BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Arenado, Goldschmidt can’t play Toronto series due to COVID vax status

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, July 25, 2022

Arenado, Goldschmidt can’t play Toronto series due to COVID vax status

The St. Louis Cardinals will be without All-Star infielders Nolan Arenado and Paul Goldschmidt for their two-game series against the Blue Jays in Toronto this week because of Canada’s COVID-19 vaccination rules, president of baseball operations John Mozeliak told reporters Sunday.

Catcher Austin Romine also will miss the series because he is unvaccinated against COVID-19.

Hombre Brotani Posted: July 25, 2022 at 05:36 AM | 313 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: cardinals, covid-19, nolan arenado, paul goldschmidt, toronto

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 3 of 4 pages < 1 2 3 4 >

201. And You Thought Zonk Was Terminated? Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:06 PM (#6088547)

Reduced to a pitchbot
Evict the principle
All men must serve
Lose yourself in the role
Lower your voice unless-
Your Leader demands you raise it

Vision of a hellscape indeed
It does make life simple
Cue His Mighty Voice
Heed His demands
Your face won't get eaten

202. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:08 PM (#6088548)

When the alternative is a lifelong conservative whose main "defection" is speaking the truth about Trump and the efforts to minimize his role in 1/6, it's hard to avoid such an inference. What other possible explanation could there be?

In your eyes, sure. To GOP voters, however, Cheney is using her perch as a Wyoming Member of Congress more than a year and a half after J6 to promote Trump!!! as a way to challenge Larry Hogan for control of the nonexistent wing of the Republican Party.

203. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:08 PM (#6088549)

The point still stands. Every GOP candidate for POTUS is deemed more incredibly dangerous than the one before.

That is both not true and immaterial.

Again, because you missed it the first time and ignored it when I corrected you, my "maybe there will be enlightenment after Trump" was about you. As David has mentioned Trump winning the election marked a change in you, and maybe when Trump is gone you will revert. But I hold out little hope.

It is also not relevant because your claim is essentially Democrats are mean to Republican nominees and call them names. While that is true, ummm, welcome to politics naive man. The exact same thing could be said about Democratic nominees, and who cares? Gosh, partisans say mean things about the other party! Let me clutch my pearls and daintily collapse into my fainting couch.

Finally, what you wrote is not even true. Even given everything above your supposition that each GOP nominee is talked about worse than the one before is complete and utter hogwash. W was, excoriated in every way imaginable and was very poorly thought of by Democrats one and all. Both John McCain and Mitt Romney, who I will note were nominees AFTER W, both (GASP!) had mean things said about them by mean Democrats (Double GASP!), but nowhere in the neighborhood about what was said about W. And for good reason.

So, basically, you didn't understand my original point (even after I pointed it out to you), and your response to what I didn't say managed to be factually incorrect and completely irrleevent whining about mean Democrats.

204. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:11 PM (#6088550)

#190 Name them.

For starters, anyone aligned with the DeSantis, Cruz, Haley, and Pompeo camps. Heck, even the Pence people don't support Cheney and Kinzinger.

205. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:15 PM (#6088551)

As David has mentioned Trump winning the election marked a change in you, and maybe when Trump is gone you will revert. But I hold out little hope.

A supposedly committed lifelong libertarian for the past five years has tirelessly defended the integrity of the FBI and DoJ, no matter what stink got disclosed or who in the Bureau got shitcanned, but I'm the one who was led astray?

Good one, Mousie!

206. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:15 PM (#6088552)

But in terms of the spirit of the line I'd say Bush II was more dangerous to democracy than Dole.

Although Dole supported Trump, and Bush II (like all the other Bushes except the sad George P. Bush) did not.

207. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:16 PM (#6088553)

JE, since I don't pay much attention to Facebook or Twitter these days: Do you think that Trump and his administration's actions between Election Day 2020 and January 6 were (a) perfectly fine and defensible, (b) not ok but also not illegal, or (c) illegal?

208. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:16 PM (#6088554)

After multiple warnings, you were tossed off for repeatedly resorting to personal insults against me and others who challenged your ridiculous claims. There's a reason why Lassus, for all of his antics, remains.

Nope. You had a tantrum because I kept posting facts. You literally used the term "filibustering" whenever I did that.

209. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:18 PM (#6088555)

Do you think that Trump and his administration's actions between Election Day 2020 and January 6 were (a) perfectly fine and defensible, (b) not ok but also not illegal, or (c) illegal?

210. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:21 PM (#6088557)

Nope. You had a tantrum because I kept posting facts. You literally used the term "filibustering" whenever I did that.

Oh, you did filibuster but ultimately got tossed in response to the personal insults.

211. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:22 PM (#6088558)

In your eyes, sure. To GOP voters, however, Cheney is using her perch as a Wyoming Member of Congress more than a year and a half after J6 to promote Trump!!! as a way to challenge Larry Hogan for control of the nonexistent wing of the Republican Party.

So you're saying that GOP voters are stupid?

Hmm… checks out. I mean, I guess if one is dumb enough to believe 2,000 Mules, one would believe that Cheney blew up her career — she was already in GOP leadership — for "control of a nonexistent wing" of the party. (But thank you for admitting that in fact there are no non-Trumpkin Republicans.)

212. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:22 PM (#6088559)

When the alternative is a lifelong conservative whose main "defection" is speaking the truth about Trump and the efforts to minimize his role in 1/6, it's hard to avoid such an inference. What other possible explanation could there be?

In your eyes, sure. To GOP voters, however, Cheney is using her perch as a Wyoming Member of Congress more than a year and a half after J6 to promote Trump!!! as a way to challenge Larry Hogan for control of the nonexistent wing of the Republican Party.

And so your only option is to support a rabid Trump supporter! That'll show her!

At least you're not saying that "The Democrats made me do it", so I guess that's something.

(And funny, that "nonexistent wing of the Republican Party" is a wing that you used to be a proud member of, Once Upon A Time.)

(Oh, and I guess that with that swipe at Hogan, you were also backing the Trumpist Dan Cox over Kelly Schulz in Maryland's gubernatorial primary. Good luck in November with that choice!)

213. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:25 PM (#6088562)

Oh, Andy, you left yourself open on that one. He's going to respond by pointing out (correctly) that the Democratic Party heavily invested in Dan Cox.

214. Misirlou cut his hair and moved to Rome Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:26 PM (#6088563)

Although Dole supported Trump, and Bush II (like all the other Bushes except the sad George P. Bush) did not.

Dole was 93 in 2016. I'd cut a doddering old man some slack.

215. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:30 PM (#6088564)

Do you think that Trump and his administration's actions between Election Day 2020 and January 6 were (a) perfectly fine and defensible, (b) not ok but also not illegal, or (c) illegal?

B.

Thanks. Do you think what he did was bad enough to be disqualifying from holding future office, or is it just another item on a list of pros and cons?

216. Ron J Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:55 PM (#6088566)

#204 Some in those camps I'll grant you. But it's been speculated that some of the fracturing of the right wing talking heads (because there are more than a few people even on Fox saying that what's come out is serious) has to do with a DeSantis pivot.

The people who believe that any violence on Jan. 6 was justified will be unmoved. That's a disturbingly high percentage of Republicans.

217. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 12:57 PM (#6088568)

That's a disturbingly high percentage of Republicans.

There wasn't any violence, and it was justified, and it was all done by Antifa.

218. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 01:12 PM (#6088571)

The exact same thing could be said about Democratic nominees, and who cares? Gosh, partisans say mean things about the other party! Let me clutch my pearls and daintily collapse into my fainting couch.

I'm still waiting for Barack Hussein Obama to confiscate my guns and impose sharia law on the United States.

219. The Yankee Clapper Posted: July 27, 2022 at 01:14 PM (#6088572)

How long has it been since some unnamed source within the USSS denounced Hutchinson's testimony and said the agents involved were eager to testify to that fact under oath? And still crickets.

You do realize that’s because the Committee never sought the agents testimony, neither before nor after Hutchinson’s testimony? Not much of an investigation when you rely on 2nd hand hearsay and don’t even check with those alleged to have made the statements, or who were in a position to corroborate or contradict that witness.

220. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 01:15 PM (#6088574)

There wasn't any violence, and it was justified, and it was all done by Antifa.

Don't forget all those BLM plants too. I heard it on Newsmax.

221. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 27, 2022 at 01:18 PM (#6088575)

A supposedly committed lifelong libertarian for the past five years has tirelessly defended the integrity of the FBI and DoJ, no matter what stink got disclosed or who in the Bureau got shitcanned, but I'm the one who was led astray?

I wasn't aware if some other person did something that meant you were completely exonerated. Nah, just more "Whatabout!".

Note: as an aside, David, for all his faults, is very consistent and has been for years. I disagree with him on 99% of things, but he has absolutely not changed substantively since 2016. Not that it matters in the slightest as to whether or not you have changed, so even your whatabout is wrong. I would think you would manage to be right at least on accident occasionally.

222. Mr. Hotfoot Jackson (gef, talking mongoose) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 01:19 PM (#6088576)

A supposedly committed lifelong libertarian

I might be wrong, but I don't think DMN fell under the sway of Ayn Rand till his ... 20s?

223. McCoy Posted: July 27, 2022 at 01:21 PM (#6088578)

He's been a lifelong pedant

224. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 27, 2022 at 01:21 PM (#6088579)

You do realize that’s because the Committee never sought the agents testimony, neither before nor after Hutchinson’s testimony? Not much of an investigation when you rely on 2nd hand hearsay and don’t even check with those alleged to have made the statements, or who were in a position to corroborate or contradict that witness.

