Did it?
So much for that. ::sound effect of toilet flushing::
Yeah, running average of 6 points ahead of every conceivable Republican candidate. :eek: The horror. The horror.
At this point, it’s actually really bad. She’s losing a decent percentage of voters to candidates they don’t even know yet. Her earlier lead was built entirely on name recognition. What remains of it is still name recognition. The bar a Republican has to meet to beat her is getting lower and lower.
And yet none of your guys, none of them, actual or even imaginary candidates, can do even as well as her, or even make it close. Keep on telling yourself it’s only “name recognition” if it comforts you, but the smart bet is that you’ll disappear from the board for a few months, stunned and bewildered, after the next Presidential election just like you did after the last one.
Just to help you clarify your thoughts a bit, you cannot simultaneously claim that opposition to HRC is due to overfamiliarity with her, from an endless stream of “reporting” about a person who’s been in the limelight for decades, but that *support *for her, well beyond anything any of your guys can muster, is simply due to “name recognition”. Not without being laughed at, that is.
So maybe it’s time to consider non-bubble-based possibilities, hmm?
It actually is name recognition. Only Bush is well known nationally. And her lead has dropped significantly. No evidence she’s hit bottom yet either.
Congressional Oversight of Government serves a valid legislative purpose.
Yes, it did. Questions asked, questions answered, it’s a simple concept. Hillary doesn’t have to appear transparent. Her fans don’t care. What difference does it make, now. Right? 
*March 14, 2015
In the GOP’s weekly address to the nation, Rep. Susan Brooks, R-Ind., said an independent arbiter should review the contents of the server to determine which emails should be made public.
“Right now there is no way for us to know whether we have all of the State Department communications that rightfully belong to the American people,” Brooks said. “The only way to truly know is by having access to Secretary Clinton’s personal server.”
Brooks is a member of a special House committee created to investigate the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
It was the Benghazi panel, Brooks said in her address, that led to the discovery of Clinton’s personal computer server and her decision to hand over some of the emails*.
Thanks for confirming for those not yet aware that yes, this *is *all about All Things Benghazi.
Do please keep it up until Election Day, won’t you? Thanks.
You assume it will be damning, but you know Ol’ Hillary better than I do. I want to know what happened preceding, during, and after the Benghazi attack that resulted in the murder of four Americans, including a U.S. Ambassador.
Scoring cheap political points masquerading as “due process” does not.
You might go Google the reports of the *seven *previous Congressional investigations, if you really want to know. Have you? Have you considered it worth your while, knowing as you do from the news that they didn’t find that Secretary Clinton did anything wrong? Is it even possible, in your view, that actually is the bottom of it?
Of course.
Just to be clear, it’s my position that it appears that Ol’ Hillary is refusing to fully cooperate with a Congressional investigation into the events leading up to, during, and after the attack in Benghazi. She doesn’t have to be transparent, and We the Voters can reward her efforts as we see fit, when we go to the polls.
Either way, the investigation will continue because a U.S. Ambassador was murdered and We the Voters have yet to find out why.
Seems pretty obvious. An attack was mounted on the consulate and no one issued any orders until they were dead.
FYI - Ol’ Hillary’s emails were not included in the other Congressional investigations.
You have yet to get the answer you’d *like *to have. But yes, we have found out why. You could too if you wanted to.
What orders would you have issued?
Can you explain what happened in Benghazi? Should I assume that you can’t because the State Dept., and the former head of the State Dept., refuse to fully cooperate with Congressional investigations? Unless you are aware of some facts that We the Voters haven’t been allowed to see?
Due process, or the public’s right to know, or cheap political points. Call it whatever you wish to call it. I want to know what happened and Ol’ Hillary is holding up the discovery.
I would have issued a stern demand that they not attack the consulate. :mad:
There is a Congressional report about Benghazi that would answer all your questions. What unanswered questions remain?