In reading your Editorial Board recommendation of Hillary Clinton for president you state, “For one thing, Clinton has been thoroughly vetted and battle-tested.” Thoroughly vetted? She is currently (not to mention all the prior investigations), under intense scrutiny on multiple fronts: emails, donations to the Clinton Foundation as she was Secretary of State, now Terry McAuliffe.
Her entire political career can truthfully be characterized as one investigation after another. Battle tested? What about her response (or lack of) to the Benghazi disaster? Your credibility as a board is sorely lacking when you make statements that are devoid of facts.
If the Bee and other journalistic organizations would in fact do their job of vetting Clinton, then you and they would have to conclude that she fails to possess the qualities we all expect and need of our president.
Christopher Patin, Clovis