Leaderboard

You have no idea what he is or isn't doing in the oval. The list of crimes he's committed is a lengthy one. If we stick to just sexual assault/abuse/rape, there are 22+ women. I'm assuming by the shear number of inflammatory topics you've started today that you had a rough weekend. I hope your day gets better.

Democrats need to admit that Bill Clinton's serial philandering and textbook sexual harassment wouldn't survive a day in the #metoo climate, and that even feminists like Gloria Steinam did some embarrassing rationalization on his behalf back in the day. Clinton could have made a really poignant apology in the last year. He didn't. He still thinks he's running for something. Bill's arrogance can stand on its own. I'm more than willing to turn my back on him. That being said, Democrats seem to agree that Clinton is too toxic to be used for this year's midterm campaigning. Al Franken was forced to resign. Supposedly liberal media icons like Harvey Weinstein, Charlie Rose, Garrison Keilor, Matt Lauerer Ryan Lizza, the news director of NPR, John Lassetter, etc, etc, all lost their jobs and considerable influence almost immediately upon the revelations going public. If you'll recall when the Weinstein revelations first broke, the conservative blogosphere wondered if the liberal hypocrites would dish out the same treatment to their beloved fundraisers, mouthpieces and Hollywood allies that Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly got. Well it turns out they did, and then some. So #metoo is actually notable for its lack of hypocrisy. But it also reminds me that the whole Monica Lewsinsky scandal came out of a two year search for impeachable offenses that started with Whitewater -- a 20 year old rumor that the Clinton's had profited from a politically influenced land deal in Arkansas. Doesn't that seem quaintly low stakes compared to the far better-vetted Russia investigation we're told is a non-story and a witch hunt?

I see hypothetical potential for the possible existence of an issue, which I would want to be further investigated. And, wouldn't you know it, it was, for over a year, and after that investigation, Trump's hand picked Director of the FBI said... "The report did not find any evidence of political bias or improper consideration actually impacting the investigation under review," Amazing.

Well it does work both ways, you know. If Bill Clinton is a monster (and you're not getting much argument here) can I trust you'll join us in our outrage over Donald Trump?

The Husker fan base is bi-polar.

No wonder the deep state failed. They were trying to eliminate a paper trail by using ESP! You're supposedly a college professor, Ric. Do you ever just stop and look at the info in front of you and say, "huh, maybe Rush is being a bit of a contortionist with the facts..."?

I'm always positive going into a new season but this is still the same old coach speak we've been hearing for years now. Sometimes it makes us excited for the season which is good, but we've had terrible coaches say all the right things before. Anyhow, my point is, we have no idea whether Chinander will make the defense great. In fact there's argument to be had that UCF didn't do a good job at the end of last year and a lot of UCF fans weren't too happy with him. I fall on the side of not holding that against him since the team was tired and playing againat the best offenses they'd faced all year. But still.

Trump shared classified info with Russians in the Oval. It mortified an ally and put intel sources at risk. He continues to use an unsecured Android that likely exposes national security information as well. At this point, the government has decided it's no BFD.

also in the report

if fox and friends is the highest rated news program...wouldn't that make them the crooked main stream media that he is always attacking?

Visiting this weekend.

Plans to be at FNL event this weekend.

Am not, you are! ...he's gonna play TE at Iowa?

Forgive me for 'pontificating' here - this isn't aimed at anyone particular but everyone in general - especially & including myself. Here is the deal as I see it - I see this in the comments above and in other threads. "What-about-isms" -- Clinton bad, Trump badder or visa versa. We can allow our political biases to blind us the reality that all is bad - not a matter of degrees but bad through and through. It is called sin. We are afraid to call a spade a spade for want of loss - loss of a political argument, loss of an advantage, etc. By us arguing over which is 'badder' we give cover to the lessor bad which allows some room for excuses, wiggle room for compromise, and we lesson our own sensitivity to the bad - thus we end up being indirect participants by giving cover. I don't see either men as fully taking responsibility and humbling themselves in these situations - they have counted the political cost and believe the cost to be too high (reminds me of the 'gain the whole world and lose your soul' comment in the gospels). Right now most of us are indignant of politicians and religious leaders who give cover to Trump with such statements like "We didn't elect a national pastor". 20 years ago it was the Dems along with their liberal & feminist friends doing the same thing wt Clinton - giving him cover. Our compromise due to political expediency and our personal political bias shouts out "hypocrite" when we provide cover to their improper behavior. One of the reasons I could no longer support the Republican party as it now exists is because I could no longer tolerate the hypocrisy I saw in my own soul when I tried to defend the indefensible.

