It is irrefutable that I, to use your clichéd response to my hackneyed phrase, have far more knowledge of me than you. I was a Sanders supporter.
But I live in the real world. A world where a flawed Clinton is still 1000 times better than Herr Drumpf. Strangely enough, that’s what Sanders has said repeatedly.
Your argument that many lawyers have concluded that Clinton broke the law already implies that many lawyers did not. In every legal matter, there will be some lawyers who argue on one side and some who argue on the other. John Yoo wrote a memo trying to justify the legality of torturing prisioners, so Bush and Cheney would not be tried as war criminals.
People may study the law, but that doesn’t mean their own personal politics are not filtering their judgment. Five partisan Supreme Court Justices awarded the 2000 election to George W Bush in a decision that has been characterized as criminal by another lawyer. If the head of the FBI — a lawyer — did not recommend prosecution of “potential violation” of federal law, of course other lawyers could argue otherwise. That’s what lawyers do.
That’s why lawyers can argue before the Supreme Court that closing womens’ health clinics in Texas will help improve the health care given to thousands of low income women. (Even though it is just a partisan end-around to stop abortion.) It doesn’t take a lawyer to see the insanity of this argument. But only a lawyer would argue it anyway, because that’s the job.
Look at yourself and your own beliefs. If you are truly an immigrants rights activist, how could you possibly argue for an outcome that could enable the election of a man who will set those rights back to the 1930's?
You were seven or eight years old when a partisan Supreme Court and the corrupt election practices of Florida helped Bush steal the 2000 election. You couldn’t possibly understand all the damage done to the country by Bush and Cheney. And yet here you are, along with all the other Bernie or Busters, blindly helping to facilitate the candidacy of a man who will return to all of those failed policies, along with some new ones that will do even more damage.
Your focus on Hillary is exactly what the GOP and the Media want you to do — muddy the issues and make the general election tight, so Trump has a chance and the TV networks can get better ratings.
As much as I love Bernie, the primary system is set up in a way that the more progressive candidate would lose virtually every state that will vote Republican in the general election. Throughout the South, Clinton’s margins were ridiculously large, and there’s no amount of whining about rigged elections that will overturn results where Clinton won by over 25 points.
With that built-in disadvantage, Sanders needed to win Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York in order to make a case that he deserved the nomination, but he didn’t. He got crushed in those states and the exit polls substantiate those results.
In California, Clinton’s big win went against the polls, which seems to have created the “election was rigged” argument. But California has a paper trail. And when all the votes are finally counted, it will confirm that Clinton won the state, even if it is only by 6%, instead of the 12% reported on election night.
There is no other path going forward for die hard supporters other than to hope for a non-election based event to overturn the results of the primary. It’s time to unite the party and stop Trump from ruining the country. And if you’ve seen his comments on addressing our national debt, and his past propensity to use bankruptcy to enrich himself in spite of his failed business ventures, we have no idea of how much damage he could do.
Congratulations you on your goal of becoming a lawyer, and especially because you had the good sense to go to UCLA.