Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, July 23, 2018

OTP 2018 July 23: How sports and American politics made each other

In January 1942, as the United States committed itself fully to World War II, President Franklin Roosevelt decided that baseball, then the national pastime, should sustain civilian morale during the lengthy struggle ahead. He implored its commissioner, Kenesaw Mountain Landis, to make sure the games went on, despite worldwide armed conflict. And so they did. Professional baseball players, Roosevelt argued, “are a definite recreational asset.”

Roosevelt did not extend that consideration to professional football players, whose sport did not register politically. As a result, the National Football League nearly shut its doors during World War II. So many players were called to serve that several franchises had to merge. In fact, the league didn’t take off until it closely associated itself with national politics. For the past half century, the intertwining of American football and politics has sustained both pastimes.

 

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 23, 2018 at 08:42 AM | 1431 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: football, off topic, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 13 of 15 pages ‹ First  < 11 12 13 14 15 > 
   1201. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:13 PM (#5717364)
Here's that quote in context, which FTR was made by an anonymous person passing a message to him, not by the author of the article:


You mean, not by the author of the article that wrote the article, had the article published, and put the quote in the headline? Along with the non-quote: "FREED FROM TRUMP, MICHAEL COHEN SEES A NEW IDENTITY: NATIONAL HERO"

Not that author?

   1202. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:13 PM (#5717365)
Can anyone make a convincing case that Donald Trump should be impeached based on the evidence we have seen so far? It seems like a very weak case at the moment.


He colluded with a hostile foreign nation to win his "election." If that's not enough for you, you don't ####### "lean left."
   1203. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:14 PM (#5717366)
Oh. I see Ray has turned on Cohen now that Cohen is no longer running interference for Trump, who Ray totally is not a supporter of. Natch.
   1204. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:16 PM (#5717367)
Can anyone make a convincing case that Donald Trump should be impeached based on the evidence we have seen so far? It seems like a very weak case at the moment.

He colluded with a hostile foreign nation to win his "election." If that's not enough for you,


...you're probably wondering what evidence there is of that and why what Hillary did is not worse.
   1205. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:20 PM (#5717368)
...you're probably wondering what evidence there is of that and why what Hillary did is not worse.


No, Ray. We're talking about people who are at the very least in the middle. Not Team Cockholster Professional #### Gobblers.
   1206. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:20 PM (#5717369)
Oh. I see Ray has turned on Cohen now that Cohen is no longer running interference for Trump, who Ray totally is not a supporter of. Natch.


How many lies can Sam tell before the new page gets broken? I've attacked Cohen from day one and have pointed out on several occasions here how unethical and terrible a "lawyer" and person he is. I've been consistent all along as to who Michael Cohen is. It's the sudden hero worshipers who have changed.
   1207. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:24 PM (#5717370)
how unethical and terrible a "lawyer" and person he is


As evidenced by his long term association with Donald Trump. (No one is "hero worshiping" Cohen; merely noting that he's a larger rat than the previous rats who have turned on the primary rat.)
   1208. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:32 PM (#5717372)
Here's a post from February where I call Cohen unethical and essentially a liar. Again, it's the newfound hero worshipers who have suddenly changed their tune on him.

745. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 14, 2018 at 11:29 AM (#5624867)

"Could be some legal issues for Cohen, and he may have to prove it."

SAYS WHO?

Jason, I don't understand the point of your answer here. Says the court in the lawsuit filed by Common Cause, probably. Cohen was representing Trump in 2011 in the dispute with In Touch magazine and Cohen threatened to sue the magazine for defamation if they ran the Stormy Daniels story. Cohen was successful in 2011 in quashing the story. Later in 2016 Cohen set up a sham company and paid Daniels $130,000 under a phony name. Now Cohen says that the money was completely his and that he was not reimbursed in any way, directly or indirectly.

It stinks to the highest of heavens and should be investigated fully.


Apparently Cohen's legal play with the statement that the money is his is to get the Common Cause lawsuit dismissed. "It was my money and had nothing to do with the campaign." However, I doubt that will happen; while the Common Cause lawsuit was legitimate, it was also a fishing expedition in search of the source of the money. Now Cohen claims he is the source. But the court will likely decide that, rather than dismissing the suit, Common Cause is entitled to discovery to explore whether Cohen is telling the truth: via interrogatories, depositions, bank statements, etc.

Unlike the sham Russia investigations, I not only fully support this lawsuit but I also would support an FEC investigation. Let the light shine in.

Note also that the state bar -- I don't know which jurisdiction(s) Cohen is licensed in -- may want to have a chat with him to determine the ethics of all of this. Even if it -- against all odds -- WAS his money and he was not reimbursed in any way, he still became involved in the case in a bizarre way that seems to go far beyond the scope of an attorney-client relationship. I couldn't imagine paying a sum of money out of my own pocket on behalf of a client and even if I were so inclined out of the goodness of my heart to do so I would put the brakes on worried that I'd get into ethical hot water.
   1209. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:32 PM (#5717373)
Here's that quote in context, which FTR was made by an anonymous person passing a message to him, not by the author of the article:

Earlier this week, however, a woman chased him down the street, shouting at him that he could be a hero if he cooperates with the government and brings President Trump down. Last week, another person attempted to get a message to Cohen, saying, “Please let him know that he could go down in history as the man that saved this country. I think his family would be so proud of him. Even people like me that were disgusted with the things we heard on those audio recordings, would totally forgive him.”

You mean, not by the author of the article that wrote the article, had the article published, and put the quote in the headline? Along with the non-quote: "FREED FROM TRUMP, MICHAEL COHEN SEES A NEW IDENTITY: NATIONAL HERO"

Not that author?



Tell you what, Ray: Go track down the name of the person who actually wrote that oh-so-incriminating message, and report back to us. (HINT: It wasn't the author of the article.)

