HamSandwhich
-
Posts
3,059 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by HamSandwhich
-
-
Why did they use a college ball?
-
1
-
1
-
-
Most productive, Diggs
Most sneaky good, Reich
Most well liked, Fitzmagic
wayyyy down here, Sammy Squakin’s
-
2 minutes ago, daz28 said:
I'll take whatever is coming, rather than insist that it's not bigfoots fault the cameraman sucked. If high and mighty means living in reality, then I do it 10/10. Kool-aid is still better than Coup-laid.
“Reality”- you use that term loosely.
-
1 hour ago, daz28 said:
The 9-0 verdict wasn't about anything other than who can invoke the clause, and they decided that was Congress, who incidentally was in on the coup, which was missing only one piece, Mike Pence. Look any sane person in the face, and tell them you think the GQP would turn on Trump for any reason short of the 'seal team 6' analogy. Even then I wouldn't be surprised if they condoned that. Now look at yourself in the mirror, and tell us that if Pence went along with it, and they declared Trump president, that you wouldn't have found some stupid way to get behind it being ok. At least the GQP member of Congress know EXACTLY what they were doing, while the cult in the bubble only has the option of believing their lies. Look at the emails and texts, they admitted they knew they needed the brainwashed cult's support to pull it off.
I see a lot of idiots like yourself who act high and mighty and have no idea what's coming. It will be fun to watch you all melt.
-
47 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:
Ha. Your expectations for this interaction is where you went wrong bruh.
Listen to NC. They do their own research!
Actually I think I just realized something of grand importance. Republicans are like sovereign citizens!!!!
Yeah, I’m having fun playing with this little guy. Not going to get much from me. Not worth the time and effort to engage with an interlocutor who has no interest in changing his own views.
-
7 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:
That logic makes about as much sense as saying that North Korea is a democracy because it's called the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Where do you get your legal news and analysis from?
Oh are you saying that democrats label things that don't actually describe what's inside? In other news, water is wet.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, ChiGoose said:
I don't watch MSNBC (or any news channel).
If you're looking to understand legal issues, start with lawyers or people with a lot of experience reporting on the law.
Some outlets to check:
Some outlets have specific law beats (like Bloomberg Law), which I would prefer to their general journalists covering legal issues.
Some of them have podcasts too, like Lawfare and Just Security. I also like the National Security Law Podcast as well as Rational Security.
When looking for good sources on legal issues, check on who is providing the coverage. Are they lawyers? Bonus if they are law professors or have experience practicing in the issue they are discussing.
As far as experts go, I generally follow the philosophy: don't ask the typical talking heads to explain legal things, don't ask your mechanic for medical advice, don't ask comedians for war strategy.
Funny that the first link is "Lawfare", a strategy that the Dems are using to bring frivoulous lawsuits against Trump on spurious legal theory. Basically means they bend the law to fit the narrative they want to achieve.
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:
The folks in here trusting talking heads instead of actually reading primary sources (probably because they have big words) and/or listening to real experts with real knowledge (instead of random Twitter accounts that are regularly wrong) are the same voices who routinely demonstrate a complete lack of knowledge of the law, facts, and reality.
They would rather be loudly wrong than actually learn anything. It's Dunning-Kruger personified.
Who are the "real experts" you're talking about? MSNBC?
Do you only trust the experts with answers to everything? i.e. you don't know what a woman is because you're not an expert?
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:
ya know, why don't you research the issues yourself like we do? Read the indictments that daz mentioned. they're publicly available and present the evidence concisely. They're unfiltered by the media that you are so suspicious of.
They're filtered through a bent justice system.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, FitzShowUsYourTitz said:
OMG. It’s no wonder your screen name is not as smart as a ham sandwichI don’t expect you to understand the inside joke as you’re on the outside.
I can tell you’re full of wisdom by your usage of “OMG” /sarcasm
-
5 hours ago, FitzShowUsYourTitz said:
try searching the World Wide Web, you lazy 🤬jjeeesh
Try not being such a douche. There are certainly hundreds of articles out there on this subject. I’m asking people specifically, who have been following this, if they’ve come across a fair representation of what happened without bias? Do you go to the robber that just robbed your house and ask them if they robbed your house and believe them when they say no? ESPN has the same reason to put this in a certain light, so they’re not exactly non-biased on this. I don’t blame them for that, just that they’re biased and I wanted a more neutral tone. So I asked the sleuths that have been following if they know of a good article. Some have responded appropriately, others are rude like yourself. Carry on
-
2 hours ago, first_and_ten said:
There are text messages. There was a denial, but not plausible. He's truly a piece of garbage.
I did see that and if it’s accurate, seems skeevy at best. Plausibility is a value statement, what was his denial about it?
-
4 minutes ago, Beck Water said:
I mean this in the nicest way, @HamSandwhich: Google.