I guess if we assume all the candidates are liars I’m picking the liar that promises to work towards expanded Medicare/universal healthcare . I also like the liar that supports equality for all, where skin color , sexual orientation , religion etc doesn’t matter. Every American citizen deserves a good life not just a select few . Liars who tell me they’ll work to guarantee all Americans who work, a livable wage , decent benefits, and dignified safe treatment in return for their labor, are good too . If they say they’re going to fix social security , and other programs that I may need some day , I love the way they lie to me. Tell me you want to try to get us out of this endless cycle of war we’re in . Stop spending ridiculous sums of money on it, and destroying lives. I’m good with that kind of lie too . That list could go on but my point is , A typical democrat is going to support that thinking and a republican usually won’t . I think most candidates go in with good intentions but get bogged down by partisan politics, lobbyists , and the corporate overlords who really pull the strings . If they will even attempt to do some of the things that will effect my life and make it better though they get my vote.

Guys, guys, guys. Why can't you just believe everyone is out to get Trump, and they were so out to get him that they forgot to stop him from getting elected and accidentally damaged Hillary Clinton's campaign? It's so logical! #deepstate

He's lost my vote.

I fail to see how you hang that on any Democrats outside of Bill Clinton. His words & actions are his own.

yes he is....and trump is 10X worse IMO.

Ah, I guess it makes sense that I was unaware of what you were referring to, as any reasonable reading of that quote would not take it to such a silly conclusion as, "...openly discussing how they could use the investigation to prevent him from becoming President."

No mention of strain. I like him.

No...this is a level of cultism unlike anything ever seen in politics before. No other politician is on record saying he could shoot someone in Times Square and not lose any supporters. And the sad thing is, Trump is right...he literally could kill people in Times Square and probably all his followers, those corrupt a*holes at FoxNews, would still defend and excuse him.

Pelini did mostly everything right aside from his on the field antics and his bad coaching in big games.

First line of the article with this tweet: "Don't we already know how this movie's going to end?"

Thank you for admitting that you are making accusations without evidence.

Yeah, pretty much.

Plans to be at FNL event this weekend.

Plans to be at FNL event this weekend.

So...why do we want yet another scum bag disgusting man in the oval office again?

Much like a crazy girlfriend. Except a bunch of dudes.

I said this when Clinton was banging everyone in site while Governor, Candidate and President. If a wife can't trust the man to stay committed to what he has promised in front of God, family and friends and to someone who he at least claims to love.....how in the hell can I trust him to tell me the truth? Well....now we are seeing this played out again times a gazillion. We have a guy who has cheated on every wife he has ever had....multiple times.....and we also see him lying to us on a daily basis. Morals and values matter.

/thread Ric I feel like you're missing the forest for the trees because of the parties involved.

I don't like Clinton and he's probably a scumbag. But, focusing just on Lewinsky here, she was well into adulthood. She wasn't some vulnerable little girl. Women are not vulnerable by default - but that's the message I hear when I see this argument. It's very possible she knew exactly what she wanted and went after it. This is all assuming there was in no way any implied consequences given to her by Clinton if she didn't agree to it. I don't think office relationships between a boss and an inferior automatically fall under the sexual harassment/assault umbrella. They are likely to, but there are cases when both adults in that situation want it.

Clinton never was covicted of rape or he would be in jail right now . I don’t think him getting a bj from a concenting adult necessarily puts him in the predatory category either . He didn’t get impeached for that anyway, he got impeached for lying about it , which is pretty normal human behavior to me . I didn’t think it was a big deal then and don’t now , but if we’re gonna say it is, then we need to look into Trumps long list of accusers too .

Clinton never apologized to Lewinsky, bristled at the notion that he probably should have, and cast himself as the victim in the whole sordid mess. I’ve never viewed him as very “likeable,” probably because I’m not a fan of rapists and sexual predators.

