1. What’s the difference between “extremely careless” and “gross negligence?”Liberal commentators are decrying the call to imprison Hillary at the RNC convention outrageous. Here's Why RNC Calls To ‘Lock Her Up’ Are Entirely Reasonable. Did any of them complain when democrates called for Bush and Chaney to be arrested? Stacy McCain on how The GOP convention exposes the reality of media bias. ANALYSIS: TRUE:
2. Why weren’t Clinton’s aides indicted?
3. Why didn’t Comey push for a special prosecutor?
4. Why is it okay for Clinton to get off the hook over “convenience?”
5. Why did Clinton lie repeatedly if she did nothing wrong?
The media is spending more time doing a forensic analysis of Melania's speech than the FBI spent on Hillary's emails.Remember when Hillary Clinton Accused Obama of Plagiarism?- No. of course, not. The media didn't make an issue out of it. They wanted Obama to win.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 20, 2016
Ben Carson defends connecting Hillary Clinton to Lucifer because he ran out of more evil things to compare her to?
A great essay, read the whole thing: Donald Trump Is Right About One Thing: Our Experts Know Nothing
Even a casual listener can hear the lack of experience every time Hillary Clinton or other Democrats start talking about the economy or business. They talk about how they will force businesses to share profits with employees. They talk about how unions are essential to the growth of the middle class. They talk about how employers should pay a higher minimum wage. They are happy to stick their hands in companies’ profits. Yet they speak from having absolutely no experience ever having run a company. They have never had to meet a payroll or make business decisions. They view businesses as bottomless pots of money they can simply raid to provide more goodies for one favored group or another.Alhouse: New from Nate Silver: "Election Update: Clinton’s Lead Is As Safe As Kerry’s Was In 2004." Instapundit: So You're Saying There's a Chance. Trump has consistently out performed media expectations. Also from Insty: Doesn't Fit the Narrative: One Of Hillary Clinton’s DNC Delegates Literally Tried To Murder Someone, But Media Are Silent. “When will media start focusing on the Democrat gun crime epidemic?”
More on the comparison of the media treatment of Patti Smith and Cindy Sheehan: Ashe Schow again, Let's not attack grieving mothers speaking at conventions and She at Ricochet: A Tale of Two Moms
Remember how Maureen Dowd talked about Patricia Smith’s ‘absolute moral authority?’From Wombat-socho's "In The Mailbox: 07.20.16", The Top Five Reasons You Can NOT Vote Hillary Clinton, Who Gets Absolute Moral Authority?, Ready for Hillary! Pennsylvania Democrat Delegate Shoots Her Husband, and from the usually sensible Megan McArdle: Republicans Can’t Praise Trump, So They Bash Clinton
No, I don’t remember that either.
Because it didn’t happen.
Instead, Patricia Smith is being relentlessly ‘fact-checked’ this morning. By PolitiFact. By The Washington Post. And probably many more.
The crux of Patricia Smith’s argument is that Hillary is a liar who told her, more-or-less over the body of her dead son, that the ‘video’ was responsible for the Benghazi attacks. Mrs Smith believes that Hillary knew, at the time, that the Benghazi attacks were organized terrorism. And there is strong evidence to indicate that she did know that. Including an inconveniently discovered email to her own daughter, sent on the night of the attack.
Just as there is strong evidence to indicate that, for days afterwards, Hillary, along with the rest of the Obama administration, was telling lots of people, and even foreign governments, that the video was responsible for the attack.
So, why is it so hard to believe that she would have told Patricia Smith the same thing?
Thus far, the best the Patricia Smith ‘fact checkers’ have been able to come up with is “there’s no conclusive evidence,” that Hillary mentioned the video to Smith, that other family members at the ceremony say that Clinton didn’t mention the video to them (so, absence of evidence is suddenly proof?), or that Smith’s story has changed over time (although her fundamental assertion has not).
I believe Patricia Smith.
Because the moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Benghazi is absolute.