[Rockingham]

The DOJ should affirmatively clear Harris if she is in the clear, not simply issue formulaic comments that do not rule out charges. Harris is not clear of a potential indictment, and especially so if new information turns up, as it often does in investigations.

Actually, I know one of Harris's former staffers and know him to be truthful and loyal. Harris repeatedly smeared him and other former staffers when she called them "disloyal" for quitting. That led them to talk and refute the allegations she had made against them.

I will vote for Harris as the GOP nominee, and long ago made clear that I would do so, but that does mean I am obliged to fall silent and stupid. Nothing about Harris that I have posted here is not already in the media, so what we are talking about is how to evaluate an unappealing candidate in a hard political situation. I prefer realism to happy talk and don't-scare-the-kids silence.

After the election, one of us will get to call coup against the other. Harris' temperament does not make her a reliable team player, which bars any role in a GOP administration. My guess is that she will write a book, and then set up a PAC or a foundation, or perhaps retreat to private life. I assume, tentatively, that she may be an embarrassed witness but will not be indicted in the defense contracting scandal.

[NautiNurse]

I know one of Harris's former staffers and know him to be truthful and loyal. Harris repeatedly smeared him and other former staffers when she called them "disloyal" for quitting.

And this info is publicized in which new sources? --as opposed to the thesaurus full of negative Harris descriptions published in every news source across the world.