And if you read the article, you'll see that it was just that---an article---not an opinion piece.** She was simply reporting the shift in opinion about Cohen.

Also note that very few authors of mainstream publications like Vanity Fair write the headlines on articles that appear under their bylines.

I know your entire identity seems to hinge on finding Leftists who think Cohen is now their "hero", but you need to do better than this.

** Contrary to what you and Trump seem to believe, reporting facts that neither you nor Trump want to accept doesn't mean that the reporting is Fake News. It's just reporting.
   1210. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:38 PM (#5717376)
Again, it's the newfound hero worshipers


the enemy of my enemy is my friend, moron. the only hero here is yours, and he's going down.
   1211. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:42 PM (#5717377)
how unethical and terrible a "lawyer" and person he is

As evidenced by his long term association with Donald Trump.


You said I had "turned on" Cohen. That was, not surprisingly, false. There was no turn.
   1212. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:46 PM (#5717378)
And if you read the article, you'll see that it was just that---an article---not an opinion piece.** She was simply reporting the shift in opinion about Cohen.


Right. Which proves my point about Cohen's sudden hero status. Thanks for agreeing.

Whereas I've always been of the mind that the man is an unethical lying piece of (likely criminal) scum who can't be believed when he says what the weather is unless his statement is independently verified.
   1213. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:47 PM (#5717381)
Whereas I've always been of the mind that the man is an unethical lying piece of (likely criminal) scum who can't be believed when he says what the weather is unless his statement is independently verified.


and he was Trump's closest confident and adviser for decades. Says something about something.
   1214. tshipman Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:54 PM (#5717384)
...you're probably wondering what evidence there is of that and why what Hillary did is not worse.


Ray, what crime are you alleging Hillary committed?

I think we've been pretty clear about what Trump's potential liabilities are. What is your theory of the case that you'd bring against Hillary for purchasing opposition research?
   1215. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 28, 2018 at 02:59 PM (#5717385)
Ray, what crime are you alleging Hillary committed?


Being a Clinton. That is easily enough, but worse she is a Democrat, and for the final straw she ran against and got more votes than the dear leader. All of these are crimes. Bad, bad crimes.
   1216. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:03 PM (#5717387)
Clapper, #1196:
Trump has sent lethal aid to Ukraine, bombed Putin's Syrian ally, destroyed a convoy of Russian mercenaries attacking a U.S. facility, repeatedly twisted the arms of our NATO allies to get them to increase their defense spending, and strongly opposed Germany's new reliance on Russia for its energy needs. Putin can't take much more of that sort of "servility".


Good news about Trump showing his teeth to Putin: At least 8%, and possibly 18% of Americans agree with you! That's more than watch "Game of Thrones," and that show is huge.

Only 47% of Americans say Trump is not tough enough on Russia... wait, correction. It's 47% of Republicans who believe that.
   1217. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:04 PM (#5717388)
Ray, what crime are you alleging Hillary committed?


Can we stop with the "when did you stop beating your wife" type "questions"? I never alleged she committed any crimes in this area. (A violation of 793f re her server I did allege, which is an entirely different topic.)

I think we've been pretty clear about what Trump's potential liabilities are. What is your theory of the case that you'd bring against Hillary for purchasing opposition research?


I would not bring any case against her, nor is there a case against her, nor did I ever say there was. In fact I said that EVERY campaign should be morally obligated to take a meeting with someone who the campaign believes may have some valuable and truthful oppo research, NO MATTER if the information is coming from an enemy power or not. So I'm fine with her trying to dig up dirt on Trump from Russia sources connected to the Russian government. I'm not the one obsessed with "collusion"; that's an obsession of you and yours. (What collusion-related crimes did Trump commit?)

Incidentally, what's the answer to my hypo that Baravelli thankfully reminded me of?

If Russia goes to the Clinton campaign and says, "We have information that Donald Trump sexually assaulted twelve women," should the Clinton campaign take that meeting?
   1218. tshipman Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:11 PM (#5717390)
If Russia goes to the Clinton campaign and says, "We have information that Donald Trump sexually assaulted twelve women," should the Clinton campaign take that meeting?


No, they should inform the FBI, as previous D campaigns did.

Can we stop with the "when did you stop beating your wife" type "questions"? I never alleged she committed any crimes in this area. (A violation of 793f re her server I did allege, which is an entirely different topic.)


...you're probably wondering what evidence there is of that and why what Hillary did is not worse.


But, you see, we ARE alleging that the Trump campaign committed crimes. So you claiming that "what Hillary did" (purchase opposition research from a vendor used by both parties?) is worse seems odd if you don't have a theory of why it's a crime.

Of course, that's if I take you seriously.
   1219. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:12 PM (#5717391)
Incidentally, what's the answer to my hypo that Baravelli thankfully reminded me of?
Without checking the old thread, I'm quite sure people did answer the question. If Russia approaches a campaign, the campaign should tell the person approaching them that if they have evidence of wrongdoing they should take it to the media or the FBI, and (b) the campaign itself should inform the FBI.

I distinctly remember people telling you that, more than once.
   1220. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:13 PM (#5717392)
What is your theory of the case that you'd bring against Hillary for purchasing opposition research?


Ray has no objective criteria for anything, He has said so many, many times. He makes judgements based on what other people think. Trump is great because he's not as horrible as the most unhinged liberal thought he would be. has he nuked Australia yet? No? then he's the greatest president ever.

WRT your question, he doesn't think Hillary did anything wrong, and he doesn't think Trump did anything wrong. But unhinged liberals want to hang Trump for collusion, therefore, since Hillary's collusion was worse than Trump's (a theory pulled straight from his nether regions), Hillary should be investigated and prosecuted first.
   1221. BDC Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:17 PM (#5717394)
If Russia goes to the Clinton campaign and says, "We have information that Donald Trump sexually assaulted twelve women," should the Clinton campaign take that meeting?


