[justiceseeker93]

I don't see why Donald Trump isn't going after Huma on the campaign trail as part of his national security theme.

She doesn't meet the smell test for a national security clearance, so what in the world was she doing with access to classified documents and information at the State Department???

What would be the downside for Trump if he mentions Huma and her closeness to HRC as evidence of HRC's callousness toward radical Islam and national security?

[Sacajaweau]

If Trump does go after Huma, it will be through Guiliani.

A Trump administration will get rid of Huma...The target is Hillary.

[libertarian27]

This really started ramping up over the weekend.

#HillarysHuma (twitter), with a few articles seen more as MSM then the other sites that this has been shown ad nauseam for months.

I think it needs more ‘press’ and grassroots inquiry for him to even mention all this at a rally...if he does mention it, I think it should be a ‘throw away’ comment... IMHO

[Political Junkie Too]

The downside is that it opens up Trump to charges that he's back to making personal attacks, that he's not running against Abedain but against Clinton, that's he's going off message again, that he's unpresidential.

These attacks are intended to put Trump on the defensive and take him off message rather than be the result of being off message, because they know how easily Trump can be distracted from the message.

So I'd say to stay away from sidetracks and stay focused on attacking Clinton directly over the issues.

-PJ

[Ann Archy]

He needs to do some of that, for sure, but 99% of Americans have NO FRREAKING idea who Huma is!

[Liz]

"Besides my govt pension, Hillary put me and Huma on the govt payroll....cashing State Dept govt paychecks. I don't need a job. "

"Besides, Hillary promised me a high-paying govt job in her administration."

[silverleaf]

Because many people don’t give a rats patoot about Huma Weiner compared to saving this country with big issues like immigration policy, economic policy and national security.

Some of us are behind trumps attacks on persons and cheering his attacks on corrupt dysfunctional political parties and systems and the people who created them and represent them. Liked Hillary

Huma is a small fish. We have less than 90 days..

[ExTexasRedhead]

There’s a long list of Zero cohorts who fit the classification of traitors, ya think?

[Eleutheria5]

Now just a cotton pickin’ minit here. Hillary isn’t callous to radical Islam and its threat to national security. She’s feckless.

[Ohioan]

The all out media attack on Donald Trump is not a sign of strength--rather of panic. I know that the media narrative also suggests that it is very late in the campaign. That is sheer bunk. Campaigns used to really get started after Labor Day. Enormous gains & losses can take place in the last few weeks of a contest--especially, where one candidate is a better communicator than the other.

There is no necessary downside in making the point you suggest with respect to Huma Abedin. It may be an item--perhaps one of many--being saved for an election eve address or one in September or October. The advantage that we have is that there is a tremendous disparity in factual ammunition. Donald Trump has an overwhelming arsenal; Mrs. Clinton has only the endless iteration of a stale, but still false narrative.

Damn the lies & Damn the liars! Elect Trump! Full speed ahead!

[RitaOK]

Trump is picking his battles, now. I believe the axe falls first on Hillary, and then the broader themes of security at home and abroad, immigration and trade.

*Humas is best left to friendly media and the surrogates. Imho.

[Impy]

Trump yesterday mentioned Huma, at least in the context of her sleazy husband.