Guard Dog

First of all the FBI has decided nothing of the sort. And they can't charge her. All they can do is recommend a charge to the United States Attorney General. Who just had a "secret" meeting with Bill Clinton which no reporters or photographers were allowed to see. Do you REALLY think they were talking about their grandchildren? Except that it's not how it works. The FBI (or any other Federal law enforcement agency seeking a federal indictment) works together with the prosecutor (U.S. Attorney's Office) who presents the evidence to a federal grand jury --which makes the judgment to indict based on whether there is enough evidence for the accused to have committed the crime. The Attorney General is not part of the process and it would not be ethical for her to be involved with the process, and she has EXPLICITLY stated that she will not be part of the process. Correct, I was referring to the US Attorney in general when I said the AG because that is like referring to the President on the actions of a cabinet member. Accurate but not precise. Well, considering the fact that you were stating that Attorney General Loretta Lynch is a member of the same party as Hillary Clinton, and that she would choose not to indict Secretary Clinton. You and others here are more than implying impropriety specifically on the part of the Clintons and the Attorney General. I was merely pointing out that the Attorney General is not part of the process to make an indictment. And you are correct, but she does have influence over the process. And just to be clear I didn't imply impropriety HAS happened, just that it wouldn't surprise me if it does. I don't think it would surprise you either. And I don't think it would matter to you. As a practical matter when you fill out your ballot in November you are going to have three choices, Trump, Clinton, or neither. You preferred political views will demand you choose Clinton. If your principles demand a different choice you can certainly follow them but you'll do so knowing you are giving up any choice on influencing the outcome, small as that may be. It's a choice only you can make. I've made my choice, wouldn't begrudge anyone else theirs.

First of all the FBI has decided nothing of the sort. And they can't charge her. All they can do is recommend a charge to the United States Attorney General. Who just had a "secret" meeting with Bill Clinton which no reporters or photographers were allowed to see. Do you REALLY think they were talking about their grandchildren? Except that it's not how it works. The FBI (or any other Federal law enforcement agency seeking a federal indictment) works together with the prosecutor (U.S. Attorney's Office) who presents the evidence to a federal grand jury --which makes the judgment to indict based on whether there is enough evidence for the accused to have committed the crime. The Attorney General is not part of the process and it would not be ethical for her to be involved with the process, and she has EXPLICITLY stated that she will not be part of the process. Correct, I was referring to the US Attorney in general when I said the AG because that is like referring to the President on the actions of a cabinet member. Accurate but not precise.

GD, that question you asked me sometimes is framed a different way because some folks think I'm biased on certain topics but its normally from people who dont really respect the principle of debate so I wouldnt really be too concerned about responding But with you its different as I do appreciate your efforts you put into our debates ....I have learnt a lot from you. For example I have changed my view on gun control primarily on the way you made your point But of course on topics like this we differ but thats fine and normal So if it was Trump I would be convinced he had something to hide because I dont think much of his integrity But I wouldn't assume the FBI was incompetent and if they decided to not charge him I would assume it was because of lack of evidence. Thats the difference, I trust the FBI to do there job and if there was real evidence against her they would have charged her I dont see the system as rigged You really don't see an issue where the Presidential Candidate... the ONLY viable Presidential Candidate of a major political party is being investigated for criminal conduct by a DOJ controlled by that same candidate's political party? But the FBI are the ones who have decided not to charge her....surly we not saying the FBI is under the influence of the Democrats and they not doing there job properly? First of all the FBI has decided nothing of the sort. And they can't charge her. All they can do is recommend a charge to the United States Attorney General. Who just had a "secret" meeting with Bill Clinton which no reporters or photographers were allowed to see. Do you REALLY think they were talking about their grandchildren? Now even of all of this is as dirty as it looks it does not mean Hillary Clinton will not be the 45th President of these United States. When your choices are between a corrupt and petty ex Senator and a billionaire blowhard who says the stupidest things imaginable you are screwed no matter what. Or you could stand by principles and support Gary Johnson or Jill Stein. I like Gary Johnson, he was on CNN State of the Union today But the news presenters ask the strangest questions or rather questions that are predictable, so the lady interviewing Johnson say " do you think Trump is a racist " How do you think he answered That is what annoys me about him. If I had been sitting in for him on Townhall last week I would have handled ALL of those questions very differently. Most of what they are asking are just using him as a catspaw to attack Trump. For the most part he should reject the premise of the questions. They all seem to built around the notion that nothing happens unless the federal government does it and that is simply not true. Gary is a shill. I'm sincerely surprised you haven't realized this yet. He is not the answer. I know exactly what he is. And if Hillary & Trump are equally bad where does one turn? I realize you will tell me Trump is the "lesser of two evils" and perhaps he is in some ways. But under either we are looking at a huge expansion of federal power and a continuation of the erosion of the separation of powers between the executive & legislature. IMO there is no "lesser" evil.