STAFFER: Hello, Clinton/Kaine 2016, thank you for helping us make history!

RUSSIA: Is Hillary there please. Must speak Hillary.

STAFFER: Can we send you a yard sign? Bumper sticker?

RUSSIA: Do not need stupid sign. Have fat binder. Is Donald Trump grabbing ladies, yes? How much Hillary want for binder?

STAFFER: Would you like to attend one of our campaign events?

RUSSIA: Yes. Private event. Under offramp near airport. Two AM, you bring fifty thousand cash, small bills no?

STAFFER: I'm afraid that's not on my checklist, sir. If you could please hold while I contact the FBI.
   1222. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:19 PM (#5717395)
If Russia goes to the Clinton campaign and says, "We have information that Donald Trump sexually assaulted twelve women," should the Clinton campaign take that meeting?

No, they should inform the FBI, as previous D campaigns did.


And how is that not allowing an enemy foreign government to influence our election?
   1223. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:22 PM (#5717396)
And how is that not allowing an enemy foreign government to influence our election?
Uh oh. Raybot is back.
   1224. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:22 PM (#5717397)
...you're probably wondering what evidence there is of that and why what Hillary did is not worse.

But, you see, we ARE alleging that the Trump campaign committed crimes. So you claiming that "what Hillary did" (purchase opposition research from a vendor used by both parties?) is worse seems odd if you don't have a theory of why it's a crime.

Of course, that's if I take you seriously.


You're not following the discussion. Sam's comment that I replied to didn't necessarily have to do with criminality per se, but with collusion and impeachment.

Collusion that is not criminal may -- depending on one's personal compass, though not mine -- be immoral or impeachable or simply bad, but it's not... criminal.
   1225. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:23 PM (#5717398)
And how is that not allowing an enemy foreign government to influence our election?

Uh oh. Raybot is back.


Concession accepted. No attempt to answer the substantive point. Just ad hominem. That's the tell that you don't have an argument that you'd not be embarrassed to make.
   1226. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:28 PM (#5717399)
Without checking the old thread, I'm quite sure people did answer the question. If Russia approaches a campaign, the campaign should tell the person approaching them that if they have evidence of wrongdoing they should take it to the media or the FBI, and (b) the campaign itself should inform the FBI.

I distinctly remember people telling you that, more than once.


I distinctly remember you telling Andy -- maybe Baravelli can find it -- that the "Tell the FBI" claptrap that the left was spinning was silly and unrealistic.

But again, "take it to the media or the FBI" and the campaign informing the FBI simply enables Russia to potentially influence the election. The only way Russia is NOT so enabled by the campaign is for the campaign to simply say "We are not interested in anything you have to tell us" and for the campaign to say and do nothing else.

Unless this whole "Allowing an enemy foreign government to influence our election" thing is just so much BS, which of course it is, which of course is the point that my hypothetical shows, which of course is why you responded to it with ad hominem rather than substance.
   1227. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:29 PM (#5717400)
Concession accepted. No attempt to answer the substantive point. Just ad hominem


To be fair, you are pretty stupid.
   1228. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:31 PM (#5717402)
No attempt to answer the substantive point.


That is your mistake right there, your point - such as it is - is not substantive. Explain how going to the FBI, as every other campaign would have and should have done - is "letting a foreign government influence the election", other than in the most trivial fashion.
   1229. tshipman Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:32 PM (#5717403)
And how is that not allowing an enemy foreign government to influence our election?


This is some kind of double-reverse bankshot logic that I'm not even going to attempt to follow.

You're not following the discussion. Sam's comment that I replied to didn't necessarily have to do with criminality per se, but with collusion and impeachment.

Collusion that is not criminal may -- depending on one's personal compass, though not mine -- be immoral or impeachable or simply bad, but it's not... criminal.


But that's just it--there is a criminal investigation into Donald Trump's campaign. There are several specific things that they are accused of doing with respect to the Russia investigation:

1. Conspiracy to commit computer crimes
2. Knowingly soliciting donations (in kind or otherwise) from foreign nationals.
3. Participating in the Russian conspiracy to defraud the United States.
4. Obstruction of justice in the investigation of the above.

Separately, he faces liabilities in the cover-ups of his sexual indiscretions:
5. Felony campaign finance law violations

"Collusion", as has been explained to you several times, is a shorthand for the crimes listed in 1-4. There is not really very widespread support for impeaching Donald Trump for just colluding with a foreign power, which is what the Trump Tower meeting already establishes by the public statements of those involved. There is no support for this, because the mere fact of taking the meeting was not a crime. We are all waiting for the Mueller investigation to finish because it will help establish how likely 1-4 are, and whether there were crimes likely to have been committed.
   1230. Lassus Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:34 PM (#5717404)
I expected more commentary on elf sex.
   1231. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:35 PM (#5717405)
Indeed, why would "You tell the media but we're not going to" even be a distinction with a difference? All that would be is the campaign suggesting X without wanting to be caught doing X themselves; but in either case the campaign is supporting X so it's hard to argue in that case that X is bad.

The only way to try to prevent our election from being influenced by the enemy foreign government would be to say to them "We are not interested and do NOT tell the media."

...If, that is, preventing election influence by an enemy foreign government is the overriding principle, as claimed.
   1232. tshipman Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:42 PM (#5717407)
Indeed, why would "You tell the media but we're not going to" even be a distinction with a difference? All that would be is the campaign suggesting X without wanting to be caught doing X themselves; but in either case the campaign is supporting X so it's hard to argue in that case that X is bad.


That's not what you said. You said informing the FBI was allowing a foreign government to influence the election. See #1222.

Are you modifying your argument?
   1233. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:45 PM (#5717408)
And if you read the article, you'll see that it was just that---an article---not an opinion piece.** She was simply reporting the shift in opinion about Cohen.

Right. Which proves my point about Cohen's sudden hero status.


