transplantbillsfan

My comment is that you're making a lot of assumptions and are now trying to twist the narrative on a nearly 500 page report that spanned a very very long time and was advertised over here as an ultimate presentation in objectivity.

Can't? Not true. Won't? True. You clearly believe he's a smoking gun. Based off everything I know about him I think you're really reaching and making A LOT of assumptions. So I genuinely want to know what you know about him. Prove to me you aren't just trying to win an argument. Educate me and stop blatantly lying about things I say. Your anger is blinding you a bit.

What in the world is msm??? I read more news out there than the average Joe. Certainly more than 3 paragraph headlines. And I cross reference and triangulate between works. But I'm not reading 1100 pages of dryly written source material largely written in legal and political lingo. You guys are just better than me if that's what you enjoy doing.

You said it, not me.

Do you really think at this point I wouldn't have researched this? This game of cat and mouse you're playing might work with other posters, but while I may be many things, I'm not a sucker, so stop playin me like one. You clearly believe you know everything there is to know about Joseph Misfud and it has led you to certain conclusions regarding the OIG report. So what do you know and what are your conclusions? You're awfully disingenuous in the way you approach discussions here. Clearly you feel you know more than everyone else. Educate us then. Do it with your clearly-more-credible-than-anyone-else's sources, please. Honestly. Post your stuff about the guy that's sourced and not some thread on Twitter and I'll read it as long as it's not some 99 page PDF file. If it's a 99 page PDF file, what does it say and why is it significant? I question whether you read those yourself, but if you've read that 99 page file PLUS the Mueller report (you said you read that in its entirety, right?) PLUS the OIG report that came out today, then you should've just read the 1100+ page Atlas Shrugged. Rand's characters are about the flattest characters in all of literature, but at least you would have been entertained with some philosophies you would back. I make the request one more time before I concede that you'd rather win an argument than drop knowledge on those of us less knowledgeable than you: In 1,000 words or less, what do you know about Joseph Misfud and why does he matter?

Welcome to read several threads of yours for myself? Okay. I'm honestly a little disappointed. I thought you were different. I've read about Joseph Misfud. I'm not searching through "several threads" to find your own thoughts on him. @Buffalo_Gal asked me to do that once with a 75 page thread... massively wasted my time. I'm not doing that with one 200+ page thread, much less "several threads." It's honestly pretty scary that you think that's it's this forum that is required reading for contemporary political education. So same question again. Strange that you're resorting to namecalling. It just seems so unlike you. I am? I did? Where did I say he "only popped up on FOX News?" Are you angry? It's weird that you're reading comprehension has gone out the window so wildly. I hope it's that, because the alternative is that you're trying to put words in my mouth as though I said something I didn't say. Lord knows why you'd do that.

Wow. You cherry pick your information like there's no tomorrow and are about as passive aggressive as anyone could be. You understand a lot about what I know or do not know about Joseph Misfud based on the few times I've chosen to post or not post in response to you???? Incredible. I make my genuine request again, tell me what you know that's true about Joseph Misfud and how it's relevant to this story. Educate me.

Meet you halfway? That's exactly what I'm doing. Why are you being evasive? Tell me the truth about Joseph Misfud. Please.

Awfully defensive for an honest question. So I guess I was right then. All you want to do is win an argument. You don't care about actually spreading truth. I've read up on Joseph Misfud. I did a long time ago. His name popped up on FOX News as a talking point God knows how long ago--because I like to see both perspectives before forming an opinion. So I know who he is, and if you know who he is and how he fits into this story, please educate me in your own words so that I can definitively see things from your perspective And what does that mean, exactly?

You never do step away from this forum, do you? Are you on call over here? No time to go down a rabbit hole, but if what you truly care about is people becoming educated, then educate me and everyone who doesn't know who he is? Who is Joseph Misfud and how does he fit into this story? Again, educate me then. What has this topic been about?

Oh I watched it. I also stated the conclusions in my 1st post today that the FBI bungled a number of things. Yet, the IG's conclusion is that the investigation into the Trump campaign was warranted and that, even without those blunders, he can't say that the FISA warrant and the rest of the investigation wouldn't have gone on EXACTLY as it did. I mean isn't the big argument over here that there was some crazy political bias against Trump that started this? That didn't happen, as per the OIG's own findings, so of course now Barr had to put out a counter statement while also continuing to fund an investigation OVERLAPPING the non-partisan OIG investigation that covered a couple years and had over 700 witnesses interviewed... Who's the deep state at this point? And @Deranged Rhino... for crying out loud already, I know what there is to know about Joseph Misfud, I just work for a living and I'm not diving your damn rabbit hole, so how 'bout you tell me who YOU THINK Joseph Misfud is and let's see how much of it jives with reality vs conspiracy theory.

You didn't? You asked me if I read the report. That's really only a relevant question if you did. Did you? If not, why'd you ask me the question? Seems you're relying on secondary sources--random twitter folks--to interpret it for you. How is that better than some of us who are reading interpretations of it from other secondary sources that are at least credible news outlets?

I think it's bizarre that people like @Deranged Rhino are claiming they've already read all 476 pages of a report that was literally released today.

