Neo

Could it be: 1). Evidence collected to date, into the bag and seal. Chain of custody intact. 2). Addition to evidence arrives, open bag and insert all contents into NEW bag, chain of custody intact. 3). Carelessly dispose of old bag, no longer relevant to chain of custody. Chain intact. 4). Take, find, steal discarded bag and plan bizarre strategy to some end .... Anyway, Eoannou must've considered this with his experience as they worked into the early morning hours to confirm the bag .... Edit: Much like D4rk said, earlier than me

Watched the Eoannou interview. The bag delivered to the home was an empty bag. I don't know what should be in the bag at this point. For instance, would it contain physical evidence (think vials, plastic containers), written observations (think doctors, nurses at the original exam), and post analysis write ups and data (lab reports and doctors)? I suspect all but the vials and containers are records stored at multiple places and can be recreated. All but the vials and containers is quite a statement. No conclusions. Mind numblingly weird. Impression: Eoannou is impressive and credible. That leads me nowhere toward a verdict, of course. Simple impression.

Sincere, legitimate question of a poster I view as passionate and informed- What do you conclude when you criticize her "on that score"? "That score" is significant if it includes sensitive, classified, marked, and top secret, today or tomorrow. She personally hired and paid a state department IT expert to assemble her server outside the scope of his role as her employee at State. He's pleaded the fifth (a right in criminal proceedings). What do you conclude on that score, regardless of his plea? How do you explain the Democratic DOJ/FBI in the context of dirty politics? Isn't this huge, for you? I'll try to give her the benefit of the doubt. These issues won't go away. I've drawn politically motivated conclusions. Guilty. I can't see this as one even though politics are part of the equation, as always. Agree. I'd use less colorful language!Insert "Bush didn't get up because he knew about the US/Zionist attack before it happened" conspiracy joke here.

To the point that this hit the light of day largely because of the election, I agree completely. If you're saying "it's my Republican enemies", you're correct. Washington is an ambitious town filled with tireless smart people who want to win at your expense. I don't dismiss allegations because they were politically timed by the opposition. They have merit, or not, regardless of the rat pointing fingers. Watergate, Iran Contra, Monica - it's always zealots on the other side. It's one of the reasons I ask "how could she have been so ....". Observation - I was surprised when this got to the FBI. I'm not close to the machinations of DOJ and FBI, but I thought that if ever there was a good situation to be in, it was HRC with a Domocratic President and AG. Human Interest: The Clinton - Obama rivalry, her role in his legacy, his desire to influence his successor, and his authority over DOJ/FBI. Just from a control your own destiny point of view, she must toss and turn at night, anxious and angry. I see President Obama smiling. Watergate, revisited: 1). It was not marked break in at the time the burglary took place. Only did a subsequent review of the office reveal it was a break in. 2). Paying hush money was more convenient than changing their retirement plans. Looking back, I shouldn't have paid hush money. 3). I kept my own Oval Office recording system. Others have taken notes and made recordings, too. There's an 18 minute gap. I was talking about golf lessons and Tricia's wedding. Don't worry. If it's relevant, I turned it over. Hogwash there, too. A Republican with an aggressive political opponent relentlessly digging in. Brilliant man, unfit to lead.

Colin Powell didn't deliberately build a second server network in his home and use it nearly exclusively. Truly, correct me if I'm wrong. Retroactively is Clinton's defense, and a smokescreen. OK, Ill concede retroactive even though the preliminary review indicates it may be otherwise. Classified or not, it's sensitive and vital. Classification or not, it should be secure. Stamp or not, guidelines and a Presidential directive said keep it on government servers. Classified or not, "I didn't want to carry two devices" when dealing with state secrets is ... I don't know the word. Further, it had to be retroactive if it's classified, she originated it, and she didn't submit it for classification before sending. Someone's grandmother who didn't know wouldn't hire a state department IT person to build the home server. Honest to goodness, this was deliberate and terrible and exposed the nation to risk for personal control reasons. Does everything have to be partisan? I have my leanings, no doubt. I hope I'm honest about them. I can't imagine twisting myself to defend this were it on "my side", whatever that is. Least interesting to me: What she did and why. Pure control to benefit her at the expense of risk to the nation (regardless of "stamp"). It's a yawner in terms of understanding it. Most interesting to me: The defense of it. I, too, am partisan.

Bunch of band wagoners. mumble mumble stutter indiscernible pause PA mumble unintelligible whisper.

Awesome comic. I've noticed that posts beginning "So what you're saying ..." almost always mischaracterize what the poster was saying. I had no idea others saw it, too. What do I know? Is this a "meme"?