Yes, as evidenced by a single written message by a single unidentified person. Congratulations, Sherlock.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again, it's the newfound hero worshipers

the enemy of my enemy is my friend, moron. the only hero here is yours, and he's going down.

In which case Cohen would be performing the Useful Idiot role for the Russia probe, just as Ray's performing the Useful Idiot role on behalf of Trump. The only difference would be that Cohen's role might prove to be a bit more Useful than merely spouting nonsense on an internet forum.
   1234. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:48 PM (#5717409)
I expected more commentary on elf sex.

You overestimate the ability of most "men" here, to achieve an erection, without a prescription and an hours notice.
   1235. BDC Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:53 PM (#5717412)
I expected more commentary on elf sex

Frito's hand, as though of its own will, reached out and traced the
delicate swelling of her elf-breast, while the other slowly crept around her
tiny, flawless waist, crushing her to his barrel chest.

"Toes, I love hairy toes," she moaned, forcing him down on the
silvered carpet. Her tiny, pink toes caressed the luxuriant fur of his instep
while Frito's nose sought out the warmth of her precious elf-navel.
   1236. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:54 PM (#5717413)
Indeed, why would "You tell the media but we're not going to" even be a distinction with a difference? All that would be is the campaign suggesting X without wanting to be caught doing X themselves; but in either case the campaign is supporting X so it's hard to argue in that case that X is bad.

That's not what you said. You said informing the FBI was allowing a foreign government to influence the election. See #1222.

Are you modifying your argument?


No, I am not modifying my argument. Again, please follow the discussion you're participating in. David's answer in 1219 had two components: (1) You tell the media (and the FBI) but we will not; and (2) we will tell the FBI.

In either case it is influencing the election, but in the post you're replying to here I was dealing specifically with the case (1A) subset: You tell the media but we will not.
   1237. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:56 PM (#5717414)
He’s not modifying his argument, his argument is modifying him. ,
   1238. Hot Wheeling American Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:56 PM (#5717415)
Trump has sent lethal aid to Ukraine, bombed Putin's Syrian ally, destroyed a convoy of Russian mercenaries attacking a U.S. facility, repeatedly twisted the arms of our NATO allies to get them to increase their defense spending, and strongly opposed Germany's new reliance on Russia for its energy needs. Putin can't take much more of that sort of "servility".

The Yankee Clapper is fond of suggesting his (?) fellow message board users and/or non-Republican politicians go run on a particular issue when he (?) doesn’t have the facts on his side. So, The Yankee Clapper, please tell your Republican party to run on Trump’s claim that he is the toughest president on Russia in this country’s history. Not sure the issue will get above defending Alex Jones and whining about the shadowbanning lie on bumper stickers, but something tells me the party can find room to defend this claim.
   1239. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 03:59 PM (#5717418)

Concession accepted. No attempt to answer the substantive point. Just ad hominem. That's the tell that you don't have an argument that you'd not be embarrassed to make.
It's not a substantive question, so there's no substantive answer. It's a Star Trek TOS way to cause a computer to explode. "I can't do anything. But not doing something might do something. Uh oh, I can't do nothing. I can't do something. I can't do nothing. Illogical. Illogical. Bzzz.. Fizz. Crackle. illogical. Boom!"
   1240. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:02 PM (#5717421)
Accepting a concession twice might be redundant but it reinforces the point that you have no argument in reply that you'd not be embarrassed to make.
   1241. The Yankee Clapper Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:07 PM (#5717422)
1. Conspiracy to commit computer crimes
2. Knowingly soliciting donations (in kind or otherwise) from foreign nationals.
3. Participating in the Russian conspiracy to defraud the United States.
4. Obstruction of justice in the investigation of the above.
5. Felony campaign finance law violations

It takes some rather "creative" interpretations and/or quite a bit of as yet undiscovered evidence to support any of those charges. Wishcasting only gets you so far.
   1242. tshipman Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:11 PM (#5717423)
No, I am not modifying my argument. Again, please follow the discussion you're participating in. David's answer in 1219 had two components: (1) You tell the media (and the FBI) but we will not; and (2) we will tell the FBI.


But that's not what you responded to. Re-read what you wrote.


No, they should inform the FBI, as previous D campaigns did.


And how is that not allowing an enemy foreign government to influence our election?


You said that informing the FBI was allowing an enemy foreign government to influence our election.

Did you misquote?

***

It takes some rather "creative" interpretations and/or quite a bit of as yet undiscovered evidence to support any of those charges. Wishcasting only gets you so far.


In fact, I said that in my post.

We are all waiting for the Mueller investigation to finish because it will help establish how likely 1-4 are, and whether there were crimes likely to have been committed.


Do you have trouble reading?
   1243. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:16 PM (#5717424)
TShipman I can't tell if you're trolling or not. No, I did not misquote, nor am I modifying my argument or any such thing.
   1244. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:16 PM (#5717425)
The only way to try to prevent our election from being influenced by the enemy foreign government would be to say to them "We are not interested and do NOT tell the media."

...If, that is, preventing election influence by an enemy foreign government is the overriding principle, as claimed.
Nobody claimed that, Raybot. There are many ways an enemy foreign government could influence the outcome of a U.S. election without it being a bad thing. The Soviet Union could tear down the Berlin Wall. The Palestinians could decide to give up terrorism, accept Israel, and become a peaceful independent country. North Korea could actually denuclearize, and hold free and fair elections. Any of those would affect who Americans voted for. But that wouldn't be bad.

See if Raybot can figure out the difference between that and, e.g., illicitly funding a presidential campaign, or secretly manipulating an election by stealing confidential information and coordinating the use of that information with a campaign, or hacking into voting machines, or secretly propagandizing to stir up racial hatred, or the like.


