Questions for the Democratic Party

I have some questions for the Democratic Party, questions that members of the mainstream media ought to be asking. Whether or not the Democratic Party will answer these questions remains to be seen.

#1 Why does your Party act as if it wants the USA’s southern border to be a sieve?

#2 If your Party doesn’t want the USA’s southern border to be a sieve, then why does your Party object to preventing foreigners from crossing the USA’s southern border illegally? (Preventing illegal border crossings would be the purpose of a wall built across the USA’s southern border.)

#3 Foreigners who are in the USA legally have played by the rules. Foreigner who are in the USA illegally have violated the rules. If you reward the latter by allowing them to remain in the USA without being penalized, then how would that be fair to the former?

#4 A 10/22/15 Real Clear Politics story states, “At a House Select Committee on Benghazi hearing Thursday, Rep. Jim Jordan introduced e-mails that show then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton calling the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya terrorism to family and the Egyptian prime minister. Jordan then questioned why she told Americans the Benghazi attack was a response to an infamous YouTube clip mocking Muslims but e-mailed it was a terrorist attack to the Egyptian prime minister and family.” So, why did Secretary Clinton give one story in public and a different story in private?

#5 Secretary Clinton’s private server contained classified information, some being top-secret information. How did that information get onto her server without her or anyone working for her violating federal law?

#6 Secretary Clinton didn’t need a private server in her home in order to conduct government business. So, other than to hide what she was doing, why did she want the private server?

#7 Here is a screenshot from a 05/31/16 story published by Rasmussen:

What makes Hillary Clinton so special that she should keep running for POTUS even if she ends up being indicted?

#8 Democrat Congressman Chaka Fattah initially refused to immediately resign from Congress after he was convicted on federal corruption charges. On 06/22/16, The Hill reported, “Rep. Chaka Fattah offered his resignation from Congress on Wednesday, but the embattled Pennsylvania Democrat intends to remain a member – and collect a salary – for several more months.” The Hill also reported, “In interviews conducted before his resignation letter, most Democrats opted simply not to comment at all, and none called for his resignation.” Why is it that congressional Democrats didn’t call for Fattah’s immediate resignation?

Eight questions are enough for now. So, what are the answers? Inquiring minds want to know.

Originally posted @ The Moderate Voice

Warren as Clinton's Running Mate?
Weekend Caption Contest™ Winners June 24, 2016
  • Retired military

    Question 9 “Does the democrat party support total confiscation of guns now or in the future?”

    ” Inquiring minds want to know ” – but apparently they don’t want to discuss it.

    • Question10 “How long has David Robertson been a contributor to Democratic Candidates and Campaigns?”

      • Scalia

        Question 11: Who does David Robertson think he is to ask so many questions, but he doesn’t bother to answer the ones he is asked?

        • Vagabond661

          Question 12: How did David get this gig if he doesn’t have any answers?

  • Retired military

    Dem Party Platform Calls For Prosecuting Global Warming Skeptics

    Democratic operatives responsible for creating their party’s platform this year have unanimously adopted a provision calling for the Department of Justice to investigate companies who disagree with Democrats on global warming science.

    So either agree with the dems are have the DOJ busting down your door.
    Nice business you got there, but I foresee numerous IRS audits in your future.

    • That’s been one of the big problems all along with AGW – you’ve GOT to have solid evidence of it, and that evidence isn’t really there unless you torture the data to get it to confess.

      Part of the problem is data interpretation. Yeah, we can measure something and we can theorize about the meaning of it – but taking the last 20 years and extrapolating it forward simply is an extrapolation, not reality. Hurricanes haven’t increased in frequency and severity, droughts are about as frequent as they’ve ever been, floods happen.

      If they were really getting the dire results that were forecast, you can bet they wouldn’t need to shut up the critics through legal action.

  • Retired military

    As with so many other questions the dem party wont provide answers. They will provide rhetoric and tell you to sit down and shut up and be thankful they are deeming to even take care of all the little people.

  • pennywit

    Is this a rhetorical stance, or does David really want answers? If the latter, he has two courses. He can email this to somebody on the Democratic Party or Hillary Clinton campaign communications team. Or he can research Democratic Party communications and find the answer himself. Personally, I think he ought to tweet this to the Hillary social-media team and see what they say to him … and then post the response.

    • Retired military

      I am sure it would be along the lines of
      right wing sexist.

  • The media will never ever ask Hillary a pointed or difficult question. They know who’s side they’re on…


  • Jwb10001

    It was revealed recently that Sid Vicious Blumencrook made a crap ton of money dealing with the Clinton’s. It was also revealed a while back that he had better access to Sec Clinton than Ambassador Steven’s did. It is also known that President Obama did NOT want Sid to have anything to do with his administration. Do you still wonder why Clinton had to hide her e-mails? She not only didn’t want her political enemies to see what she was doing, she didn’t want the president to know what was going on.

    • And … it’s a scary thought to think she’s at the top of the DNC heap as far as candidates go. I’d feel a lot better about our future if O’Malley were the candidate.

      I know I’m being pessimistic with this, but I’m worried we’re getting to a ‘one man, one vote, one time’ point where we’re about to elect a dictatrix that feels herself far above the law, and will get rid of all those pesky rules that’ll keep her from establishing the perpetual political dynasty she deserves.

      • Jwb10001

        At one point I was convinced that if she were elected she would be dogged by congressional investigations that would hamstring her agenda. Now I’m concerned that the republicans has so screwed the pooch that they won’t have enough power in congress to challenge her. I don’t go quiet so far as to think she’ll try to suspend elections but I suspect she will enthusiastically push to increase government intrusion.

        • Enthusiastically push? She’ll try to get a Cat D-9 bulldozer to give it a shove. 😉

          • Jwb10001

            Well yes that’s what I was politely trying to say lol.


        Still never understood how she was, in reality, the presumptive candidate even before the primaries. It was the equivalent of a “make-up” call in sports for her previous loss to Obama. Heck, it was such a sure thing that most other Democrats didn’t even consider a run because it was already in the bag.

        As someone said, with the demographic advantage enjoyed by the Democrats, they should have been able to run a cardboard cutout and win. Instead, they chose the one candidate that half the country despises. The result is that even if she does win, governing is simply more difficult.

        By the way, how much will Trump enjoy saying “I told you so” for the next four years? Perhaps even more than actually winning. I have always theorized that he really wouldn’t enjoy the job as he really wouldn’t be the boss in the fashion he has previously enjoyed, but being able to go on television every other day and crow about what he would have done differently for the next four years? Priceless.

        • She knew where the bodies are buried. (Possibly literally.) She knows the secrets, the levers, the buttons to push to get her way. And not to go all conspiracy-theory on her, but I’m thinking she’s made it clear to a lot of people that any attempt to get in her way will result in their political destruction.

          And possibly personal as well. If she’ll throw a filmmaker in jail to help promote the Bengazi ‘It wasn’t radical Islam, they were incited by a youtube video nobody watched’ story – what would she do when the stakes are the Presidency?

          And what would she do if she got it? THAT really worries me.

        • Retired military

          She was the presumptive nominee because she had the dirt on everyone from the FBI files. I think it is hilarious and most fitting that if she isn’t elected the first woman president the one person who stood in her way was Barrack Obama.