I did not realize that the only way they could speak on the record was if they were subpoenaed. Weird, but with all the talk about how any minunte now agents were going to destroy her testimony you would have thought it could have happened before now. But now I get it, the only outlet for that was anonymous statements. They were incapable of going on the record.

225. And You Thought Zonk Was Terminated? Posted: July 27, 2022 at 01:24 PM (#6088580)

Here's where Some Here want to play semantic games -

Ornato has been interviewed by the committee at least twice; Engel at least once (if not twice).

Here's also where Some Here want to play distraction games -

Of course, there will be no referrals or charges or anything like that for assaulting a USSS agent or causing a traffic danger or anything like that. It's amusing flavor, but largely a meaningless bauble.

It's why Some Here just cannot be taken seriously.

226. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 01:43 PM (#6088582)

Yep; the claim that Hutchinson lied, that Trumpkins like Jason immediately leapt on, was itself "secondhand hearsay." Nobody came out and said, "I was there and it didn't happen," or the like. Rather, unnamed people from the Secret Service said, "These guys are prepared to testify that it didn't happen." (But unlike Hutchinson's, not given under oath!)

Also, Jason is ignoring the fact that they did get testimony corroborating her — just not from the Secret Service agents who deleted their texts.

https://wsvn.com/news/politics/dc-police-officer-in-trump-jan-6-motorcade-corroborates-details-of-heated-secret-service-exchange-to-committee/

227. Traderdave

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 02:29 PM (#6088589)

There's also grainy, inconclusive video of some sort of ruckus happening in that SUV at the moment in question. That's not incontrovertible, but it lends real credence to Hutchinson's account.

228. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 02:35 PM (#6088591)

(Oh, and I guess that with that swipe at Hogan, you were also backing the Trumpist Dan Cox over Kelly Schulz in Maryland's gubernatorial primary. Good luck in November with that choice!)

Oh, Andy, you left yourself open on that one. He's going to respond by pointing out (correctly) that the Democratic Party heavily invested in Dan Cox.

Don't blame me, I voted for Moore!

As for the Dems' tactic, I'd be more inclined to knock it if Cox had even a 10% chance of winning in November.**

That said, since Schulz would be more like Hogan, having her succeed him wouldn't have been the worst thing in the world, though for us Democrats Moore is an easy choice.

** And yes, I'll put up $1000 if anyone wants to put up $100 and say Cox will win.

229. The Yankee Clapper Posted: July 27, 2022 at 02:39 PM (#6088592)

And yes, I'll put up $1000 if anyone wants to put up $100 and say Cox will win.

You can’t be taken seriously unless you offer ‘Bivens odds’.

230. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 02:41 PM (#6088593)

231. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 02:42 PM (#6088594)

You can’t be taken seriously unless you offer ‘Bivens odds’.

That still stings. Not so much the money part (but that's a little bit of it).

232. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 02:44 PM (#6088596)

There's also grainy, inconclusive video of some sort of ruckus happening in that SUV at the moment in question.

Oh, please have a link, PLEASE! I'm still giggling over that horrifying image...a POTUS, off his rocker, assaulting a minion, the minion saving POTUS from himself.

233. Misirlou cut his hair and moved to Rome Posted: July 27, 2022 at 02:45 PM (#6088597)

Also, Jason is ignoring the fact that they did get testimony corroborating her — just not from the Secret Service agents who deleted their texts.

https://wsvn.com/news/politics/dc-police-officer-in-trump-jan-6-motorcade-corroborates-details-of-heated-secret-service-exchange-to-committee/

You don't understand. That's not what's important. What's critical is either confirming or disproving that Ornato used the word lunge. The future of the republic depends on it.

234. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 02:57 PM (#6088600)

Cox will almost certainly not win, but he has an infinitely greater chance of winning now than he would've if Shultz had won the primary. And the anti-Trump wing¹ is weaker and the Trump wing is stronger.

As I said, I voted for Moore, but IMO the Trump fever that's infected the Republican base is something that's just going to have to work itself out on its own, over time. And as I'm sure Mouse has pointed out somewhere along the line, those Democratic Astroturf ads were quite factually true, and Cox's winning margin was hardly made up of only Democratic crossovers.

--------

You can’t be taken seriously unless you offer ‘Bivens odds’.

That still stings. Not so much the money part (but that's a little bit of it).

Yeah, but in your real world life it was chump change compared to your movie earnings.

235. McCoy Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:13 PM (#6088602)

Anytime Bivens wants to offer up odds I'll take part again.

236. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:14 PM (#6088603)

There's a Raw Story article out today that quotes an unnamed GOP insider who says that they're waiting for Trump to die, and then they'll get back to business as usual.

237. Traderdave

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:14 PM (#6088604)

Does "Bivens odds" refer to Ray's winning bet from Nov '16?

238. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:15 PM (#6088605)

Anytime Bivens wants to offer up odds I'll take part again.

On what? Not that I'm a moth to a flame or anything.

239. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:16 PM (#6088606)

240. McCoy Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:16 PM (#6088607)

Ray's? Ray's? Ray's? You mean McCoy's winning bet!

241. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:17 PM (#6088608)

Any time, McCoy? Really? I'll give you 20-1 odds that say the Red Sox won't make the playoffs this season. Wanna get me even with you?

242. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:18 PM (#6088609)

Ray's? Ray's? Ray's? You mean McCoy's winning bet!

There were multiple winners. You, Ray, SBB, and Dog on the Sidewalk, IIRC. Maybe one more?

243. McCoy Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:22 PM (#6088610)

I can put 10 bucks on that.

244. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:25 PM (#6088611)

Fine. That's a Venmo transaction. I'll buy a couple of small ice cream sundaes with it.

245. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:30 PM (#6088612)

No more bets on anything nationally (politically). I've been burned for the first and last time by the imbeciles. I knew there were a % of dummies and a % of immoral ####### out there that would vote for Trump, but not as many as the # that actually did. Naïveté on my part.

There was a giddy Trumpkin here who offered to bet that Curt Schilling would beat Warren for the US Senate seat in MA, but that went nowhere. Anyone want Geoff Diehl v the incumbent AG for Governor of MA? I'd be up for that bet.

246. McCoy Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:49 PM (#6088614)

So to be clear you're betting 200 they won't make it and I'm betting 10 they will, correct?

247. Ron J Posted: July 27, 2022 at 03:55 PM (#6088615)

#222 Indeed. When I first encountered him his usenet .sig was very much pro Bill Clinton.

248. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 04:21 PM (#6088619)

No more bets on anything nationally (politically). I've been burned for the first and last time by the imbeciles. I knew there were a % of dummies and a % of immoral ####### out there that would vote for Trump, but not as many as the # that actually did. Naïveté on my part.

I lost a dinner to Jason and Clapper that time, but I made it back tenfold with Ray in 2020. He offered even odds for $1000 that Trump would be re-elected. And the whole campaign bus cheered when he lost.

249. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 04:29 PM (#6088623)

So to be clear you're betting 200 they won't make it and I'm betting 10 they will, correct?

How about this hedge, if you'll allow: If they are buyers at the deadline, let me evaluate who they add to the team. If they're sellers or stand pat, we're on.

250. Mr. Hotfoot Jackson (gef, talking mongoose) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 04:30 PM (#6088624)

There was a giddy Trumpkin here who offered to bet that Curt Schilling would beat Warren for the US Senate seat in MA

Oh, please ID him. Please.

251. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 04:30 PM (#6088625)

Tsk. Ray didn't offer me the same bet in 2020. Not that I would have taken it. Burned, I tell you! Singed! My eyebrows just grew back.

252. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 04:32 PM (#6088626)

Oh, please ID him. Please

I honestly forget. It may have been Kehoskie? Clapper, was it you? Not that you'd own up to it.

253. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 27, 2022 at 04:34 PM (#6088627)

Clapper would never ever in a million years make that declarative a statement about his own opinion. His commitment to being passive-aggressive and non-declarative is amazing. Impressive even.

254. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 04:34 PM (#6088628)

It wasn't JE. It may have been Ray, but it doesn't resonate. Maybe SBB, but again...Kehoskie hits me as most likely. I suck with the search feature, if anyone is good at it, have at it. It was in OTP, around the 2016 campaign, maybe after.

255. Mr. Hotfoot Jackson (gef, talking mongoose) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 04:49 PM (#6088631)

Kehoskie's last visit to the site shows to be 8/8/16.

256. The Yankee Clapper Posted: July 27, 2022 at 04:50 PM (#6088632)

Bivens does stupid bets; I don’t.

257. The Yankee Clapper Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:00 PM (#6088636)

I did not realize that the only way they could speak on the record was if they were subpoenaed. Weird, but with all the talk about how any minunte now agents were going to destroy her testimony you would have thought it could have happened before now. But now I get it, the only outlet for that was anonymous statements. They were incapable of going on the record.

Bitter Mouse may advise career government employees to speak publicly about matters related to their employment, even when the current political appointees in their agency prefer they don’t, without a subpoena or even a formal request from the investigating body, but many would disagree with such advice. Of course, the actions or non-actions of the agents wouldn’t excuse the Committee’s lack of action. Why rely on hearsay rather than pin down the eye witness testimony?

258. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:01 PM (#6088637)

It was only a stupid bet when I upped the odds to 20-1. Before that, I got no takers. At 20-1, the fishermen came out in force.

259. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:03 PM (#6088639)

Why rely on hearsay rather than pin down the eye witness testimony?

Aren't they investigating the alleged deleted text messages? Stay tuned!

260. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:05 PM (#6088640)

Bitter Mouse may advise career government employees to speak publicly about matters related to their employment, even when the current political appointees in their agency prefer they don’t, without a subpoena or even a formal request from the investigating body, but many would disagree with such advice. Of course, the actions or non-actions of the agents wouldn’t excuse the Committee’s lack of action. Why rely on hearsay rather than pin down the eye witness testimony?

You might want to review what David wrote, it seems there is more corroboration given that you seem able to credit.

Anyway, it is on those who loudly tried to discredit sworn testimony to put up or shut up. Thus far they have (on the record) shut up. Despite the rather frequent boasts, there has been nothing. Seems they want it both ways, they want to be able to stay in the shadows and also be believed that the sworn testimony is false. You don't get it both ways.

261. McCoy Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:07 PM (#6088641)

Re 249. How about we just decide to make a bet or not at the deadline?

And just move over to discord. It's easier to keep track of this stuff over there.

262. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:08 PM (#6088643)

I bet though if someone with likely relevant testimony came forward and wanted to testify before the J6 group they would be obliged. And it seems to me if they knew a previous witness had perjured themselves they absolutely have relevant testimony.

263. The Duke Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:17 PM (#6088648)

The most often asked question at the capital gift shop is " do you sell those buffalo horns here?".

That's all you need to know about January 6th.

264. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:21 PM (#6088649)

That's all you need to know about January 6th.

No, no it is not. Even if the dumb factoid is true (which I doubt, but hey it could be).

265. Biscuit_pants Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:25 PM (#6088650)

That's all you need to know about January 6th.

I am genuinely curious as to what you mean here? In your opinion what does that tell you?

266. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:28 PM (#6088651)

Why rely on hearsay rather than pin down the eye witness testimony?

As I explained: (1) They have eyewitness testimony.
(2) The relevant people have lawyered up.
(3) It's far too tangential a point to worry about. How violent Trump was in his dispute with the Secret Service has nothing to do with the substance of what happened that day or in the two months leading up to that day.

267. The Yankee Clapper Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:37 PM (#6088655)

The Committee has mechanisms for obtaining the testimony in question, if it wishes, and it would likely have been even easier to do so when Hutchinson first raised the issue with the investigators.

268. Lassus Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:55 PM (#6088657)

I am genuinely curious as to what you mean here? In your opinion what does that tell you?

The loudest, most ridiculous moron is popular.
Which we already knew when Trump was elected.

269. greenback needs a ride, not ammo

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 05:59 PM (#6088658)

The Committee has mechanisms for obtaining the testimony in question, if it wishes, and it would likely have been even easier to do so when Hutchinson first raised the issue with the investigators.

Has anyone successfully overcome these mechanisms for obtaining testimony?

270. sunday silence (again) Posted: July 27, 2022 at 06:02 PM (#6088659)

as longs as we're researching old challenges: can someone find the thread where the icon guy offered odds of 500:1 that Trump would not attempt to something illegal to overturn the 2020 election?

271. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 27, 2022 at 06:11 PM (#6088661)

The Committee has mechanisms for obtaining the testimony in question, if it wishes, and it would likely have been even easier to do so when Hutchinson first raised the issue with the investigators.

If someone has knowledge of a federal crime (IANAL but I think perjury before the committee would qualify as such) then they should come publicly forward. No one has. But sure, the Federal government could in theory depose the entire population of DC in order to find someone who might challenge previously sworn testimony. Seems weird you want to waste government resources that way though.

272. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 06:15 PM (#6088662)

Re 249. How about we just decide to make a bet or not at the deadline?

And just move over to discord.

That's fine. I'll need a link to Discord.

273. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 27, 2022 at 06:18 PM (#6088663)

That's fine. I'll need a link to Discord.

Sent to your BTF email.

274. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 27, 2022 at 06:47 PM (#6088665)

Got it. Thanks.

275. Ron J Posted: July 27, 2022 at 06:49 PM (#6088666)

#217 (and others) As discussed, when it comes to Hutchinson's testimony on the lunge the issue isn't what Trump did but rather what Tony Ornato told her. The particular detail may have no evidentiary value if nobody else heard the conversation. But it's not important in terms of Trump's actions on the day. And anybody who thinks they can impeach her entire testimony based on his denial is ... unlikely to be correct.

