Linda vanDyck made reference to part of my letter of Aug. 12. She re-ferred to a question I jok-ingly asked. Her state-ment was “is this the kind of question he asks him-self when deciding who to vote for?” If so, he should be removed from the vot-ing rolls as being too ill-advised to make such im-portant decisions.

Did Linda check Fact Check? Is it legal to re-move a person from the voting rolls for being ill-advised? If so, Mrs. Clin-ton would lose 85 percent of her voters.

I have found over the years that there is a huge amount of voters who are uninformed and unedu-cated as to the record of the people they vote for. It’s okay, they are pro-tected by the enormity of their stupidity.

Anyone that reads vanDyck’s letter will no-tice she did not question my facts on Mrs. Clinton’s records. The parts on how she treats women, and her personal finances. Al-so, about the misuse of funds from her founda-tion.

How about a Fact Check on Hillary’s 10-top verified lies. Why would anyone vote for a person being investigated by the FBI? Also, an inspector general who passed evi-dence of potential mis-handling of classified in-formation to the Justice Department.

The current FBI direc-tor was nominated by President Obama. So this investigation was not started by a Republican- nominated director.

It would be nice if Lin-da vanDyck would not use ugly insulting remarks against people she disa-grees with. I welcome a factual debate on Mrs. Clinton’s record: she is the one running for office.

The only two reasons for voting for her I have heard from my Democrat-ic friends are: she’s a woman and Bill was a great President. Does honesty and integrity matter? Linda vanDyck, why not use Fact Check to defend Hillary’s record?