oldmanfan

I think you have to have a conversation. But until I saw other reports indicating the Bills may be interested, I pretty much wrote off the OP. Because it was, after all, LaCanfora.

How can a Bills site not include the following (and I'll have to try and find videos): They're kiliin' me Whitey! They're killin' me You over-officious jerk!

I am one that believes our debt is the greatest threat to our country right now.

I hope so. It would be nice to have a fiscal conservative throw his hat in the ring.

I am excited to see how Allen turns out. But let's not put too much pressure on a rookie QB

I appreciate your perspective

I would think Beane is at least asking the wuestion

Oops, just saw you support the investigation continuing. Answers my question

I'm glad we can discuss and keep it relatively civil. I still disagree. I think your conclusion depends on assumptions you are making about what Mueller has or doesn't have. We don't know that and will not know it until his report comes out. You mention him releasing Cohen to SDNY. That is for charges most appropriate to that district. It does not mean he has nothing else. As for criticizing previous investigations, yes the 2002 wasn't a good moment for the country. On the other hand Watergate was. Truman's investigation into defense spending was. What would be your alternative? One last question or two I've wanted to ask you: do you believe the Russians interfered or tried to with the election? And if so shouldn't we find out how so it doesn't happen again?

That is nasty stuff

I just read the entire transcript of his plea. There is nothing in there that definitively says that Cohen has nothing more to provide the government regarding the Russia investigation. Russia is mentioned nowhere. You are assuming because it was not part of this plea agreement that he must have nothing to offer. That is incorrect. Because I have read and listened to experts there could be a number of reasons for this. The special prosecutor no doubt has access to the materials obtained from Mr. Cohen's office. They may need time to confirm materials therein. They may need time to corroborate the claim made in the plea agreement about the president being involved; I doubt they will just take Mr. Cohen's word on it. So in summary I took your advice and went to the source. And objectively your claims are wrong from what I see. You sure you're not trying to force things to fit your narrative? Let the investigation be completed. Then let the chips fall where they may.

Hope you're right. Have my doubts...

I mentioned at the time of the trade I thought he'd get cut. We'll see.

Two wrongs do not make a right.

Sorry. She could have used her name, could have expressed sympathy. But she used it to slam another network. I'm a middle of the political spectrum guy but her comment was ridiculous.

Agreed

And the same should hold for the present nominee

The guy us obviously qualified. I'm concerned about what seems to be too much deference to the Executive branch vs the legislative and judicial. But elections have consequences and you'll get a jurist like this given the election results. Just like you got Ginsberg with Clinton.

I hear you. So let Republicans pass their plan. Problem is when the other party comes back into power (which they will at some point) they will just change things to what they want and ignore the Republicans. At some point the parties need to stop this crap and focus on the good of the nation.

Disgusting. She should not be allowed back on air

Completely agree with you on the Department of Education. No need for that; it is a state/local government issue.

Independent; lean very much towards the conservative on fiscal and law and order issues, more to the liberal side in social issues. Went for Johnson/Weld; could not in good conscience vote for either party lastvelection.

Correct. I am not from VA.

Since I'm independent I have no side. Democrats should have solved this when they had the power. Republicans should now. But historically big things like this should involve bipartisan cooperation.

We encourage patients to be their own advocates, encourage them to ask questions , and are always willing to encourage second opinions. So again your assumption that there are errors or we don't do such things is erroneous. This news broke last night. To gain insight I read and listened to experts in the field, prosecutors that do this for a living. If you are saying that we should not rely on experts in their field to help guide decision making or helping folks form opinions then I'm at a loss to figure out what you want. I'm pretty smart but without a thorough background in the law I wouldn't pretend to understand such issues. I'll take the information they provide, consider it and then form my opinion. Again I think you have confirmation bias, you take information and then fit it to your preconceived notion is what I am seeing. But as I said yesterday I'll read that one document you suggested about FISA. Send me the link again; I can't find our posts on that. Adults are having a conversation and debate here. Run along now.