276. And You Thought Zonk Was Terminated? Posted: July 27, 2022 at 07:14 PM (#6088669)

I'm trying to decide whether the sycofauxnt focus on the "lunge" is dumber than Green Room Johnny Turley's initial day or two spent trying to convince people that the REAL scandal and news was that the USSS kidnapped POTUS.

277. Ron J Posted: July 27, 2022 at 07:17 PM (#6088670)

#276 It's a rather pathetic effort to impeach the entirety of her testimony.

278. And You Thought Zonk Was Terminated? Posted: July 27, 2022 at 07:46 PM (#6088675)

#276 It's a rather pathetic effort to impeach the entirety of her testimony.

I know, I guess it was more of a rhetorical question... Turley's hot take was more amusing, and I suppose - that's going to make it automatically dumber over time.

In any case, it annoyed me going back a month ago that the lunge and the plate toss/ketchup drip sucked up so much oxygen because there was a *lot* in the June 28 hearing that was new and rather shocking. The magnetometers and the insistence on leading the mob (whatever made-for-film elements aside) was a point where I was no longer sure Trump wouldn't(/even shouldn't) be charged.

Part of me wishes the people who stopped him from pulling it off had spoken up ~18 months ago - but people aren't perfect and I believe in redemption.

279. Ron J Posted: July 27, 2022 at 08:17 PM (#6088680)

#278 Well Pat Cipollone in particular is in a tricky position and his testimony is bound to be important. It was always going to take a long time to reach an understanding on the boundaries. And then from what I understand they used him to corroborate such details of Hutchinson's testimony that he could.

280. Starring Bradley Scotchman as RMc Posted: July 27, 2022 at 08:17 PM (#6088681)

Buffalo Bob: "What time is it, kids?"

Primates: "It's COVID 'n Politics Time...!"

"COVID and politics!
They're Primer's favourite tricks!
Left-wing and right-wing, well,
Tell you to go to hell!
You wanna talk 'bout ball?
It just ain't here at all,
Looks like you're out of luck,
Baseball, get [REDACTED]!"

281. greenback needs a ride, not ammo

Posted: July 27, 2022 at 08:39 PM (#6088686)

I'm trying to decide whether the sycofauxnt focus on the "lunge" is dumber than Green Room Johnny Turley's initial day or two spent trying to convince people that the REAL scandal and news was that the USSS kidnapped POTUS.

Turley kinda was a useful idiot here though. Basically he made it clearer that the USSS had to take the extraordinary step of kidnapping an outgoing POTUS to (inadvertently?) prevent a coup attempt / potential massacre of congress. Implying that the only thing between us and Julius Caesar was a couple of rogue Secret Service agents adds a bit of flavor to any description of Trump's efforts on J6.

282. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: July 28, 2022 at 06:21 AM (#6088730)

Buffalo Bob: "What time is it, kids?"

Primates: "It's COVID 'n Politics Time...!

First post came from who?

283. ReggieThomasLives Posted: July 28, 2022 at 01:52 PM (#6088759)

¹ "Wing" is too strong. What's something much smaller than a wing? A hallway? A broom closet?

A Feather?

284. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: July 31, 2022 at 10:41 PM (#6089133)

(And funny, that "nonexistent wing of the Republican Party" is a wing that you used to be a proud member of, Once Upon A Time.)

Back in 2016, Andy, I was Never Trump. However, I was not Never Republican then and never promised to be in the future.

In contrast to DMN's latest attempt at revisionist history, it wasn't until maybe halfway through 2017 when it started to become evident that Trump's enemies, such as the clowns who occupied the 7th floor of the Bureau, were greater threats to the Constitution.

As for Trump's policies, they were a net plus.

Regarding 2024, I've made clear my preference that he not run again. Enacting state voter integrity measures are critical going forward; in contrast, endlessly carping about 2020 is boring and a waste of time.

(Oh, and I guess that with that swipe at Hogan, you were also backing the Trumpist Dan Cox over Kelly Schulz in Maryland's gubernatorial primary. Good luck in November with that choice!)

If Hogan had been so interested in Schulz, how come he and his pals didn't give her campaign a dime? Moreover, why did he spend the week before the primary in New Hampshire instead of campaigning alongside her?

Hogan should have run for what would have been a very winnable Senate seat. Instead, he foolishly listened to the sycophants. Consequently, if he does make a run for the GOP POTUS nomination, don't expect him to capture even a quarter of the vote in his home state.

285. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: July 31, 2022 at 10:45 PM (#6089134)

Note: as an aside, David, for all his faults, is very consistent and has been for years. I disagree with him on 99% of things, but he has absolutely not changed substantively since 2016. Not that it matters in the slightest as to whether or not you have changed, so even your whatabout is wrong. I would think you would manage to be right at least on accident occasionally.

Prior to 2017, it's difficult to recall a moment here where DMN was caught breathlessly regurgitating federal law enforcement talking points in a controversy.

