SectionC3

I agree completely. I initially entertained the idea of trying to trade Moore first, but he's a better roster fit the Samuel. At this point, it's hard to conceive of cutting Shavers, who has an exceptional work ethic, roster versatility, and threshold competence, for a guy (Samuel) with marginal production who can't stay on the field.

1. He deserved the opportunity to make tape. 2. They're thinking of trying to trade Mike White (hello, Lions and Raiders) and they wanted to see if he can handle #3.

Exactly.

Sure, fine, but negotiations were ongoing.

Who's leeching? It's broadcast over the air and on premium channels for which I pay. That's leeching? Give me a break. (And I happened to purchase no fewer than four PSLs at the new stadium, so while we're on the subject of leeching maybe you can show some cards in that respect.)

That's really what we're talking about here. Taste, or poor taste, depending on one's perspective. That's it. Have the yacht, don't have the yacht, whatever. I think it's in poor taste to take $850m in taxpayer subsidy to fund a business and to then turn around and buy a $100m yacht. Others feel differently, and they're entitled to that opinion for many valid reasons. That about sums the whole thing up. All of this is well said. I'm not mad at the guy. I appreciate that he invested the money here and kept the team here. But I'm mindful of the fact that it's an immensely profitable business, and I personally would not have taken gobs of taxpayer money and then bought a yacht. It's not how I work. The question is taste, and look, and it's not for me. And some others. But there are more who don't really care about the optics or who don't see it the same way. Whatevs.

You have to be kidding.

I don’t disagree with the thought that he likes to send the children of others to war. But wasn’t he around in Trump I? And it’s not like his views have evolved or changed since then. So it does make this “raid” seem a bit like a distraction and persecution.

Mostly because if I was going to take $250m from the county containing the poorest city in America it’s not something I would do. I don’t blame the state and county for paying for the stadium. I would have done the same. I also think it’s a bad look to take those funds and spend $100m on a friggin stupid opulent boat. It’s not something I would have done. You have your opinion, I have mine. It is what it is. On to the next issue.

Tell that to my tenants who are scraping by and could use a slice of that $600m. Look, I would have voted for the stadium monies, too. I get why Terry asked, and I get why the state paid. It’s still not a good look to get $600m in tax monies and then build a $100m boat. We agree to disagree.

I disagree. It's a terrible look. I support the stadium monies--as a community, we had to do it. But this looks awful, and tone deaf.

Maybe go into SE if you’re spending the money anyways. Try that.

Such a response should be expected from someone now protecting “Hilly!” Well done, MAGA!

Good news, and just like March.

That is not good news.

Thanks to Ingram’s great play/uncalled DPI.

If you’re still talking about Joe Biden, then you’ve lost the plot. Like JDHillyFan.

Like the cats and dogs thing? Not to mention the area with the most crime—southeast across the river—is untouched by the feds. Another imaginary emergency created by the Don.

More context. He’s an emotional guy protective of his health. He bawled (not picking on him) when he tore his ACL. Took a full year to feel comfortable after the ACL injury. Threw his helmet pretty far when he tore his Achilles. This? Not the same reaction. And it would be malpractice not to cart him over to the field house if they were in the stadium. So, … fingers crossed.

Samuel and Cook.

What’s the latest conspiracy theory about Obama? I haven’t been on 4chan like, ever, so I’m not current on such matters.

Maybe you and your MAGA pals can J6 those things and unveil the conspiracy. After all, the new theory seems to be that the Clintons are prominently mentioned therein. So how come you’re now protecting “Hilly?”

At least they won't cover up the Epstein files.

I thought Republicans were interested in the release of the Epstein files. What a hoax that was.

Like what? The "severe consequences" that haven't materialized? That's the best you have? No exoneration. Legally sufficient evidence of an obstruction crime. But Trump appointee Bill Barr killing it after reading the report for a few minutes. And you invent some nonsense to explain it away.