Conservative group asks probe of Clinton move for son-in-law

[Jarqui]

37. I do not completely agree about these guys

I do agree they've got a conservative/GOP slant (slope might be better) or currently heavy bias. I supports Dems so on that level, I'm not too excited about what they're doing either.

Larry Klayman, who started them, is no longer with them and is an extremist.

Judicial Watch on Obama's birth certificate
:http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/weekly-updates/28-judicial-watch-investigates-obamas-mortgage-deal/

July 11, 2008

"Our legal team reviewed the argument and provided some useful analysis that I thought I should share with you. Under 8 U.S.C. 1401(a), anyone born in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S., is a U.S. citizen at birth. In addition, under 8 U.S.C. 1405, anyone born in Hawaii after April 30, 1900 is a U.S. citizen at birth. (Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961.) The argument questioning Obama’s legal eligibility is wrong and apparently confuses persons born inside the U.S. with persons born outside the U.S., one of whose parents is a U.S. citizen and the other is a non-U.S. citizen (8 U.S.C. 1401(g)).

I know there are concerns about whether the birth certificate distributed by the Obama campaign is truly an official copy. The Obama camp will have to put to rest that question on its own. In the meantime, I haven’t seen any reliable information yet to suggest Obama was born anywhere other than Hawaii, so he’s a United States citizen and eligible to serve as our nation’s president.

Tom Fitton
President

Looks like you're the one doing the smearing of Judicial Watch (hate to defend them but the facts are the facts).

What Judicial Watch is doing is different than merely smearing with garbage accusations/labels, etc like your lame "Bernie is a child molester" example.

They're digging up evidence. Real indisputable hard copy or facts for everyone to see. That's much harder to dispute. And it's something the media can latch on to and run with.

In terms of the "mushrooming Benghazi scandal", it did mushroom. It started with Benghazi. Then it morphed into Clinton's email server trying to find the Benghazi emails when they started doing FOIAs for her emails. Now that has all kinds of folks looking at all kinds of things. I wrote about some of them here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251858165#post12
and here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=894929

I've been hearing this email thing is "nothing" for quite some time

The House originally requested these emails more than a year ago
"nothing" has the GOP controlled Senate Judiciary Committee still looking into it
"nothing" has the GOP controlled House still looking over their shoulder
"nothing" has the FBI still looking into it
"nothing" still has a third of 55,000 pages of Clinton's emails to go through and publish in the next couple of months
"nothing" still has the judgement of the AP FOIA request of the State Department to be satisfied over the next four plus months to provide additional information beyond the 55,000 pages of emails
"nothing" has spread to "mysteriously" missing emails belonging to Clinton's IT guy
"nothing" has Clinton's IT guy lawyering up and pleading the 5th
"nothing" has the Senate Judiciary Committee evaluating immunity for Clinton's IT guy
"nothing" has spread to them looking at the involvement of Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills and at least 9 others
"nothing" has already fed the GOP more Clinton lies to be used against her in the general election
http://nypost.com/2015/09/30/hillarys-e-mail-lies-seven-months-and-counting/
http://nypost.com/2015/08/16/hillary-clintons-5-e-mail-lies/

Can't say I feel comfortable describing the above as "nothing" for a candidate for President.

"nothing" has developed a life of it's own with no end in sight, has spread and could be a real cancer on her candidacy.

Forgot Inspector General on the above list as someone pointed out.

Since then, we have them looking at the emails for
- Hillary helping her son-in-law while Secretary of State
- arms deals for Clinton Foundation/campaign donors
- mining deals for the Canadian wing of the Clinton Foundation
- at least two emails recently confirmed as "top secret" on her server at home
etc

All of those started with or got fueled in some way by the little Benghazi investigation. It's like a cancerous tumor, mushrooming, growing tentacles. And it's a lot worse than the verbal smears because it starts with hard copy emails sent or received by Hillary. And here we are more than a couple of years past the start of Benghazi, less than 11 months away from the election and this mess is branching out and still going strong.

As Democrats, that's not very good news for the front runner or us. Hillary carries significant risk that folks like this are going to bury her with this stuff.

It's hard to trust the candidate to tell us how vulnerable she is because she's been a chronic liar much of her career.

Judicial Watch, the Kochs, the GOP and the media are going chow down on Hillary. They're going to do it whether we like it or not and they've got volumes of material to do it with.


Bernie, who I support, doesn't have this baggage. I think he's honest, has better truly progressive policies and because of the mess above, is a better bet. More than my slip is showing. You know where my heart is.