cle23
-
Posts
1,307 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by cle23
-
-
1 minute ago, Jerry Jabber said:
Hope McD challenges the play.
For what?
-
15 minutes ago, Virgil said:
Browns release the Right Josh
Rosen played against 3rd and 4th string players, and he was awful even then. Pretty sure he was under 50% completion for the preseason.
-
Just now, Rc2catch said:
100% he’s made the case about him now and he’s loving the attention he’s getting. When this thread started his client was gonna get maximum value that they asked for. Each tweet is probably losing her money and killing all the leverage he had.
Her lawyer is trying to pressure the local PD to do something, same as the Watson situation. Araiza has nowhere near the capital that Watson has, even before the contract, so looking at it as a money grab is much less likely, plus, she claimed to not know him when she went for the rape kit.
The local PD and university sat on this for 7 months without even investigating it. Forcible gang rape is much worse than anything Watson was accused of (not that what is was accused of is ok), but it's amazing how many people have changed their tune when it happens closer to home.
-
1 hour ago, HamSandwhich said:
I didn’t realize people could only be bruised and bleeding by anything other than rape? Same with going to the hospital? You must be of the “believe all women” camp?
Yes, those things can happen during consensual sex, but rarely do women then tell everyone it was rape, and go to the hospital for a rape kit just for the fun of it.
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:
Jeez, the guy calls for an investigation into COVID and suddenly you’re anti-investigation. Weird.
Investigations are fine. Rand Paul is still an idiot.
-
38 minutes ago, HOUSE said:
The Browns will be a league wide hated team, it's not just the DeShawn Watson thing, it's more about offering a fully Guaranteed contract that will eventually effect every nfl team.
Hated by who though? The Watson will be in play, but the players won't hate Cleveland more for the contract. Do you think the players will hate them more for doing something that, in the long term, will positively effect every NFL player?
-
23 hours ago, mbs said:
I don't think safety should ever be a priority. And with this staff, a dropoff in DB talent isn't going hit as hard as other positions.
These are the guys who closed the season for the number one defense in the NFL last year:
Jordan Poyer (7th) terrible in Cleveland.
Mikah Hyde (5th) backup safety/slot in GB. Great playoff run his last year.
Taron Johnson (4th)
Dane Jackson (7th)
Levi Wallace (UDFA)That's three studs and two competent backs, all from pretty humble beginnings.
Given the supposed attention other front offices are giving Benford (6th), I don't think McDermott is just finding diamonds in the rough. He's polishing whatever rocks he finds into gems and he can keep on doing it for a lot less money than Poyer is asking. He can't turn Dane into Reevis, but they won't be totally exposed with a mid round pick. Ehem, Josh Norman.
This isn't really the case at any other position, so I'd rather see money spent on skill positions or even o-line, the latter being filled with turds that can't be polished. (I'm holding out hope that Kromer changes this.)
On the other hand, be a witch Mr. Bean and keep him here. (at 2/32M)
Poyer wasn't terrible in Cleveland. Definitely not what he became in Buffalo, but when given consistent playing time, he performed pretty well. They just changed coaches so often that he got passed over a lot.
-
1
-
-
-
6 hours ago, DRsGhost said:
Plenty of evidence that you've ignored because you've been told to.
Want to square mail in voting is not secure vs. We just had the largest number of mail in votes in US history and golly gee it was also the most secure election on US history...
Or nah?
Simply saying " mail in ballots aren't secure" is not evidence though. If there is evidence that fraud occurred, then show it, prosecute the people who did it, and move on. If it is shown that people orchestrated it, then throw them in jail as well.
There is fraud in almost every level of everything. Not a lot anyone can do to completely prevent fraud. But just shouting "this is fraudulent" without then showing that it actually was isn't the correct response either.
Would it have been fraudulent if Trump won as well?
-
4 hours ago, DRsGhost said:
There never was nor will there ever be sufficient evidence of voter fraud. That was the whole point of the massive effort to make mail in voting seem innocuous and normal.
Puking mail in ballots and applications everywhere is all the evidence you need to know that major shenanigans occurred.
Prior to 2020 it was universally accepted with bipartisan consensus that mail in voting invited great opportunity for voter fraud.
See 2005 bi partisan commission co- chaired by President Carter.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/heed-jimmy-carter-on-the-danger-of-mail-in-voting-11586557667
Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.” That quote isn’t from President Trump, who criticized mail-in voting this week after Wisconsin Democrats tried and failed to change an election at the last minute into an exclusively mail-in affair. It’s the conclusion of the bipartisan 2005 report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform, chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker III.
42% of the total ballots cast in 2020 were by mail or at mail in drop boxes. Previously the highest proportion in a Presidential election was around 20%. Given these previous warnings about mail in voting that were bipartisan, it's therefore incumbent on apologists such as yourself to square the previous bipartisan warnings of mail in voting making our elections less secure, with the overnight 180 in labeling the 2020 election as the most secure election in US history.
Yet investigations by BOTH sides have returned no major instances of voter fraud.
-
1 hour ago, DRsGhost said:
Joe Biden in no way shape or form got anywhere close to 81 million legal votes. Period.
Talk about brainwashed.
If it's that simple, then show the evidence. Because so far, it hasn't happened. Trump is what, 1/76 in lawsuits regarding the "stolen" election.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, DRsGhost said:
Nope.
The sane statute he quoted in one of his previous posts does not say what he claims it does. It does give the President authority to declassify things as he sees fit. It does not say anywhere that they can declassify things through actions (sending them to his own home) alone.
-
3 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:
Yes, the President has the power to classify and declassify as he see fit. But there are still processes in which he needs to do it. He can't just say "I declassified those" after taking the documents and getting caught. And they are not his property even if he did declassify them.