GD, that question you asked me sometimes is framed a different way because some folks think I'm biased on certain topics but its normally from people who dont really respect the principle of debate so I wouldnt really be too concerned about responding But with you its different as I do appreciate your efforts you put into our debates ....I have learnt a lot from you. For example I have changed my view on gun control primarily on the way you made your point But of course on topics like this we differ but thats fine and normal So if it was Trump I would be convinced he had something to hide because I dont think much of his integrity But I wouldn't assume the FBI was incompetent and if they decided to not charge him I would assume it was because of lack of evidence. Thats the difference, I trust the FBI to do there job and if there was real evidence against her they would have charged her I dont see the system as rigged You really don't see an issue where the Presidential Candidate... the ONLY viable Presidential Candidate of a major political party is being investigated for criminal conduct by a DOJ controlled by that same candidate's political party? But the FBI are the ones who have decided not to charge her....surly we not saying the FBI is under the influence of the Democrats and they not doing there job properly? First of all the FBI has decided nothing of the sort. And they can't charge her. All they can do is recommend a charge to the United States Attorney General. Who just had a "secret" meeting with Bill Clinton which no reporters or photographers were allowed to see. Do you REALLY think they were talking about their grandchildren? Now even of all of this is as dirty as it looks it does not mean Hillary Clinton will not be the 45th President of these United States. When your choices are between a corrupt and petty ex Senator and a billionaire blowhard who says the stupidest things imaginable you are screwed no matter what. Or you could stand by principles and support Gary Johnson or Jill Stein. I like Gary Johnson, he was on CNN State of the Union today But the news presenters ask the strangest questions or rather questions that are predictable, so the lady interviewing Johnson say " do you think Trump is a racist " How do you think he answered That is what annoys me about him. If I had been sitting in for him on Townhall last week I would have handled ALL of those questions very differently. Most of what they are asking are just using him as a catspaw to attack Trump. For the most part he should reject the premise of the questions. They all seem to built around the notion that nothing happens unless the federal government does it and that is simply not true.

GD, that question you asked me sometimes is framed a different way because some folks think I'm biased on certain topics but its normally from people who dont really respect the principle of debate so I wouldnt really be too concerned about responding But with you its different as I do appreciate your efforts you put into our debates ....I have learnt a lot from you. For example I have changed my view on gun control primarily on the way you made your point But of course on topics like this we differ but thats fine and normal So if it was Trump I would be convinced he had something to hide because I dont think much of his integrity But I wouldn't assume the FBI was incompetent and if they decided to not charge him I would assume it was because of lack of evidence. Thats the difference, I trust the FBI to do there job and if there was real evidence against her they would have charged her I dont see the system as rigged You really don't see an issue where the Presidential Candidate... the ONLY viable Presidential Candidate of a major political party is being investigated for criminal conduct by a DOJ controlled by that same candidate's political party? But the FBI are the ones who have decided not to charge her....surly we not saying the FBI is under the influence of the Democrats and they not doing there job properly? First of all the FBI has decided nothing of the sort. And they can't charge her. All they can do is recommend a charge to the United States Attorney General. Who just had a "secret" meeting with Bill Clinton which no reporters or photographers were allowed to see. Do you REALLY think they were talking about their grandchildren? Now even of all of this is as dirty as it looks it does not mean Hillary Clinton will not be the 45th President of these United States. When your choices are between a corrupt and petty ex Senator and a billionaire blowhard who says the stupidest things imaginable you are screwed no matter what. Or you could stand by principles and support Gary Johnson or Jill Stein.

Bruce, let my pose a hypothetical question. And I would like you to think about an answer. Assume for a moment that the use of a private server to conduct the business of the United States was no big deal. All the data on that server are still the property of the United States. Why do you think she had the data destroyed before complying with a court order to surrender the server? This is the heart of it right here. Had she just said "Private server was wrong? My bad, sorry about that. Here's all the data" this whole thing dies three years ago.

GD, that question you asked me sometimes is framed a different way because some folks think I'm biased on certain topics but its normally from people who dont really respect the principle of debate so I wouldnt really be too concerned about responding But with you its different as I do appreciate your efforts you put into our debates ....I have learnt a lot from you. For example I have changed my view on gun control primarily on the way you made your point But of course on topics like this we differ but thats fine and normal So if it was Trump I would be convinced he had something to hide because I dont think much of his integrity But I wouldn't assume the FBI was incompetent and if they decided to not charge him I would assume it was because of lack of evidence. Thats the difference, I trust the FBI to do there job and if there was real evidence against her they would have charged her I dont see the system as rigged You really don't see an issue where the Presidential Candidate... the ONLY viable Presidential Candidate of a major political party is being investigated for criminal conduct by a DOJ controlled by that same candidate's political party?