Seriously. All sorts of info is out there.
For example:
Asking people to give you a "good article" combined with the above "ESPN was one of the entities that were accused by Favre so they have a reason to paint this in a certain light" suggests that you are primed to accept only certain sources, so instead of asking to be fed so that you can reject what you're given as biased or as not good, why not just do your own research?
Again - this is a strong hint that you are only looking for articles that read in a certain way or from certain sources you accept, so why not do your own research to find something you perceive as "fair" or "holding mustard" instead of demanding to be fed and chiding those who don't feed you?
I was specifically asking because there is TOO MUCH out there and a lot of it has it's own opinions. So I was asking if anyone thought there was an article that was fair that I could review. Does that make sense?
4 minutes ago, Beck Water said:I mean this in the nicest way, @HamSandwhich: Google.
Seriously. All sorts of info is out there.
For example:
Asking people to give you a "good article" combined with the above "ESPN was one of the entities that were accused by Favre so they have a reason to paint this in a certain light" suggests that you are primed to accept only certain sources, so instead of asking to be fed so that you can reject what you're given as biased or as not good, why not just do your own research?
Again - this is a strong hint that you are only looking for articles that read in a certain way or from certain sources you accept, so why not do your own research to find something you perceive as "fair" or "holding mustard" instead of demanding to be fed and chiding those who don't feed you?
I'm primed not to just believe articles from places that were impacted by this scenario. Is that not fair? I would do that for any subject.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, ddaryl said:
Maybe this will tell you what you need to see/hear.
https://mississippitoday.org/2022/09/13/phil-bryant-brett-favre-welfare/
Look at this, a person who actually responded with an article I can look at, rather than just "rolling eyes" emoji. Simply just asking those who have been following this if they can help a person who is not well versed in this subject to provide an article that is fair to both sides. I'll take a look and see if this holds mustard, but I appreciate your offering this article.
-
2
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
Do anyone have a good article explaining what happened exactly here, that’s fair for each sides point of view? This one seems a bit biased and gives no idea as to Favres stance (I realize there have probably been articles ad nauseam).
Question I have, was this willfully accepting money knowing it was not for this by Favre? Is there plausible deniability? It may not matter to the law but would change my view on how I look at Favre.
ESPN was one of the entities that were accused by Favre so they have a reason to paint this in a certain light.
-
2
-
5
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:
Yes to both. Easily.
They both helped change the culture. And Hyde made arguably the best play that I have seen live in that stadium having attended hundreds of games. To get that pick against NE in the WC game given where he came from on the field . . . It was breathtaking.
That was the best int id ever seen, it was like he was playing center field.
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, Logic said:
Fangio's an old school coach. A football lifer. McDaniel is an odd duck with odd affectations.
Unpopular opinion: I think the Mike McDaniel thing is closer to souring completely and blowing up than it is to breaking through to championship level football.
I think the team will continue to thrive in the early season, continue to falter later in the season and in the playoffs (if they make it that far).
I think that, once they consistently start to not be able to break through, McDaniel's act is going to wear thin quickly and things are going to go south fast.
I also think Tua is just good enough to get your hopes up every year, and just bad enough to dash them when the stakes are highest.
I do not buy this version of the Dolphins, with McDaniel as coach and Tua as QB, as being long term contenders to the Bills for AFC East supremacy.💯 agreed
-
Well, they were right, the pundits are always right and they said he sucks. Just saying and all that happy horsesh*t that kids say these days
-
Is sarcasm the same as being facetious? Also, how dare you? That is the antithesis of what you said, those two sticking around obviously means McDermott is a fun party man who pushes the limit right to the edge!
-
1
-
1
-
-
If you don’t like the product on the field, perhaps you should watch for the commercials.
-
Just now, sleeby said:
Cause it gets many people pumped up and crazy train - over 40 years old and nothing to do with Buffalo- is way over used.
May I suggest 'A Milli' by Lil Wayne? Real loud so the snare sounds like gun shots. That would get a rise out of everyone of one form or another; and maybe some lawsuits too. Good stuff.
Wait, are you saying the crazy train horn or crazy train by ozzy? Love Crazy Train!
-
2 hours ago, Negan said:
Bills should be playing more TOOL on 3rd downs, seems they get a stop every time they play Sober!
NE played a ton of TOOL inside Gillette on defense through the Brady era and they seemed to do pretty good.
That evil rock n roll, bringing dark spirits into the stadium. It’s obvious Belliboy sold his soul to the devil for those championships!
-
I’ve thought this for a while, it’s played out. I don’t really care all that much, but when I’ve heard it, the thought that it’s overplayed has crossed my mind. Thus it needs to go!
-
1
-
1
-
-
This is the supposed front runner for the MVP? 😂😂
name this guy
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Hyde