To the editor: Hillary Clinton's emails were investigated by the FBI, who found insufficient evidence for criminal prosecution. In response, Clinton took responsibility by acknowledging her mistakes.
Former students of so-called Trump University are suing Donald Trump for fraud. In response, Trump has denied responsibility and attacked the heritage of the judge hearing the case.
The bottom line is that Clinton has shown that she is capable of assuming the awesome responsibilities of the presidency. Trump has shown that he never will be.
John D. Kelley, Santa Barbara
To the editor: Honestly, I am plenty tired of hearing about Clinton’s damn emails (as
The bottom line is that the FBI decided that there is no basis to go forward with an indictment.
FBI Director James B. Comey clarified his unclear, somewhat confusing, public statements when he later testified before a congressional hearing.
Now let's get serious about comparing Secretary Clinton's candidacy with that of Donald Trump, a narcissistic adolescent-acting bully.
Marcia Herman, Los Angeles
To the editor: I read with amusement the article detailing the alleged classified status of many old Clinton e-mail messages.
As is well known, the federal government would classify Jefferson's nose on Mount Rushmore if it could get away with it.
The Clinton messages are doubtless about things everyone knows already, or wouldn't really care about anymore anyway. The so-called email scandal is a purely manufactured one targeting Clinton's record largely because she is a woman who is presumably not tough enough to absorb this bullying. Let's all move on.
Daniel Loftin, Long Beach
To the editor: Really? What exactly does Secretary Clinton have to do to get past this issue?
She clearly believes that she has been exonerated (she has been) and that the FBI director concluded she did not intentionally transmit classified information (he did conclude this).
Inside the federal government, what can be sent via email is a very tough issue for all employees and contractors. It is easy to make a mistake or simply be unaware of the status of a piece of information. That's why intent is the critical issue.
I defy any federal manager or, better yet, any member of Congress to allow their email to be scrutinized at the level Clinton's has been, and come out without any issues.
This was a minor transgression for which virtually no other employee would be called to account on. All the facts are known and there is nothing new here despite the wild charges being hurled by Trump. It is time for the press to move on.
Scott Sewell, Marina del Rey
To the editor: I very seldom see anti-Hillary letters. It's hard to believe almost everyone is pro-Hillary when she repeatedly lied to Congress while under oath!
Isn't the truth important anymore? Wake up people!
Patricia Nash, Redondo Beach
To the editor: No rational person would equate what are labeled "lies by Hillary Clinton" to the outright fabrications from Donald Trump.
What Clinton, to her detriment, has done is offer facts in a way to favor her position.
She is accused of being too nuanced — even God forbid "legal" — in her statements. Interestingly, that's a quality I would want in a President.
Robin Hill, Mar Vista