Well, the system is rigged in that the Democrats don't eat their own. As long as the DOJ is under the control of Democrats would not surprise me if a democrat candidate was caught red handed raping the corpse of an underage hooker he had just murdered didn't get charged. In fact anyone who criticized that decision would probably be called a bigot for being against his "underage hooker murder" lifestyle choices. What's worse is many Americans will do a Bruce is doing and just overlook it because they like the criminals politics. In all seriousness that "meeting" between Lynch & Bill Clinton didn't just look bad... it WAS bad. But hardly a shock. Now Hillary Clinton is not stupid. If she were and this private e-mail server were just a mistake in the name of convenience and privacy I'd look past it. But because she is not stupid then it looks more like a way of avoiding things like Congressional oversight and those annoying FOI requests. That begs the question "What is she hiding". And it takes on a new light when the Clinton Foundations takes in millions of dollars in donations by foreign interests who received favorable treatment from the State Dept. If none of this is true WHY did she feel the need to have all the data professionally destroyed before complying with the subpoena for her server? Bruce, let me ask you a question, change the name Hillary with Donald Trump and keep all the facts the same. Would you still think this was nothing? I'm guessing no.

If I was Huma Aberdeen I'd be looking into lawyers and letting everyone know I'm not suicidal right about now.

ABC had Molson Canadian on sale yesterday for Canada Day (I guess). So I bought a case. It's not the best Canadian beer (Red Racer IPA has that covered) but it is very.... Canadian... sort of. Well, it's from Canada anyway. So last night I played Baldur's Gate and drank a toast to Canada. I think I'll do that again tonight. Here's to ya eh!

The Soup Nazi should have been the picture for the German Reich. And how does Banya get Italy?

It sounds like you've had enough of the midwest anyway. And it would be closer to family.

He's a great poll. 13% of respondents would rather that the Earth hit by an asteroid than have Trump or Clinton as President. http://www.12news.com/news/nation-now/poll-13-prefer-meteor-hitting-earth-to-trump-or-clinton-as-president/261733603 Well, it WOULD be quicker. Hmmmmm..... VOTE ASTEROID 2016! ASTEROID IN '16: IT WILL ROCK YOUR WORLD!

Great! Now I have coffee all over my monitor! That would be funny if only you were joking. Hillary Clinton does not want to destroy the US. I don't think she thinks she could. Hillary Clinton is only interested in the glorification of Hillary Clinton. If she happens to help a few people along the way that;s great. If she happens to ruin a few people along the way then f--k them. And yes she can certainly win this election (God help us all) . Oh and by the way there was not gay marriage bill. The Supreme Court found that there was ALWAYS a right to gay marriage as an "equal protection" issue. Or more accurately the court found that prohibiting it was actually prohibited. And by the way, Barack Obama was OPPOSED to it before the SCOTUS took it up: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/3375059/Barack-Obama-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman.html.

Self flagellation? I'm no "liberal" (in the American sense of the word) but I'm not watching them. If I want to see leftist hypocrisy I'll just watch the news.

If I could live in any other state Wyoming is #1 on my list.

As for Leferd's post, I say the Greeks can just go straight to hell! But in all seriousness, 99% of Americans do not lay awake at night wondering what the world thinks of us.

Apparently Newt f-----g Gingrich and Chris Christie are the leading candidates for Trump's VP pick. Christie would be an OK if unimaginative choice. But Gingrich? Seriously? That guy has more public dirty laundry than... well I guess any Republican not currently serving time. And he is slightly less likable than Trump himself if that is even possible. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gingrich-christie-are-the-leading-candidates-to-be-trumps-running-mate/2016/06/30/98fa3ecc-3eef-11e6-84e8-1580c7db5275_story.html

Now reading Soldier Dogs by Maria Goodavage. It's about the training and use of K9's in Iraq & Afghanistan. Also reading The Great Gatsby because why not.

Buccaneers play the Eagles in 45 days!

Thanks for the info... I didn't know this existed. And in two days it will be waiting for me at the Covington Post Office.

Thing is... they are BOTH right!

Everything I'm reading makes it sound like Elizabeth Warren is going to be Hillary's choice for VP. I think that would be a terrible idea. First of all she is a Senator from Massachusetts, a state Hillary will win no matter what. So no help there. Second she is Hillary's mirror image. She would be better served by using this pick to throw a bone to the Bernie Sanders populist crowd. Not Sanders himself, that would be a terrible idea. Someone like Jeff Merkley (Senator from Oregon) or Tulsi Gabbard (US Rep HI AND an Army Vet) would be solid choices. Just my $.02

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/684549/EU-cannot-rely-NATO-needs-new-defence-policy-chief Interesting development. An EU military under the command of a EU government. Amazing, the dream of William Penn, Charles de St-Pierre, Napoleon, & Hitler coming true with hardly a shot fired. This would make me feel better about a "leave" vote if I were British.

I bought the pre-release version of the new Master of Orion game. It's always been pretty to look at but it was a buggy mess at first. Of course I knew that is what I was signing up for so I'm not complaining. After the last update I made it 200 turns into a game without a glitch. It's come a long way.