GG

Glad you acknowledged that. Most people forget that the main reason that Moulds didn't get production early on is that he was in Levy's dog house. Whenever he got the chance, he produced and that always prompted questions about why he wasn't on the field more often? It's the exact opposite situation of Zay, who's always on the field but doesn't produce.

Since we're using stats, here is the more instructive one: Catch rate in games where final score was <8 points, 32%. These games accounted for 43% of his total targets. The guy is invisible when it matters. I have a sense that many people who are using Moulds as the example never saw Moulds play in his 1st & 2nd years.

Funny how you link a TD for a game that's out of hand. Here's a handful with the game was still in doubt (cued at 30 seconds). The one at 52 seconds is my favorite. Then check at 1:19 for a catch that any NFL WR should make with ease. But, no. I'm glad he's dedicated the offseason to the weight room. Let's see if it turns him into a WR.

He had the prime opportunity to solidify the No. 1 WR last year while surrounded by garbage for most of the season. He stunk and only appeared when the downs didn't matter. Everybody killed Clay for dropping a tough pass vs Miami, and that gave Jones a pass for a horrific bobble of a great toss by Allen. That play is emblematic of Zay's catching ability, and it's a longshot to think that something will light up where he can show to be more than a #6 WR on a team with bad WRs

It would be easier to have faith if he once showed the ability to catch without fighting the ball. At this point, if you're appealing to faith, then it's a blind faith because he hasn't shown enough to merit anything else.

Welcome to France

Again, this is the semantics only apply in the forum discussion where Collusion = Conspiracy in our threads. But for the sake of Mueller's investigation, he was looking for a conspiracy, which he didn't find. Therefore, by extension, there was no finding of the commonly discussed term "collusion"

Way to go out on that limb, Mr Fog

Many people still don't understand the motivations and obstacles behind the private sector investments.

I recommend that @plenzmd1 read this piece

You keep missing the point that the threshold for telling a lie is much higher in a courtroom than it is in a regular conversation. You can make an argument that Barr wasn't as forthcoming as he could have been in the various hearings, but that does not constitute a lie. But in these hearings his job is not to be forthcoming, but to answer each question. That's the first instruction your lawyers give you before any deposition. You never, ever volunteer any elaboration on a question, unless asked to do so. That's why these hearings are so carefully orchestrated, because the point of the questioners is to get the gotcha moment. Both sides knew of the existence of Mueller's letter. But it wasn't public, so Dems used the leaked reports to entrap Barr. What I don't understand is why you're more upset that Barr skillfully eluded the trap than you are about Dems and some members of the press orchestrating a perjury trap for someone who's not a prime player in the investigation on something that is not related to the investigation itself. What do the Dems gain by sidelining Barr, who's only been on the job for 3 months? Shouldn't that scare you a hell of a lot more as a citizen?

Of course his response was technical because he knew they were setting up a trap. That's why their argument is hollow. They asked the wrong question and are now trying to hang him for an answer to a totally unrelated question (as far as the law goes) This is not about a semantics debate on a message board. It's about whether he lied under the legal code. It's clear that he did not because they can't even frame him properly. Now that Dems are out of bullets do you think that Barr or Trump will be benevolent when it's their turn in 2 weeks? PS - what do you think is way worse - Barr slipping away with a technicality on an improperly worded question or the Dems intentionally setting up a perjury trap on something that’s totally inconsequential to a 2 year investigation that yielded nothing?

If the Dems are trying to hang a perjury trap on him, they need to be better questioners. The questions have to be very specific to catch him in the act, because the trap they've set so far is full of holes. Asking him about some staffers' commentary and then trying to link that to a specific letter from Mueller will not fly in any courtroom, other than the commentators on CNN & MSNBC. And of course Barr knew exactly what they were trying to ask him and that's why he gave the specific response to a badly framed question. Doesn't make what he said a lie, though. If they asked him if he was aware of a letter from Mueller, then his response would be different. Of course if they asked him that question, then someone on Mueller's team and in Congress would also be charged with peddling confidential information. That's what makes this comical. The Dems also knew about the Mueller letter, and they still couldn't set a proper perjury trap for Barr. Now, their only option is to throw the empty gun at the tanks. Have fun.

Wonder if the chicken bucket made it past Nadler's desk.

I was just about to post that. Caught my eye too.

If you insist on their literal interpretation that Barr lied in April 8, then there's no case, because the questions were in relation to "members of Mueller's team" which is not the same as Mueller. If Dems were smart enough to ask the right questions in April, then maybe they would have an eyehole opening as opposed to being the whiny second raters.

Doug Martin re-signed with Raiders. Time to put this one to rest.

The distinction this time is clarifying a fan of the sport vs a fan of a team. You can't claim to like a sport, but then say you will not watch the playoff games, which are the best games of the year. It's not the same as questioning someone's fandom for criticizing a team.

Fraud, as in claiming that you're a hockey fan. Any true hockey fan would love every one of these games.

This proves that you're a fraud. These games are fantastic, and any true hockey fan would enjoy the hell out of them.

BTW, many of your jpg links are breaking today

Doesn't look like it, because the camera just panned out showing the entire panel and then zoomed in on Booker.

Don't know if this belongs here or in the Media thread - Maybe it's the feed that I'm watching but anyone else notice that when it's the D's turn the camera is on the asking Senator. When it's the R's turn, the camera is on Barr? At one point, during Sasse's turn, the camera was on Blumy

Pond sucking ... Hah

If there was any doubt that LaCanfora is a hack, this article should cement it.