EDIT: For the sake of clarification, I am not saying that each of the things in the previous paragraph happened or involved Trump. I am simply distinguishing legitimate ways of affecting an election and illegitimate ways.
   1245. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:21 PM (#5717428)
Nobody claimed that, Raybot. There are many ways an enemy foreign government could influence the outcome of a U.S. election without it being a bad thing. The Soviet Union could tear down the Berlin Wall. The Palestinians could decide to give up terrorism, accept Israel, and become a peaceful independent country. North Korea could actually denuclearize, and hold free and fair elections. Any of those would affect who Americans voted for. But that wouldn't be bad.


None of which has the slightest relevance to the point we're discussing which is a campaign allowing an enemy foreign government to influence our election. Which my "Hillary, this is Vladimir; we have incontrovertible evidence that Trump sexually assaulted 12 women, can we show it to you?" hypothetical precisely goes to.
   1246. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:28 PM (#5717437)
Ray, #1243:
TShipman I can't tell if you're trolling or not.


If you felt a sharp pang of professional jealousy over Shipman's post, then yes. Yes, he is.
   1247. Greg K Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:31 PM (#5717441)
None of which has the slightest relevance to the point we're discussing which is a campaign allowing an enemy foreign government to influence our election. Which my "Hillary, this is Vladimir; we have incontrovertible evidence that Trump sexually assaulted 12 women, can we show it to you?" hypothetical precisely goes to.

This sort of seems like that scene from The Ides of March. Once you sit down in the meeting you're screwed. It seems like informing the FBI and getting them to investigate is the best option. Aside from any legal issues, meeting with the Russians to get the dirt opens you up to accusations that this is all just cooked up by partisan hacks and foreign enemies.

Of course, as evidenced in the above paragraph, pretty much all of my knowledge about US political campaigns and law comes from movies, so I'm not sure why my opinion is worth anything.
   1248. tshipman Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:32 PM (#5717442)
TShipman I can't tell if you're trolling or not. No, I did not misquote, nor am I modifying my argument or any such thing.


Re-read 1222:

No, they should inform the FBI, as previous D campaigns did.


And how is that not allowing an enemy foreign government to influence our election?
   1249. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:35 PM (#5717451)
I've re-read 1222. I did not misquote nor am I modifying any argument.
   1250. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:37 PM (#5717453)
why are we even talking about a hypothetical that didn't happen?
   1251. BDC Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:41 PM (#5717454)
So if a parent offers me a thousand bucks to change their kid's grade to A, and I report the parent to the university ethics officer, that allows the parent to influence the grades I give in my class.
   1252. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:43 PM (#5717456)
why are we even talking about a hypothetical that didn't happen?


Lol.

I've heard that hypotheticals tend not to have happened.

Hypotheticals are a good way to test principles. We've seen here that put to that test the stated principles are shown not to be principles at all.
   1253. Joe Bivens, Slack Rumped Rutabaga Head Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:46 PM (#5717459)
I love when Ray accuses people of not being able to offer "substantive" responses to his feeble arguments. As if they're worthy of anything other than mocking. They're not. Ray is a feeble minded person who loves to blather on about libs. He is the poster boy for Dunning-Kruger, yet, sadly, will never know.

Unless you people convince him of it. You can do it! I have faith in you!
   1254. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:48 PM (#5717462)
Hypotheticals are a good way to test principles.


yea you're Kant with the categorical imperative here. get real. here in reality your boy is the one that met with the Russians, likely to accept stolen info on his opponent. you can rosterbate to fantastical meetings that never happened all you want.
   1255. tshipman Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:49 PM (#5717463)
I've re-read 1222. I did not misquote nor am I modifying any argument.


I'm flummoxed.

You said this:
Again, please follow the discussion you're participating in. David's answer in 1219 had two components: (1) You tell the media (and the FBI) but we will not; and (2) we will tell the FBI.


But you didn't respond to David's answer in 1219.

You responded to my statement in 1218. I never mentioned the media, I said to just go to the FBI. But you said that just informing the FBI was allowing a foreign government to influence the election.

When pressed (because that statement is crazy), you changed your argument to mention the media. Then you claimed you didn't. And now I've wasted all this time responding to you, so I guess you win after all.
   1256. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:50 PM (#5717464)
Unserious people send up a red flag whenever they think saying "collusion is not a crime" is a killer mic drop. It's a lucky thing, then, that the letter appointing Robert Mueller as special counsel makes no mention of collusion. He's investigating conspiracy and coordination, among other things.

Stupidity and greed aren't crimes either, but they're sure going to send some folks to jail.
   1257. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:52 PM (#5717465)

None of which has the slightest relevance to the point we're discussing
If you think that, it's because you don't understand it.
   1258. Walks Clog Up the Bases Posted: July 28, 2018 at 04:59 PM (#5717467)
why are we even talking about a hypothetical that didn't happen?


Because people won't just ignore Ray.
   1259. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: July 28, 2018 at 05:03 PM (#5717469)
Conversely, Ray's eruption of posts shows just how hard he can ignore a thing he so badly wants everyone to ignore.
   1260. Ray (CTL) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 05:04 PM (#5717470)
But you didn't respond to David's answer in 1219.


I did, in 1226 and 1231. Those were in response to David's 1219.

My 1222 and 1224 were in response to you.

You conflated something.

You responded to my statement in 1218. I never mentioned the media, I said to just go to the FBI. But you said that just informing the FBI was allowing a foreign government to influence the election.

When pressed (because that statement is crazy), you changed your argument to mention the media. Then you claimed you didn't. And now I've wasted all this time responding to you, so I guess you win after all.


No, I didn't change my answer at all; I was simply responding, separately, to different points you and David had made.

