When You Look Back On The Crime, You Can't Say "The Dog Didn't Bark"

I wrote this before the election, but never printed it. So I guess you did hear the dog bark, slammed the door in the Clinton's face and locked out the lawless felons. I only hope we didn't welcome in the clowns. 

Common Sense Commentary: In investigating crimes, Law Officers not only consider the positive clues which are left at the scene, a finger print, a hair, DNA on a glass, spent bullets or empty shell casings, but they also consider clues which are absent. That is, things which should be there, but aren't, stolen items, broken glass, a gun .... the absence of it. Those are called "negative" clues. Another of the negative clues is .... there was a watch-dog there, but the dog didn't bark. Why? did the dog know the perpetrator of the crime? Was the dog drugged or poisoned? The dog could be blind and deaf, and yet, the dog's sense of smell is a thousand times greater than a human's. It can smell the intruder outside the door and will put up a barking fit at a potential danger. The person at the door does not pass the smell test.

So, when the fog has risen, the smoke has cleared, the dust has settled, and a new President has been elected who turns out to be a disaster, as was true in the last two Presidential elections, and will also be true if Hillary is elected, those who voted for that person, of which ever party, will have responsibility for the disaster.  The watch dogs are all barking.  The watch dogs are sounding the alarm so open that Presidential door very prayerfully... RB