Mr. East ... Thank you. I am not a petroleum engineer. I hear this on the other side: "Since we use the oil anyway, the delivery risk has to be compared to the delivery risk of the sources that won't be replaced by the pipeline". Is Keystone "net" riskier? The aquifer is news to me.

Ms. Clinton is now against the Keystone pipeline, calling it a distraction. Is this an election issue for any of you?

We the people! I'm vibrating.

Disclosure, transparency, I'm in.

I'll watch tonight. Grateful.

100% agree, in case I was confusing

Earnest question ... I'm under-informed. Did Carson initiate the Muslim / Candidate conversation? -- Self inflicted wound over non-issue in any but the "dog whistle" (to quote Mr. Whiskey) crowd. Did the media initiate the Muslim / Candidate conversation? -- Media asking a candidate a question the answer to which should have been "of course, if his/her beliefs allow them to execute the duties of the office, just like with anyone else". Accordingly (to me, that is) .... Self inflicted and he's to blame, or badly responded to. How it's relevant, well ask the media guy / gal who asked ... And now, to stir controversy .... asking any candidate if their beliefs prevent them from serving is legitimate, and so is any voter considering that when choosing a candidate to vote for. Heck, think of our Kentucky clerk. It's not the religious belief, or not (polite nod to Drunkard) ... but it's the ability to perform duties. Come to think of it, if that's controversial .... oh, boy.

Well, they do have extensive reign, if not quite free reign. So do George Soros, you, and my Aunt Emma. You called my post paranoid, earlier .... between posts where you identified your bogeyman.

Actually, I don't pick a partisan bone in my answer. Edited: Yikes, syntax!

I'm not sure if you're asking me a campaign finance question or implying that Koch money is somehow worse than Soros, Teamster money. If it's the former, I sincerely don't know. If it's the latter, I care only to the extent that our current law allows financial participation by individuals and the corporations they own. I'm happy to consider campaign finance reform. We can say what we want about donors, but the Koch brothers employ 100,000 people and they "threw" nearly $250 million at Sloan Kettering, although the adjective used by the less agitated is "donated". No one snickered at the announcement.

Walker's out and the thinning continues. Too slowly, as I've complained before. A few swipes at Trump on the way out. I expected great things from Walker. He never "arrived".

I like this post, Dennis. I'll only add - "needed this loss IF we learn from it". The NFL is designed for parity. You're gonna lose. Yesterday was two teams playing that are designed completely differently - emphasis on team talent vs emphasis on field generals. The generals won, as they have for years. With free agency and caps, design is as important as talent. We've improved in both aspects. The Pats remain great. Squish the Phish and I'm happy with the season so far.

I agree with the last half dozen posters. We have no idea what happened, or what two people legitimately believe happened. Allegations need to be taken seriously. Innocence is presumed. Everything else is speculation, observation, and inquiry. We've indulged all three. I think, without keeping a tally or having a conclusion, that BuffaloBorn and JJ are referring to exchanges where some speculation, observation and inquiry was met with admonition, descriptions of rape culture and victim shaming, and allusion to misogyny. I speak for no one. I'm a man. I make mistakes. I did read some personal comments in a highly charged environment where we're all guessing and claiming to do no more. Two lives have had their trajectories irreversibly altered. Justice and healing to both.

3Putt - you made me laugh (in a good way). The inter-webs - every now and then a poster who I view as so balanced and reserved, pro and con, just drops a "this is how I feel bomb"! Carry on!

Winner, winner, chicken dinner.

In some ways, we've seen a "Head Coach Rex Ryan" experience condensed to two weeks. Jets fans would nod their head knowingly. Lots of fun, swagger and talk. Feels good. Players and fans love him. Pounds somebody, gets a win, and gets attention. More swagger and the city joins in. The media lap it up. Then, Belichick and the meaningful test .... Now, don't write off the season in this collection of in-completes, pretenders, and frauds that is today's NFL. Ten and six has you right there. Miami becomes very important. You're gonna see eight in the box a lot this year.

Rapid Reaction 1). New England owns the division until they're beaten. Billboards, national broadcasters, and trash talking won't change that. 2). I'll play against a dumb bully every day of the week. 3). You can start two rookies and a UDFA across from two pro bowlers when your QB knows where the other seventeen players are, every moment. 4). Flags. The sport is almost unwatchable. Lather, rinse, repeat. 5). McCoy looks better (health, elusiveness). 6). Offensive line, preseason to today - one step forward, one step back. 7). When do we start getting the "ball in the hands of playmakers"? 8). First half defense v Pats = Second half defense v Colts. Not a bad result, absent the gift points. 9). Why is everyone slipping and falling? 10). Read option, anyone? 11). One more, and Carpenter's cut. It's not funny anymore.

Nothing worse than a stupid bully.