26 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:The FBI was there at Mar-A-lago as recently as June 3rd going through the 15 boxes. Trump even showed up and talked to the agents going through the boxes. This whole thing is completely ludicrous especially when you consider there have been disputes between the National Archives and all former Presidents about what should go to the archives.
But don't worry as I said before this only ends one way..with Trump in handcuffs. Our republic and it's norms be damned.
Again, without knowing exactly WHAT is in these documents, you can't say that it is ludicrous. If it's some random historical document with no national security risk, then absolutely it would be ludicrous to raid a home for that reason. If it is top secret nuclear research/weapons as has been suggested, there would be nothing ludicrous about it. Right now we are all speculating, but I highly doubt a judge authorizes a raid of this magnitude if there wasn't at least decent evidence of Trump having something he should not have. But time will tell.
-
2 hours ago, DRsGhost said:
Who controls federal elections? Hint: It's not the federal government.
And the 18 month interim between when he leaves with these documents and the raid on Mar-A-Lago falls on who?
It depends. If the current admin has requested the documents and the requests have been denied, that's on Trump and his counsel. If they didn't request them, then it falls on both. Trump never should have taken them if they are what they are described as, and the current admin shouldn't have left things out there this long either, especially if they just recently noticed they being gone.
-
1
-
-
41 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:
There's a President leaving office with classified documents that are defacto declassified by said action.
Then there's this strawman that you created where formerly classified documents are leveraged by a former President and his son to commit real crimes.
Try again.
There are steps to take to declassify things. You can't just take them and then claim they are declassified. That isn't how this works. There is no "defacto" declassification.
-
18 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:
Isn't it ironic that "the most secure election in US History" gave us the administration that allowed "the greatest security risk in US History" to happen?
Seeing as how the election happened under Trump's administration, and the documents were supposedly taken during Trump's days as President (based on the "he can declassify anything he wants" crowd), who let it happen?
I have not seen definitive answers on WHEN the documents left the WH, so that may vary, but also seeing as how Trump's admin did everything possible to make the transition as difficult as possible, who is at fault? And, if Trump and his staffers took the documents, you are still trying to blame others?
-
1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:
You don’t understand the term Deep State at all do you?
I do. Over the years the "definition" has changed quite a bit, but it's still the same basic concept. It used to be the government within the government that ran things in a lot of countries such as Russia/KGB, but somehow here it has come to encompass the "elite" that run everything. All I am saying is that Trump is somehow the only one that's been attacked by the "Deep State" according to him, even though he would likely been a part of it given his supposed wealth.
It's another way for him to extort his followers. Have you ever noticed that every conspiracy theory that Trump comes up with, his next step is to ask for money to help fight the supposed threat. Nothing ever comes of any of it, but he rakes in millions of dollars in the mean time.
And I do understand that there is a preferential treatment and such for the millionaire/billionaires of the world. I just don't understand how people can think that it's all some giant club that plans the daily life of the world.
-
22 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:
Defend what?
More deep state b.s.?
You think he really freaking has top super secret classified docs at Mar a Lago my God you're an idiot.
And you think a virus that killed almost 7 million people in 2 years is "just the flu." And that a worldwide event was used to get Trump out of power.
Tell me. When was the so called "deep state" ever mentioned before Trump? When was this shadow government ever mentioned before Trump used it as his excuse for everything?
I know the government is incredibly shady, but people who claim Biden/Hillary/Obama/whoever else are the heads of some super secret "deep state" that runs everything and rigs everything are incredibly gullible. Have you ever known a group of people the size of what you're describing be able to keep a secret? Ever?
-
37 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:
By who?
Ok. Poor choice of words. He hasn't been "accused" yet, but that's the reports for now. Either way, how is that Biden's fault?
-
23 minutes ago, Irv said:
Nice try. WaPo. What a joke. Covering up for Demented Jokes failures. What a mess.
Seriously? Trump is accused of stealing top secret nuclear documents, and you are still trying to blame Biden?
-
4
-
-
Just now, DRsGhost said:
Have you happened to watch CNN or MSNBC over the past seven years?
No, I literally haven't, because it's the same. Notice I didn't single out either side on this one as they both do it. You just happen to be by far the most "vocal" about it, and you only post garbage "conservative" talking heads.
-
Just now, DRsGhost said:
Get a grip. It's a part of the conversation that's out there. Out there includes here on this forum. I happen to agree with the statement made.
You can embed tweets here. It's allowed. I will continue to. If you don't like it please ignore.
Right, you are free to do as you please. Just stating that this dude is complaining about something that hasn't happened yet. And making statements about things that haven't happened yet.
If they don't agree with someone, it's just trash, trash, trash 24/7 until you can hope something sticks. It's insanity.
-
3 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:
Constantly posting random Twitter biased hacks doesn't help support anyone's case. On either side. It could be announced that we cured cancer, and if it was proven that a "liberal" did it, this guy would complain. And there are plenty of liberal Twitter hacks that would do the same if places were reversed.
-
4 hours ago, Rock-A-Bye Beasley said:
low is one thing, but Watson is making almost nothing in base salary, that’s not common. (For example, when Josh signed his extension they lowered his 2022 cap hit to 16mil but he’s still making 4mil base salary)Another thing I just put together is the fact that Cleveland has the most cap space in the league by about 20mil. Wouldn’t it benefit them to front-load a big contract at this point?
Its indefensible from every angle I can think of.
Allen last year made 920k base salary, so yes, it is common. The Browns signed Garrett to a huge contract with low base salary early.
I agree with the optics looking bad though.
NFL "Around the League" Gameday thread
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I'm assuming they were thinking he lost a lot of weapons, so he would panic. Obviously that didn't happen. Dumb game plan for sure.