Two People Help Feeble Hillary Clinton Up Steps at Aretha Franklin Funeral

Bill and Hillary Clinton attended Aretha Franklin’s funeral on Friday in Detroit, Michigan.

After paying their respects viewing the open casket, Bill and Hillary headed over to their seats.

She may be taking meds that are helping her, but I really do not see her "fainting" in that van episode. My brother said if it wasn't Parkinsons she mays have had a bowel issue where she couldn't take another step without crapping in her pants and the cramps were so painful she couldn't walk. But either way, that was NOT a fainting spell she had. I use to faint a lot, I know exactly what it is like. When I was in High school I use to run on the cross country team and also run a lot of marathons and I got my blood pressure so low I would faint at times, one minute I would be standing, next minute I would be on the ground like a puppet having it's strings cut. Never was I ever able to stand up like Hillary during a fainting spell, it just does not happen never mind trying to actually walk. What convince me is that she has Parkinsons is the people around her reacted to this as if it was routine, and then the one guy always carrying the laser pointer.....

BTW, that guard was taken out last year for failing Hillary........

Special Agent who handled Hillary Clinton during 2016 seizure-like collapse dead at 49

Todd Madison obituary

Secret Service might have broken protocol during Hillary Clinton's exit from 9/11 event (and paid the ultimate price for it)

Todd Madison RIP

Yes, I agree that is not fainting. There is a ton of misdirection about that incident including the notion that she fainted. What is happening there is neuromuscular where the brain is not properly controlling the legs. That's why a lot of people say Parkinsons. But I know Parkinsons really well, unfortunately, in several different patients.

What I see in that van video could be an example of an reaction to Parkinsons overmedication. It could be dozens of other things. Also others have suggested she has deep brain stimulation to keep her functional with Parkinsons. Unfortunately none of my patients could or can afford that treatment, so I don't know much about it.

Although that video could be Parkinsons with failure to control leg muscles, there are too many other recent videos that show nearly perfect muscle control, but obvious balance problems, possible weakness, etc. Even early Parkinsons takes away the muscle control needed to walk up stairs like I saw the other days. But like I said there could be some magic like DBS involved.

“Benghazi”

If your point is that Hillary is guilty of murder, and deserves to be hanged, you get no argument from me. I’d like to see her get tried, convicted and sentenced accordingly.

In all likelihood, that will not happen. I’m not saying I’m fine with that - because I’m not. But I do understand the reason - giving a politician of her notoriety a fair trial is deeply problematic.

For starters, imagine jury selection. Half the people voted for her to be president of the United States and half voted against her. Would the prosecution agree on a jurer who had voted for her? Would the defense agree on a jurer who had voted against her?

The problem is that it’s impossible to rule out political bias influencing the trial. The case would have to be thrown out - not because she is “above the law” but because every single witness, forensic expert, attorney and even the judge would have demonstrable bias for her or against her.

Do you know any people that voted for Hillary Clinton who could be convinced she was responsible for the deaths and coverup in Benghazi? Do you know any people who voted for her that could be convinced that she had Seth Rich killed or was guilty of any other “Arkancides”? Of course not. They think all that stuff is just lies and smears of the “vast right wing conspiracy”.

If there was ever any chance of getting a conviction in the Seth Rich case or any other Arkancide case, it would have been before the case received publicity and before the local jurisdiction made any connections to HRC or any evidence of a political motivation for the killing. If by following normal investigatory leads, the evidence led directly at her, it could then be argued that the investigators could not have been biased because they had no way of knowing where the evidence was pointing.

This is what it meant by “justice is blind”. Once the issue has been made public and once political motives have been ascribed, justice is no longer “blind”.

The very last place a case against Hillary Clinton could originate from would be the DOJ of the Trump administration. Forget about it - a Republican President’s DOJ prosecuting his Democrat rival?

How could you possibly prove objectivity? You couldn’t.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.