GG

The answer, as always is - it depends (with the appropriate presumption that you do not steal the signals). What do yo watch and how many TV sets do you have set up? If you watch a lot of different shows, especially on premium channels, then you're almost always better with a cable/DTV provider because you can always negotiate a bundle discount. If you try to replicate the bundles that you get with cable/DTV with a la carte streaming options, you will pay more. If all you need is over the air channels on one TV and a base selection of premium channels, then you can get by with streaming.

Just a hunch that Trump hasn't fully though this plan. Trying to inflict economic pain on Mexico won't have the intended effect he thinks it will, because AMLO isn't a big friend of Mexican business owners in the first place. Trump could end up helping AMLO's to renationalize industry. The best part of course is, as Mexican industry suffers, the greater the incentive to climb the northern wall. Idiot is as idiot does.

Forget that. How do the announced tariffs not violate the very treaty he just negotiated? This is the Trump I was afraid of.

Are media journalists aware of what's happening to the media industry?

What's with this guy and tariffs? It's not a superweapon.

The reason that the UN got out of the peacekeeping business and into monitoring Alexa voices.

No, it only assumes one thing and that is that the obstruction was done solely by Trump without help from anyone around him. And that supposition is virtually impossible.

They should have called the injury by its proper name - extreme brain crampitosis.

Didn't both of them have injured legs?

That's utter baloney, because it was clear that Mueller and team were scalp hunting. If there was a scintilla of indictable evidence of obstruction on anyone in Trump's orbit, you would have seen a very public perp walk.

Contrary to popular belief many here have read a good portion of the report. And if you are clinging to Part II of the report to hang your impeachment hat on, be careful that the hook doesn't snare your neck as well. Part II doesn't surprise anyone who have known for decades that Trump is a temperamental narcissistic man-child. Doesn't make it illegal though, even by the lower impeachment standards. OTOH, we'll see if you dare show your face here once Horowitz, Huber, etc present their findings.

Every time he utters something?

And doing what with them? Moving to them to the Israel border?

World's worst dictator.

When did Greggy say there was no basis for a possible crime? If you've been following these threads, you'd see that there are many avenues for possible crimes that have been committed with far greater evidence than what was alleged in Mueller's investigation.

How do you reach that conclusion from what DR wrote?

If Trump is as stupid as people make him out to be, there's no way that he could obstruct justice on his own.

Considering the lengths they went through to charge people with totally unrelated crimes, you have to be the incredibly or willfully ignorant to think that Mueller & Team wouldn't have charged anyone in Trump's orbit if there was even a plausible hint of prosecutable obstruction.

There's a long discussion about this a year or so ago in one of Greggy's threads. Investigators only got an ISO image of the server, not the physical drive. According to some experts on this site, that should have been enough. But depending on the political viewpoint, the opposing experts disagreed.

If it was so transparent, where are the quotes from team mates that O'Reilly wanted out? Even if nobody wanted to go on record, a good journalist would find ways to describe the situation if it was clear cut as you make it sound. What Harrington doesn't do is try to delve into the Sabres/Pegulas' reasons for dumping O'Reilly after giving him a massive contract and slapping a C on the sweater. Instead he gave a lazy rehash of news that everyone already knew. That's not journalism.

I have to admit, the new screen name hurts my brain.

As long as they pull it from the southern shores, they can claim French lineage.

Uhm, isn't it the job of the beat reporter to get to the bottom of the story, much of which is behind the scenes, instead of regurgitating public knowledge?

I didn't say that the article wasn't topical. I said that it was lazy journalism that parroted the national media and offered nothing new, which is something that you expect a local beat writer to provide. Don't you think going down the road of whether the Cal situation in Rochester had some bearing on the decision to get rid of Ryan a few months later?

Whether you believe that the coup is illogical or not, what is your take on the massive misstatements of facts that are in Comey's oped? Start from his alleged timelines. Ready, set go!