What has the argument been? Anti-Trump bias. No? Investigators uncovered “no documentary or testimonial evidence” of political bias behind official actions related to the investigation, known as Crossfire Hurricane, said the report, which totaled more than 400 pages. The F.B.I. had sufficient evidence in July 2016 to lawfully open the investigation, and its use of informants to approach campaign aides followed procedures, the inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, determined. So on the grounds that there was some kind of "Deep State War" against Trump, give it a rest. Now you can move the goalposts if you want and pretend that your argument is now (and has always been if you want to be that disingenous) that the FBI made mistakes wiretapping Page: Mr. Horowitz also uncovered substantial dysfunction, carelessness and serious errors in one part of the sprawling inquiry: the F.B.I.’s applications for court orders approving a wiretap targeting Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser with ties to Russia, under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA. He found that one low-ranking F.B.I. lawyer altered a related document and referred the lawyer for possible prosecution. Of course that hasn't been your argument over here. It hasn't been that the FBI or our Intelligence Community is incompetent (which is what I'm guessing the argument shifts to), but it's that there's some deep political bias against Trump from the beginning and investigating Trump in the first place was baseless and unwarranted. Clearly not true.

Night and Day. Barr's a moron.

I can concede that Baltimore and the Patriots are the best defenses the Bills have faced, but even subtracting those games from the rest of his home games, you don't think these numbers look pretty different since you can't see him playing tight during the games? Home-- 59.6% completion %, 6.8 YPA, 9 TDs--less than 2 per game (8 passing, 1 rushing), 3 turnovers (2 INTS, 1 fumble lost) Away--65% completion %, 7.5 YPA, 14 TDs --more than 2 per game (8 passing, 6 rushing), 5 turnovers (3 INTs, 2 fumbles lost) I don't know why you're so unwilling to accept that sometimes there are intangible factors that aren't parts of the football field within the sidelines that also come into play for football players. Watching Allen yesterday there were multiple times he was wildly inaccurate. Some could be attributed to weather and some to defensive pressure, but yes, he looked jittery from the get go. Like you, I feel better about Allen moving forward because I do think he learns from his mistakes and will continue to get better, but this year I feel more comfortable with the Bills and Allen especially on the road.

Dallas is a top 10 team defense and currently 7th in pass defense. That was one of Allen's best games. Philly has a worse defense, but you pull that out as though they're a better team. Why? I'm a little amazed that you're clinging to a solely statistical argument. You seriously don't notice a difference in the way our offense and Allen in particular play when he's at home? Next Sunday on the road against one of the league's best defense will be a great test to this theory.

Home-- 54.8% completion %, 6 YPA, 11 TDs (8 passing, 2 rushing), 7 turnovers (5 INTS, 2 fumbles lost), 77.4 QB Rating Away--65% completion %, 7.5 YPA, 14 TDs (8 passing, 6 rushing), 5 turnovers (3 INTs, 2 fumbles lost), 94.7 QB Rating Allen is better on the road. Personally I think the immediate and added pressure and expectation of a ravenous fanbase behind him just makes him overly excited and causes him to lose focus. Oddly enough he seems to thrive under duress on the road. I expect a bounceback good game for him in primetime on the road against the Steelers in SNF.

OC was a predictable idiot today. I don't know why he went away from all of the pre-snap motions considering it's been a staple of our offensive success.

https://theathletic.com/1444151/2019/12/08/bills-going-to-feel-good-about-sleeping-tonight-despite-losing-to-ravens?source=shared-article Baltimore’s pinball-machine offense (first in points and rushing yards, second in total yards) experienced unprecedented frustration: Fewest yards (257, 164 below average). Second-fewest first downs (18, seven below average). Third-fewest plays (59, eight below average). Fewest rushing yards (118, 90 below average). Second-lowest yards per carry (3.6, 2.0 below average) Fewest rushing first downs (six, six below average). Tied for second-lowest passing yards (139, 74 below average). Third-lowest yards per pass (5.3, 2.5 yards below average). Since 2000, the Bills — and we’re talking some bad teams — had a .619 win percentage when limiting opponents to no more than 257 yards and 18 first downs. Jackson completed 16 of his 25 throws for 145 yards and three touchdowns. He ran 11 times for 40 yards, ending a streak of nine games with at least 60 rushing yards. The Ravens led the NFL in explosive plays coming into Sunday, averaging 6.1 runs of at least 10 yards and 1.4 passes of at least 20 yards. They had two such runs and one such pass Sunday. The Ravens hadn’t punted more than three times in a game and totaled only six punts over their previous five games. Sam Koch kicked it away seven times. .... Alexander explained how McDermott labels performances on a four-square chart: play well and win; play well and lose; play poorly and win; play poorly and lose. “Today we played good, but we lost,” Alexander said. “It’s not like they outmatched us and we don’t belong on the field with them.” Calm confidence was evident in Buffalo’s postgame den. No sense of panic or peril was evident like in the Cowboys’ locker room Thanksgiving night. I really think that little tidbit from Lorax is pretty revealing. McDermott DOES preach moral victories to his players, at least to some degree.

I know people are joking about this as ridiculous, but if Daboll isn't utilizing McKenzie or Foster with those motion sweep plays consistently the way he has all season, Duke needs to be active. Allen needs a big bodied receiver who can actually catch. Knox could be that guy in the future, but he's unreliable now. Just activate him already so we have a WR who can make contested catches.

The Eagles are a bad team if that's how you define Dallas and that was BY FAR our worst game all season... And it was at home in the elements, which is always supposed to be Buffalo's advantage.