They didn't hide them because they were trying to help or protect anyone. They didn't disclose them because that FBI policy. That's how investigations are supposed to work. Personally I think Comey erred badly in his judgment (the IG report said as much) but that he chose to disclose the new emails because A) he told Congress he would and B) he was afraid of what Congressional Republicans would do when Clinton won & found out he didn't disclose them prior to the election. I can already envision the claims that he threw the election to her now. It's not hard because many Dems (voters, not politicians) believe he threw the election to Trump by telling an obvious partisan hack like Chaffetz, who immediately leaked the news. And they may be right. What charges should she have been brought up on? What crimes were they excusing? You're doing that thing again where you get a lot of the facts right but mix in unfounded, ridiculous claims as well.

If that's your opinion, that's fair. He's put on a pedestal by Democrats because he's a former president. That's pretty much the long and short of it. It's impossible to uncouple the allegations against him from him being POTUS & being incredibly popular. So in continuing to give him a platform, the Dems deserve whatever heat they catch from statements like yours. But I'd similarly hope you'd call for the GOP to excommunicate Trump when his term(s) end due to the dozens of accusations against him.

that sounds like some right wing echo chamber stuff your spouting there.

He’s been the most popular Democrat, other than Obama, for decades. He’s lauded, applauded, celebrated, and honored by Democrats. He’s a speaker at Democratic events, rallies, and conventions...often the keynote speaker. He’s made tens of millions of dollars based on his popularity among Democrats. Championing a rapist and serial sexual predator is appalling in a vacuum. Doing so while shrieking about #METOO is unbelievably hypocritical.

You can read more about those messages here. Not a good look for Strzok. But nonetheless the report found no evidence it influenced his work. In fact, the FBI handling of the investigation was carried out in such a way that it helped Trump & hurt Clinton: Strzok was also removed immediately from the Mueller investigation as soon as his private sentiments toward Trump became known. And he's offering to testify willingly for House Judiciary Committee. But we also learned other new things recently. During the election, there were rumors swirling that the New York FBI field office, with deep ties to Rudy Giuliani, had a deep anti-Clinton bias. This led to worries they were going to improperly handle info, i.e., leak it to Rudy to help the Trump camp. Devine Nunes admitted last night, apparently accidentally, that in late September of 2016 "good FBI agents" alerted him that they had found new emails pertinent to Clinton on Anthony Weiner's laptop. Adam Schiff, Nunes' Democratic counterpart on the House Intel Committee, was not made aware of this. Here's Rudy himself on Fox News on October 26th, making a not so subtle reference to more Clinton news coming down the pipe. He's downright giddy. When did the FBI (Comey) officially notify Congress they had found new emails on Weiner's laptop? October 28th, 2016. Long before that time, both Nunes & Rudy knew and had apparently set their own machinations in motion. It's dirty campaigning using info they shouldn't have had, but it absolutely worked. It's not surprising, given this current crop of Republicans value power above everything else. It's pretty easy to see who benefitted & who got hosed here. This all hurt Clinton & helped Trump.

"We'll stop it." Who is the we being referenced? Just him and her? The entire FBI? Maybe the entire investigative team? Maybe all of America? Maybe Democrats? How do they say they'll stop it? Well, they don't. But you said they were discussing how they would prevent Trump from winning. Is it clear whether the act of stopping will be done within the capacities of their jobs as government employees, vs just in their own personal lives as private citizens? No, it isn't. Are we able to satisfactorily discern any amounts of humor, hyperbole, sarcasm, etc. that would change the context of the already entirely vague statement? Nope, not really. This is why people can't take you seriously. You actually bring up really good points and topics of conversation, occasionally, but they're always in between these ridiculous allegations and conclusions that are based on virtually nothing in terms of actual evidence.

Surprise result of the day, Iceland drew with Argentina 1-1. Skol

The term "deep state" has come to mean any government official or agency that doesn't adhere to the policies or beliefs of the current administration. Such officials have existed in government throughout America's ever-changing political history. It's only now that we have a man in the White House who demands loyalty and is paranoid about anyone not willing to kiss his ring that the term "deep state" has entered the public's vernacular. It's not that it didn't exist under Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush & Obama. It's that they weren't scared of it. Trump is, and here we are.

Took the boy to Incredibles 2....I’d give it a solid A. The first one is better but the second movie is still a solid movie.

Eh. I'd say barely having played corner before getting to college is most of it. He should be playing offense. I no fan of Diaco's but it's not like he was lighting the world on fire under Banker either.