Since 2017, it's been difficult to recall a moment where DMN hasn't breathlessly regurgitated federal law enforcement talking points in a controversy.

286. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: July 31, 2022 at 11:00 PM (#6089135)

I did not realize that the only way they could speak on the record was if they were subpoenaed. Weird, but with all the talk about how any minunte now agents were going to destroy her testimony you would have thought it could have happened before now. But now I get it, the only outlet for that was anonymous statements. They were incapable of going on the record.

I was gone here for two years but it appears folks here still refuse to read their own links...

(CNN) — A Washington, DC, police officer has corroborated to the House select committee investigating January 6, 2021, details regarding a heated exchange former President Donald Trump had with his Secret Service detail when he was told he could not go to the US Capitol after his rally, a source familiar with the matter tells CNN.

The officer with the Metropolitan Police Department was in the motorcade with the Secret Service for Trump on January 6 and recounted what was seen to committee investigators, according to the source.

Oh look, here's yet another anonymously sourced story supposedly incriminating Trump that, like so many of the prior ones, will never be corroborated. I mean, why does this source not have a name? This story is over two weeks old so why has he/she not testified before the J6 inquisitors? Yup, it's a total mystery!

287. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: July 31, 2022 at 11:09 PM (#6089136)

Thanks. Do you think what he did was bad enough to be disqualifying from holding future office, or is it just another item on a list of pros and cons?

His antics fall somewhere in between.

As noted above, Trump's Democrat opponents have demonstrated they are a greater threat to the health of the nation.

And as noted above, the hope is that DJT doesn't run again. In the event he does run *and* manages to secure the nomination, I'll back him in the general.

288. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: July 31, 2022 at 11:14 PM (#6089138)

The Committee has mechanisms for obtaining the testimony in question, if it wishes, and it would likely have been even easier to do so when Hutchinson first raised the issue with the investigators.

Not everyone here qualifies, Clapper, but generally we're responding to folks who are alternately nearly as gullible or nefarious as Joseph Davies, our clown of an ambassador who in 1938 insisted to his colleagues back in DC that Stalin's Great Purge trials were actually genuine.

289. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Posted: July 31, 2022 at 11:19 PM (#6089139)

(And funny, that "nonexistent wing of the Republican Party" is a wing that you used to be a proud member of, Once Upon A Time.)

Back in 2016, Andy, I was Never Trump. However, I was not Never Republican then and never promised to be in the future.

Cheney and Kinzinger and Romney are Republicans who consistently supported Trump's policies, if not his rhetoric. Cheney's only "sin" was not dodging the truth about what happened on 1/6.

And yet you're now supporting "ABC". When was it made a requirement for Republicans to be Trump supporters?

Hogan should have run for what would have been a very winnable Senate seat. Instead, he foolishly listened to the sycophants. Consequently, if he does make a run for the GOP POTUS nomination, don't expect him to capture even a quarter of the vote in his home state.

At worst Hogan is guilty of underestimating the degree of Trump fever within the Maryland GOP. At best he's trying to lead his party back to sanity, which admittedly is a hopeless battle with the majority of the party still harboring fantasies that Trump won the election. I seriously have to marvel how you've managed to align yourself with people that far removed from reality. This isn't the Jason I once knew.

290. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: July 31, 2022 at 11:23 PM (#6089140)

Anyway, it is on those who loudly tried to discredit sworn testimony to put up or shut up.

When did it become permissible for Secret Service agents to burst into a J6 inquisition and demand that they be put under oath? No, Mouse, the onus is on the inquisitors to subpoena them.

291. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: July 31, 2022 at 11:29 PM (#6089141)

And yet you're now supporting "ABC". When was it made a requirement for Republicans to be Trump supporters?

Again, there are plenty of Trump agnostics and even detractors opposing Cheney and Kinzinger, who are openly fundraising off of their J6 performances as they audition for future CNN and MSNBC gigs.

At worst Hogan is guilty of underestimating the degree of Trump fever within the Maryland GOP. At best he's trying to lead his party back to sanity, which admittedly is a hopeless battle with the majority of the party still harboring fantasies that Trump won the election.

Regardless of whether Trump runs again for the nomination, Hogan doesn't have a prayer. He should have gone after the Senate seat.

This isn't the Jason I once knew.

We'll always have Clyde's. (smile)

292. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 01, 2022 at 07:27 AM (#6089146)

Oh look, here's yet another anonymously sourced story supposedly incriminating Trump that, like so many of the prior ones, will never be corroborated. I mean, why does this source not have a name? This story is over two weeks old so why has he/she not testified before the J6 inquisitors? Yup, it's a total mystery!

This is not the takedown you imagine. Once more, because you keep missing it.

