oldmanfan

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.

True. That door can swing both ways though depending on the issue.

Others here want to have an intelligent conversation. You don't so don't waste my time

I agree the Democratic Party has dragged their feet. But this attitude of always blaming one side or the other needs to stop. Critical national issues like this demand bipartisan solutions.

Tragic. This is an example of where I think the president has the right idea; we have to get control of our borders. But some of the methods he suggests are too draconian, like the stuff with the kids. I'd focus on much stronger electronic surveillance, more personnel, especially going after employers that hire illegals. A situation that has cried out for a bipartisan solution but we gave parties that are completely ineffective

This is completely and totally nonsense. They have a medical problem and they come to see me because I have the expertise to help them. And I do, way more times than not. Your assumption that I and other medical practiciobers are oftentimes wrong and fail patients is absurd on its face. Again I'll listen to professional prosecutors on matters of the law vs. guys like you, unless you are a member of the bar,

Yes, I listen to people with expertise in the field. Like most people do. And then I form my opinion. Your source stuff is a broken record now. I have patients who see me because of my expertise. Maybe I should send them to you.

Here's the deal. I work in the medical field. If someone has a kidney disorder I consult a nephrologist, and not a truck driver. I spent all last night watching a variety of prosecutors voicing their educated opinions on the Cohen stuff. I read a number of different sites with generally differing perspectives. And I listened to Cohen's actual lawyer. The vast vast majority disagree with you and indicated that the story on Cohen's cooperation is far from closed. So so tell me: are you a prosecutor who has actual experience in such matters? Or are you a truck driver?

You're way off base thinking he doesn't. You want to believe you're right because it fits your pre-conceived narrative. Confirmation bias.

Impeachable offense are what the members of the House at the time decide are impeachable offenses. Defenders of Clinton say an affair where we wasn't exactly truthful wasn't impeachable. I disagree; he should have been convicted for perjury. Likewise, if it is shown the current president broke the law to swing the election, or even worse worked with a foreign enemy to do so, he should also be impeached and convicted. If anyone in the country should be held up to the highest possible ethical and legal standards, it should be our presidents.

We will see. For those of you trying to write this off as nothing against the president think again. If Cohen and/or Manafort have material they can trade to provide evidence about whatever went on with the Russians, odds are they'll use it. As I keep saying, let the investigation run its course.

Maybe it's your nose that doesn't work

Ditto. I have the package and prefer to sit and scream on my own.

Tell you what. Over the next few days I'll read through this and give you my feedback. But quit trying to lecture people on whether or not they think. You're better than that. As for Mueller, everyone agreed at the beginning he was as standup a guy as could be picked to do this. Sure. And I suspect they probably are. Let them do their job.

No. Not for these charges. Now he has the ones in DC to deal with. If he was or was not.part of a Russian conspiracy it will become known. Let them do their job is all I'm saying. I'll accept whatever conclusions.

False. I have read some of your stuff. I don't find it persuasive at all. That does not mean I am giving in to a narrative. It means you are unpersuasive. And you just don't like hearing that. You are not free thinking; you take everything you see and reflexively fit it into YOUR preconceived bias. i would be delighted to see the Clintons get hauled in. I thought he should have been convicted by the Senate and I did not vote for her because she would have been a horrific president. You have a Republican Congress and Executive branch. Complain to them, not me.

I am the one free thinking. You are the one who has concated this vast conspiracy stuff. And if the Clintons show up in the Russian thing throw them in jail.

It doesn't matter who he worked for when he did this. The special prosecutor found this out during their investigation, prosecuted him for these crimes, and for 8 of them a jury of his peers found him guilty. Should we now just not prosecute financial crimes? The Russian stuff is still being investigated. We will see what they find out. Today does not have to have anything to do with it.

Two more guys guilty. The charges for each of these came as collateral charges referred to other legal agencies from the special counsel. The special council continues his work and we'll see where it goes. These decisions in no way say there was no conspiracy or not. They say two guys tried to pull off financial games and got caught. And the special prosecutor moves on. And saying 8 of 18 somehow proves the prosecutors are wrong is hogwash.

This is just sad.

I would recommend two things to those who don't like the guy: 1. Don't listen 2. Write to his advertisers with a copy to WGR and tell them why you will not be a patron of their company. Living out of town, I don't have to listen to him. I have a couple times on line, and quickly stopped. Way too caustic for me.

No. Wrecked his knee. And you are comparing apples and oranges with the league then vs. now. Those kinds of TD/Int ratios were more common and completion percentages were lower. Defenses got away with murder on WEs. Not saying Shaw was a superstar but for a rookie he was damn good. Just would have liked to see a healthy Shaw with OJ.

I am not comparing their physical skills directly. Shaw was really good as a rookie and it would have been interesting to see how things would have gone had he not gotten hurt.