Observer

Why are you promoting a relationship between Iran and the Orlando shooter? And the world is safer today than at nearly any time in human history, histrionics about mass shootings, BLM, and terrorism notwithstanding. Our species-narcissism forces us to always think we're in the worst time but not many humans in our past would trade backwards, and if they did, I'll have what they're smoking.

RCP has Clinton up by 3 in PA. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/pa/pennsylvania_trump_vs_clinton-5633.html PA hasn't gone R in almost 30 years...since 1988. Called a battleground state but hasn't been one in a while.

You'd make a bad cop.

When they start asking him questions next week, the train will get back off the rails. No worries.

When I was at Trump Arena next to Trump Tower inside the Trump Salon getting a Trump haircut thinking about Trump Largo and my Trump Cruiseline, build a wall. How much time left?

The AG can charge her. The FBI Director was tasked with looking into her possible guilt with respect to the two statutes mentioned before. Comey had to play the hand he was given. You don't understand it. That's OK. Comey wants another shot at Clinton but with a broader mandate--he was seething while testifying. He can't stand her. I would not be shocked if she was indicted in a second pass.

So you think Comey was lying today when he said he was not asked by Congress to look into whether Clinton lied (or obstructed)? Today and yesterday I saw a man who is seething at Clinton but was handcuffed by his legal duty to investigate Clinton under certain statutes quoted earlier in this thread by me. Comey would love a broader mandate. And given it, will come back with a much different result. Clinton is a long ways from out of the woods. You let your uniform get in the way of your vision. Clinton is in deep crap but got off because an honest guy followed his mandate. Comey did everything he could over the last two days to ask for another bite at the apple of this investigation. He's going to get it.

But not what the FBI was referred to investigate.

It's a legal question. Intent to what? She was hiding/destroying evidence like a MFer but Comey was not asked to look into perjury or obstruction (yet).

Intent to what?

If he promises to quit if he wins, he can nominate my left sock. If he attends the presidential debates as suggested today, 2 of them are long format (15 minutes per topic!!). He was a targically silent figure when the debates turned substantive in the home forum of the Republican debates. Can you imagine him staring at a mic for 7 minutes and trying to talk sensibly?

Trump is the idiot's idiot. He toys with the idea of quitting if elected. WTF?

Interesting to review the statutes in the context of a criminal investigation. Statute 1: 18 U.S.C.A. § 1924(a) Here none of the documents were actually classified when she used the server. Even if they were later deemed classified, she had no knowledge of their classified designation when removed. Statute 2: 18 U.S.C.A § 793(f) This is the espionage statute. It requires--as interpreted by the Supreme Court--intent to harm the US: Comey hit the right target, and carefully worded his statement. What Hillary did was wrong, reckless, and probably would get anyone in that position fired or sanctioned. But it was not criminal at least according to the FBI. And that's the only thing he could say given the statutes he had to work with. Now, I'm not sure why she wouldn't be charged with obstruction or some other crime based on her complete dishonesty in the investigation but that's not the question Comey could answer. That's something for the AG to decide.

Glad that's settled.

Safe to say Messi has no idea who Kelly is!

6 points according to most polls and the RCP average. The Fox polling is usually the best and has him at 6. And in the battleground states, he's getting shellacked. It's early but it ain't looking pretty. Hillary is a flat criminal but she controls her soundbytes.

She's a disaster but wait until you see the guy she's running against!

A friend of mine moved here from India to go to grad school on September 10th. He met his roommate on September 11. The roommate's name: Osama Hussein. Apparently a great guy but tough draw on the naming.

Attacking a guy for his profession? Like being a doctor is a bad thing? Imagine a board where we stuck to issues.

If REMAIN had won, no action would have been needed by Parliament if it wanted to follow the referendum. REMAIN is a vote for no change.

You've obviously missed his white power posts. (No, I'm not kidding although I accused him of being a second hogboy.)

You don't understand the Brexit referendum. It's not binding on the representatives. That's why I asked the question.

If you were an elected official and were anti-abortion, but your discrict was pro-choice, how would you vote when pro-choice legislation arrived at your desk? Your conscience that got you elected? Against your conscience and following the masses? Elected officials should do the former and the electorate can vote them out if they don't like it.

Not necessarily. It's a thorny issue. You can't boot everyone out. You can't just waive a magic wand and grant amnesty. But tackling it in an honest way requires some decision to set up an achievable way to let productive members of our society, including illegals, join it. The left and right need to find a way to work together to tackle this (and so many other) problems. The tenor of both sides is division but division accomplishes dick.

The Brexit vote is not cleanly conservative, but it's interesting that US conservatives are mostly supporting the LEAVE result, despite it being a vote against free trade. Conservatives were once the party of free trade and now have become protectionists who don't believe in open trade. It's a curious turn to find them in bed with trade unions and the left. That conservatives (the current crop of them) vote anti immigration is no shock. There was a moment here where it seemed the right in the US might tackle immigration reform in a meaningful way, but the Trump ascendency ensures that won't happen.