I read through the documents (quickly) as well. None were classified as child porn that I saw. They claimed most of it was for "Grooming purposes."

There were books with nude children, but it was under the context of nudity in general, men/women/children. Lots of "barely legal" mags, trannies, gay stuff (adult men), and S&M themed porn. There were photos of children, but the detectives still didn't define them as child pornography. I couldn't find anything about animal torture or gore. Not that there wasn't, I went through it pretty quickly and my eyes were getting tired.

If it's an accurate report it seemed he was smart enough to keep his child nudity to more "art" based books that were quite a bit older. That way he could probably claim he was a collector of vintage nudes etc. My guess anyway...

The whole thing is weird.

It could be how they collected the material? Perhaps he had lawyers who were able to go through everything with a fine tooth comb and declare it inadmissible?

Trump has taken a dive in the polls. Hillary currently has a 7 point spread when you average polling data. That's well above the margin of error.

Republicans are getting anxious.

Hillary's war chest is enormous compared to Trump right now. 42 M raised vs 1.3 M.

Not surprisingly, as I had guessed, he appears to be having trouble running a national campaign. He needs help, and he needs to take advice quick, or this is all over. His claim is that he is able to run this lean n' mean, and that's how he would run government. But I suspect that's BS. Oddly he doesn't seem to be paying much attention to swing states. (By comparison Hillary is unleashing heavy ads in those areas starting now.)

Part of me wonders if he knows he's not cut out for the job and is trying to self destruct at this point. He sure doesn't seem like he wants the gig. The convention is going to be fun, and boy O'boy so is the rest of this election.

The primary use by pressure cookers 99.9% of the time is to cook food. While the primary use of a gun is to kill people. Although that's completely irrelevant since....

I'm really tired of this dishonest argument too. One side says more regulation is needed, and the right side of the aisle asks why they want to ban all guns.

Are conservatives incapable of reading English?

Or maybe math? As we can see, a gun allows asshole terrorists to kill people much more efficiently (and subsequently many more) than with a rigged pressure cooker. Therefore, people are advocating regulation/background checks that would make it more difficult for dickheads like this to murder Americans. The same thing Obama said last week.

Why is this basic concept so difficult to get through the thick skulls of conservatives?

There are a few immediate ironies that come to mind. The first is that we should anticipate the liberals will make this political immediately ( Hello? Are you reading your own posts?) Second is that we should be upset at any perceived semantics by the press, while keeping close tabs on how Obama speaks in regards to this event and attack him immediately if he doesn't use words we deem appropriate. And finally that we're all Americans, unless these Americans want to get married, serve in the military or raise kids.