If someone broke federal law by perjury(which is essentially your claim), why haven't any sources come forward to say so openly? Especially if they have gone to the committee willing to testify to such and been ignored or rejected? They easily could, obviously.

No one has come forth and been willing to testify under oath that she perjured herself. When in doubt believe the person under oath over the anonymous "source".

293. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 01, 2022 at 07:35 AM (#6089147)

When did it become permissible for Secret Service agents to burst into a J6 inquisition and demand that they be put under oath? No, Mouse, the onus is on the inquisitors to subpoena them.

Nope. If you see that someone has broken the law and you are an agent of the law with direct knowledge that could shine a light on it, it is your opinion they should and can do nothing? Just sit there quietly, saying nothing, not even standing up and proclaiming that they are willing to testify under oath (they don't have to "break in" or give their testimony to the press)?

That is nuts. If they know of such a crime they should and must stand up and say something. Especially if they think the whole thing is - to use your silly and slanted term - an inquisition.

You are claiming the whole thing is a farce, an inquisition and that they have witnessed perjury that dishonors a former administration, and your claim is they should sit and do nothing unless the inquisition happens to subpoena them? Really?

Obviously, in those circumstances - which exist only in your imagination, by the way - they must stand forth and speak so that the truth be known. The fact that they are unwilling to stand up and fight against this "obvious" miscarriage of justice, suggests either they are cowards one and all, or there is no such misscarriage.

294. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Posted: August 01, 2022 at 07:37 AM (#6089148)

Again, there are plenty of Trump agnostics and even detractors opposing Cheney and Kinzinger, who are openly fundraising off of their J6 performances as they audition for future CNN and MSNBC gigs.

How many Trump detractors---meaning those who have said openly that they'd support a hypothetical primary opponent**---who've also come out in support of ABC in the Wyoming primary? Names, please.

** Tut-tuts don't count, and neither does merely accepting the results of the 2020 election. I'm not saying they have to support prosecuting Trump for his well-documented actions and inactions on 1/6, but they do have to recognize his threat to democracy, and what that implies for any future campaign.

We'll always have Clyde's. (smile)

Indeed, and to show that it's not personal, would you care to have a rematch of that wager in the event that Trump becomes the nominee? (very big grin)

295. Lassus Posted: August 01, 2022 at 08:21 AM (#6089150)

Again, there are plenty of Trump agnostics and even detractors opposing Cheney and Kinzinger

Show your work.

296. Hot Wheeling American Posted: August 01, 2022 at 08:40 AM (#6089154)

284. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE Posted: July 31, 2022 at 10:41 PM (#6089133)
[ Ignored Comment ]
285. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE Posted: July 31, 2022 at 10:45 PM (#6089134)
[ Ignored Comment ]
286. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE Posted: July 31, 2022 at 11:00 PM (#6089135)
[ Ignored Comment ]
287. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE Posted: July 31, 2022 at 11:09 PM (#6089136)
[ Ignored Comment ]
288. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE Posted: July 31, 2022 at 11:14 PM (#6089138)
[ Ignored Comment ]
289. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: July 31, 2022 at 11:19 PM (#6089139)
[ Ignored Comment ]
290. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE Posted: July 31, 2022 at 11:23 PM (#6089140)
[ Ignored Comment ]
291. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE Posted: July 31, 2022 at 11:29 PM (#6089141)
[ Ignored Comment ]

Havin' a normal one.

297. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 01, 2022 at 09:07 AM (#6089157)

I mean, why does this source not have a name? This story is over two weeks old so why has he/she not testified before the J6 inquisitors?

Um, because the source is reporting what the person who did testify before the J6 investigators said. It's like you didn't even read the link.

298. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 01, 2022 at 09:10 AM (#6089158)

Back in 2016, Andy, I was Never Trump.

Someone still doesn't know what the word "never" means.

299. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 01, 2022 at 09:23 AM (#6089161)

Prior to 2017, it's difficult to recall a moment here where DMN was caught breathlessly regurgitating federal law enforcement talking points in a controversy.

Since 2017, it's been difficult to recall a moment where DMN hasn't breathlessly regurgitated federal law enforcement talking points in a controversy.

What Jason means is that I kept pointing out how his sources were full of ####, factually and legally. How's that Huber investigation going? How about the Durham one? (Wasn't there yet a third retaliatory investigation that Trump's people came up with?)

(The only "controversy" in most of the cases that Jason refers to is that Trumpkins were treated like every other criminal suspect rather than being given special dispensation.)

300. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE

Posted: August 01, 2022 at 09:49 AM (#6089165)

Flip.

Page 3 of 4 pages < 1 2 3 4 >

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Monday, July 25, 2022

Arenado, Goldschmidt can’t play Toronto series due to COVID vax status

Reader Comments and Retorts

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

Hot Topics