I did not change my argument. I continue to state, and to stand by, and to maintain, my statement that just informing the FBI would be allowing a foreign government to influence the election. As obviously it would be.
   1261. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 05:10 PM (#5717471)
^ this is what law school gets you, folks.
   1262. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: July 28, 2018 at 05:17 PM (#5717472)
The tragedy of Trump Derangement Syndrome is that the sufferer has no way of knowing he's got it.
   1263. tshipman Posted: July 28, 2018 at 05:20 PM (#5717473)
I did not change my argument. I continue to state, and to stand by, and to maintain, my statement that just informing the FBI would be allowing a foreign government to influence the election. As obviously it would be.


Oh okay. Your argument is just stupid, but you're clinging tenaciously to it until you inevitably deny you said it.

Great. I'm done here.
   1264. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 05:25 PM (#5717474)

Oh okay. Your argument is just stupid, but you're clinging tenaciously to it until you inevitably deny you said it.
And in 2019 he'll claim that anyone who makes a similar argument is homophobic.
   1265. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: July 28, 2018 at 05:26 PM (#5717475)
Donald Trump:
I did NOT know of the meeting with my son, Don jr. Sounds to me like someone is trying to make up stories in order to get himself out of an unrelated jam (Taxi cabs maybe?).


Trump's latest diversionary tactic should really throw sand into the special counsel's gears. Robert Mueller probably doesn't even remember the time he convicted John Gotti with testimony from a mobster who cut a federal deal. But Sammy Gravano was only a vicious murderer, whereas Michael Cohen is involved with taxi cabs maybe.
   1266. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 28, 2018 at 05:27 PM (#5717476)
I did not change my argument. I continue to state, and to stand by, and to maintain, my statement that just informing the FBI would be allowing a foreign government to influence the election. As obviously it would be.



Oh okay. Your argument is just stupid, but you're clinging tenaciously to it until you inevitably deny you said it.


Yeah. Dumb.

The Trump campaign should have reported it to the FBI and not used any such information. Instead they lied about it, over a period of ... well years now. And almost certainly used the information. The fact that Ray can't distinguish between using and not using, between telling the FBI and lying about it tell you everything you need to know.
   1267. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: July 28, 2018 at 05:32 PM (#5717478)
I did not change my argument. I continue to state, and to stand by, and to maintain, my statement that just informing the FBI would be allowing a foreign government to influence the election. As obviously it would be.


More nihilism. Boiled down to it's essence, this is no different than the infamous Bobby Knight quote "I think that if rape is inevitable, relax and enjoy it."
   1268. Morty Causa Posted: July 28, 2018 at 05:37 PM (#5717481)
People, you need to stop beating Ray the piñata (as I believe Jolly Old used to call him). Give it up. There are no prizes.
   1269. greenback slays lewks Posted: July 28, 2018 at 05:58 PM (#5717485)
People, you need to stop beating Ray the piñata (as I believe Jolly Old used to call him). Give it up. There are no prizes.

This much attention is clearly a prize to Ray. They might as well fellate him like he's Iran.
   1270. strong silence Posted: July 28, 2018 at 06:12 PM (#5717488)
I get the feeling that Ray needs the attention from David and this community called OTP. Why else would he suffer constant insults and enter so many arguments he nearly always loses?

I'm reading a recent book called Denmark Vesey's Garden. It's a history of South Carolina and the battle between blacks and whites to control history, to own the narrative of slavery in S.C. The book is intended as a introduction to the question we face today of what to do with monuments dedicated to slavery, the Confederacy and those who supported them.
   1271. Davo Posted: July 28, 2018 at 06:15 PM (#5717489)
Laws, schmaws. What’s the moral reason why it’s bad for foreigners to influence the results of an election?

I’m an American, but I followed the Philippines presidential elections closely, and wanted very badly for Duterte to lose, because I believed he was going to have a ton of his citizens murdered.

What are my options? Can I start blogging in Tagalog about how awful he is? Can I write letters to the editors of Philippine newspapers urging their citizens to vote against Duterte? Suppose I uncover proof that Duterte was a rapist—can I leak it to Julian Assange in the hopes that he’ll publicize it? Can I donate money to the candidates running against him?

Now all of the above, but assume I’m a US Senator—any difference?
   1272. Davo Posted: July 28, 2018 at 06:22 PM (#5717490)
1196. The Yankee Clapper Posted: July 28, 2018 at 01:43 PM (#5717355)
Trump is, to put it politely, servile around Putin . . .

Trump has sent lethal aid to Ukraine, bombed Putin's Syrian ally, destroyed a convoy of Russian mercenaries attacking a U.S. facility, repeatedly twisted the arms of our NATO allies to get them to increase their defense spending, and strongly opposed Germany's new reliance on Russia for its energy needs. Putin can't take much more of that sort of "servility".

Ding ding ding. It’s the biggest problem with all these far-fetched “kompromat!” Russia-gate theories: the “puppet” is so clearly not doing the bidding of the “puppet-master!” America is still ramping up tensions with Russia as aggressively as we were under the last few administrations. If Trump is a secret Russian agent he’s doing a really shitty job at it!
   1273. greenback slays lewks Posted: July 28, 2018 at 06:25 PM (#5717491)
Trump has sent lethal aid to Ukraine, bombed Putin's Syrian ally, destroyed a convoy of Russian mercenaries attacking a U.S. facility, repeatedly twisted the arms of our NATO allies to get them to increase their defense spending, and strongly opposed Germany's new reliance on Russia for its energy needs. Putin can't take much more of that sort of "servility".

These talking points seem to be circulating among the GOP chorus as proof of Trump's willingness to stand up to his boss. One of them in particular is odd, the destruction of the Russian mercenary unit. There are three obvious problems here. First, there's no evidence at all that Trump was involved with the destruction of the mercenary force, since the destruction of the Wagner unit was apparently performed in self-defense. Second, the Russian position, which the US happily accepts, is that the mercenaries were not under Putin's control. As a result, nobody in the White House has been willing to confront Putin over the behavior of these mercenaries. If it was discussed in Helsinki, for example, then nobody reported it. In fact, Trump's has stated the US should remove troops from Syria, even though his military advisors have supported the exact opposite position.
   1274. greenback slays lewks Posted: July 28, 2018 at 06:32 PM (#5717494)
America is still ramping up tensions with Russia as aggressively as we were under the last few administrations.

