FBI investigation hanging over their head.  Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN).  Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI).  Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA).  Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-MN).  House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).  Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).  Not a slouch in the bunch, although I consider Klobuchar to be heads and tails above this field in terms of ability and electability.  The Feminist Left, as much as I disagree with them on a number of social issues, are a key constituency of the Democratic Party and the idea that the Democrats ought to nominate a female candidate in a nod to a key constituency isn't totally ridiculous.  But why a candidate under investigation by the FBI?  And why not allow that candidate under investigation to battle it out for viability with other Democrats?  Sanders is NOT A DEMOCRAT and would not have entered the race but for the lack of real Democrats running.

It's not an issue of "gender equality".  It's an issue of why the world's oldest political party went into the tank for a Presidential candidate that was under active FBI investigation.  Why is she so special?  And she has, indeed, received special undeserved favor from the Democratic Party; if this were not true, there would be a slew of challengers for the Democratic nomination, one of whom would have been a sitting VP and others of whom that would not have been under investigation.  Hillary's "special".  And that's not been a good thing for the Democratic Party, or for America.