Glenn Greenwald has been spouting this #### too. It is odd to de-emphasize the acts of the Russian government directed by Putin.
   1275. Joe Bivens, Slack Rumped Rutabaga Head Posted: July 28, 2018 at 06:47 PM (#5717497)
NATO without the US is a paper tiger, and Trump has been making noises about leaving NATO. His misunderstanding of how NATO is funded, coupled with his "America first" nonsense, gives Putin a woody while scaring the #### out of the EU. All of a sudden, seemingly out of nowhere Trump wonders aloud why we have to care about Montenegro. That was seemingly out of nowhere until you hear that Putin sees Montenegro as a strategic base for Russia.
   1276. Davo Posted: July 28, 2018 at 06:57 PM (#5717499)
Just to clear up any confusion, you libs have it exactly right: Glen Greenwald and I only want the US to stop bombing Syrian children because we’re on Putin’s payroll.
   1277. strong silence Posted: July 28, 2018 at 06:58 PM (#5717500)
Edit. I am halfway through the book.

I have not yet made up my mind about how to treat these types of monuments. Take the monument to Calhoun in Charleston. On one hand, I feel it should remain as a historical document to the memory of what some people thought of him. However, this monument leaves the lesson on the consciousness of those living that Calhoun was great and ought rightly to be revered. Perhaps a solution is to keep him there but add others right beside him: MLK, Lincoln, Malcom, or a list of slave names such as is the Vietnam Memorial.
   1278. Davo Posted: July 28, 2018 at 07:23 PM (#5717505)
MLK and Lincoln? #### that, if the right are gonna honor their terrorists, I want statues for Christopher Dorner and Fred Hampton.
   1279. strong silence Posted: July 28, 2018 at 07:37 PM (#5717509)
Who are they?
   1280. The Yankee Clapper Posted: July 28, 2018 at 07:48 PM (#5717511)
One of them in particular is odd, the destruction of the Russian mercenary unit. There are three obvious problems here. First, there's no evidence at all that Trump was involved with the destruction of the mercenary force, since the destruction of the Wagner unit was apparently performed in self-defense. Second, the Russian position, which the US happily accepts, is that the mercenaries were not under Putin's control.

That ignores that Trump gave U.S. forces in Syria rather robust rules of engagement and a mandate not to worry much about Syrian sensitivities while destroying ISIS and aiding anti-Assad rebels. That the U.S. didn't publicly wipe Russia's face in the dirt about destroying its mercenary convoy seems no more than prudent diplomacy rather than an indication that anyone actually thought the Russian government wasn't involved.
   1281. BrianBrianson Posted: July 28, 2018 at 08:02 PM (#5717513)
NATO without the US is a paper tiger


This depends on who you think NATO is supposed to be guarding against, but Russia ain't winning a war against (UK+France+Germany+...less important countries. I suppose the Poles might be super-keen on that action).

Who else attacks a NATO member, and where? India invades a British or French Indian ocean territory?

China would be a potent advisary, but where are they going to attack a NATO member other than the US?
   1282. The Yankee Clapper Posted: July 28, 2018 at 08:34 PM (#5717516)
This depends on who you think NATO is supposed to be guarding against, but Russia ain't winning a war against (UK+France+Germany+...less important countries.

You may want to rethink that. The Russians have ~ 20,000 tanks; at one time Germany had 2,000 tanks under NATO auspices, but now would be hard-pressed to quickly deploy 200. The U.K., France & Germany would have difficulty mounting an effective defense of Western & Central Europe on their own.
   1283. tshipman Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:05 PM (#5717522)
You may want to rethink that. The Russians have ~ 20,000 tanks; at one time Germany had 2,000 tanks under NATO auspices, but now would be hard-pressed to quickly deploy 200. The U.K., France & Germany would have difficulty mounting an effective defense of Western & Central Europe on their own.


...
You think tanks are relevant in modern nation state conflicts?
   1284. . Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:06 PM (#5717523)
There are many ways an enemy foreign government could influence the outcome of a U.S. election without it being a bad thing. The Soviet Union could tear down the Berlin Wall.


Yes, exactly -- now you're finally, finally getting it.(*)

If it can impact our election by tearing down the Berlin Wall or talking openly to the press, absent actual criminal conduct, there's no reason for concern if it provides true and relevant and material information about one presidential candidate to another candidate.

(*) Do be sure to tell the others.
   1285. . Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:08 PM (#5717524)
If Russia approaches a campaign, the campaign should tell the person approaching them that if they have evidence of wrongdoing they should take it to the media or the FBI, and (b) the campaign itself should inform the FBI.


LOL. Of course, the Clinton campaign did exactly the opposite. It took a bunch of meetings with Russia AND told the FBI.

But you didn't respond to David's answer in 1219.


His "answer" in 1219 is the product of a parallel, nonexistent universe for the reason I just noted.
   1286. Morty Causa Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:12 PM (#5717526)
1284:

Disingenuousness or naivete? You make the call.

I mean, really. The issue isn't wrt "influence". The issue under investigation is "interference".
   1287. . Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:20 PM (#5717527)
The Trump campaign should have reported it to the FBI and not used any such information.


LOL. You mean like the Clinton campaign did? I mean, pay no heed to the fact that the Clinton campaign agent took a bunch of meetings with Russia and became an FBI informant whose "information" derived from Russia led to a bunch of wiretaps of the Trump campaign.

What's the weather like in Fantasyland?
   1288. The Yankee Clapper Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:21 PM (#5717528)
You think tanks are relevant in modern nation state conflicts?

Everybody does. You need something to stop them.
   1289. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:22 PM (#5717529)
There are three obvious problems here. First, there's no evidence at all that Trump was involved with the destruction of the mercenary force, since the destruction of the Wagner unit was apparently performed in self-defense.
You beat me to commenting on this. I have no idea why Cadet Bonespurs is getting credit for something that he had nothing to do with. I mean, does YC think that when our forces were attacked, they called the White House to decide whether to defend themselves?

And what YC tries to spin as pro-NATO is really an attempt to blow up NATO.
   1290. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:22 PM (#5717530)

Just to clear up any confusion, you libs have it exactly right: Glen Greenwald and I only want the US to stop bombing Syrian children because we’re on Putin’s payroll.
Let's just say that your concern for Syria's children is curiously selective.
   1291. . Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:26 PM (#5717531)
If Russia approaches a campaign, the campaign should tell the person approaching them that if they have evidence of wrongdoing they should take it to the media or the FBI, and (b) the campaign itself should inform the FBI.


And of course, Russia didn't "approach" the Clinton campaign; the Clinton campaign approached Russia and actively sought out its assistance.


   1292. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:28 PM (#5717532)

Who else attacks a NATO member, and where? India invades a British or French Indian ocean territory?
NATO's mutual defense obligation only applies to attacks in North America or Europe, including North Atlantic territories, or Turkey. It does not apply to attacks on territories elsewhere in the world. (I guess we didn't want to commit ourselves to propping up the vestiges of colonial empires.)
   1293. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:29 PM (#5717534)

LOL. Of course, the Clinton campaign did exactly the opposite. It took a bunch of meetings with Russia
Still lying, I see. You're as sociopathic as your hero Trump.
   1294. . Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:30 PM (#5717536)
Still lying, I see.


You don't "see" in the least.
   1295. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:30 PM (#5717537)
If it can impact our election by tearing down the Berlin Wall or talking openly to the press, absent actual criminal conduct, there's no reason for concern if it provides true and relevant and material information about one presidential candidate to another candidate.
If a baseball player can score on a home run, there's no reason for concern if the batter takes his bat and beats the opposing pitcher to death with it. Also, I like spaghetti.
   1296. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:32 PM (#5717538)

LOL. You mean like the Clinton campaign did? I mean, pay no heed to the fact that the Clinton campaign agent
Fake lawyer doesn't know the difference between an agent and independent contractor. Film at 11.
took a bunch of meetings with Russia
Troll pretends not to know the difference between the Russian government and someone from Russia. No film needed.
   1297. . Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:33 PM (#5717539)
If a baseball player can score on a home run, there's no reason for concern if the batter takes his bat and beats the opposing pitcher to death with it. Also, I like spaghetti.


LOL. I'm not even sure the target demo is going to buy that one, but one can never tell.
   1298. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:37 PM (#5717540)
No, it's true. I swear on my grandmothers' graves: I like spaghetti.
   1299. . Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:38 PM (#5717541)
Fake lawyer doesn't know the difference between an agent and independent contractor. Film at 11.


Utterly meaningless distinction in this context. Completely and totally. Might fool some people, who knows? Smart people know better.

Troll pretends not to know the difference between the Russian government and someone from Russia.


Oh yeah, that's your theory that a senior person in a government who discusses government-obtained information with someone in the typical course of their business isn't "acting on behalf of the government" unless and until they affirmatively say, "I'm acting on behalf of the government."

I was time-pressed and unable to get to that doozy earlier, but suffice it to say it's as absurd as all the other stuff on this topic you've invented and regurgitated. Maybe it will work with the target demo.
   1300. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 28, 2018 at 09:38 PM (#5717542)
What a chump. Penne is the money pasta.
Page 13 of 15 pages ‹ First  < 11 12 13 14 15 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
TedBerg
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogCC Sabathia has a case for Cooperstown
(22 - 3:36am, Oct 21)
Last: Jaack

NewsblogAstros enter World Series against Nationals as heaviest favorites since 2007
(2 - 2:38am, Oct 21)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogWhy did Jeff Bridich give Nolan Arenado an opt-out clause?:The Athletic (paywall):Groke
(3 - 1:05am, Oct 21)
Last: Dr. Vaux

NewsblogChampionship Series OMNICHATTER!
(1140 - 11:39pm, Oct 20)
Last: Red Voodooin

NewsblogEric Cooper, MLB umpire for 21 years, dies at age 52
(4 - 11:30pm, Oct 20)
Last: Walks Clog Up the Bases

NewsblogOT - NBA thread (pre-season)
(575 - 11:25pm, Oct 20)
Last: tshipman

NewsblogSavages in the box go bust with slew of strikeouts
(25 - 11:05pm, Oct 20)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogClinching heroics net Altuve ALCS MVP honors
(16 - 11:02pm, Oct 20)
Last: bobm

NewsblogOT- Soccer Thread- October 2019
(192 - 10:55pm, Oct 20)
Last: Sean Forman

NewsblogCapital hill: Astros, Nats put World Series eyes on pitching
(4 - 9:11pm, Oct 20)
Last: puck

NewsblogWaiting game: Nationals get 6 days off before World Series
(14 - 8:47pm, Oct 20)
Last: AndrewJ

NewsblogThe hit-by-pitch god
(11 - 8:42pm, Oct 20)
Last: The Duke

NewsblogOT - 2019 NFL thread
(33 - 8:36pm, Oct 20)
Last: It's regretful that PASTE was able to get out

NewsblogEx-Red Sox knuckleballer Steven Wright to undergo Tommy John surgery
(4 - 5:24pm, Oct 20)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

Hall of MeritRoy Halladay, Mariano Rivera, and "Cannonball" Dick Redding elected - Hall of Merit Class of 2019
(57 - 4:51pm, Oct 20)
Last: Jaack

Page rendered in 0.7949 seconds
46 querie(s) executed