Weave

Olofsson is nowhere near our 2nd best forward. On any other line he's invisible, or visible for the wrong reasons. He's got an amazing shot. Everything else about his game is underdeveloped. I can't really pick between Skinner and Sam for #2. Different players, about the same impact on the game overall. Pre injury I would have had Mojo as our #2, but not currently.

My problem with a vote to censure is twofold. 1. It has no teeth to curb the illegal activity that has taken place, and 2. related to 1., Trump can and will simply ignore it and continue on, business as usual. We really need to see these activities halted, and punished to dissuade them from happening again in the future.

Tanked.

Last one showed up on my youtube feed so it showed up because of my preferences. Im following your band on facebook so I saw this one when it was posted. Now I’m on to watching a 2016 Rammstein show at MSG on Amazon. God, I can’t wait for their US tour. What a ***** show that is going to be. I need to be there.

Absolutely

Yeah, 2 games seems about normal to me. I’d like the normal to be higher, but this is a normal penalty for a 1st timer on a hit that could have been alot more predatory that it was.

And we’ll pillory him for saying the truth.

LIstened to it on FB before you posted it here. Like it.

It’s gonna be another cycle with bad choices in all parties.

It's not as egregious as Miller Lucic, but I can't see Maroon looking the other way if we elbowed Kuch.

Or a broken jaw.

Rhetorical sarcasm was rhetorical.

Welp. I'm done.

I mean, we supported burning the team down once when we had near all stars as the top of the team, what makes you think the idea we can improve fortunes by jettisoning them wouldn't change?

This is why we need a player or two capable of a little thuggery. Not to get revenge on Cernac, but to be the team that issues some disruption for a change, instead of always being the victim of disruption all the damned time.

Lack of dynamic play, or flash is a factor. Draft position is as well. We did tank to get a less than all star level RW. That's gotta bias opinions.

At the time I was all for the Clinton impeachment. He almost certainly obstructed justice. Although frankly, I think a stronger case for obstruction of justice can be had re: Trump right now. The investigation that led to the obstruction of justice charges? Yeah, I was for it then as well. Now? Not so much. Don't get me wrong, getting into a sexual relationship with a subordinate is worthy of censure. Was it worthy of a full blown investigation? I don't feel so today. The hatred for the Clintons is interesting. I'm guilty of it. I think Hillary lost on her own merits. Bill's history sure doesn't help, but she's crafted her own negative image.

He'll get impeached. However, a loyal Republican majority in the Senate won't convict. It's not like a criminal trial. Impeachment is an inherently political process. See Bill Clinton as example #1. Politics prevented his conviction, not innocence. But he was impeached.

Sam Reinhart, on most teams.

Would you feel any better if I said you're ignoring evidence because you don't like what it shows? Because that is exactly what hiding your head in the sand means. I'm not relying on anyone's opinions to form my thoughts. I'm relying on sworn testimony. All of it. Available to anyone to read, unlike the trnascript you'll never see.

I've never been a registered Democrat and never in 34 years as a voter voted one for President, Governor, or Senator. In fact, I can count on the fingers of one hand and have fingers left over how many Dmes I've voted for lifetime. It's not my party. And it has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation about Donald Trump. Frankly, it says alot about the man when a never Democrat feels so strongly about what is happening today. When there is no more substance to your argument you change the subject.

Yeah, that is exactly what you are doing, putting your head in the sand. It's too conveninet for someone who is never going to get all the information to say they will reserve judgement until they get it, especially given the sworn testimony that you 100% have access to. And given your outrage over Hillary's emails and Benghazi (neither of which you have seen any evidence about) about 3 years ago I'm calling *****.

Not trying to be snarky here but I think you have your head in the sand if you aren’t willing to accept the testimony of career professionals, and not political appointees, that have detailed the events involving the bribery (let’s call it what it is) of a friendly country. Democrats may be running the investigation but the testimony and evidence is coming from career experts who have served without issue under Presidents from both parties. That “bunch of people” as you label them have no base that they are appealing to.

I don’t share your optimism or your opinion that it is a failed experiment. Under Trump separation of powers has been pretty well gutted and majority Conservatives put in positions for life. Don’t forget that some of those appointees should have been Obama appointees. I don’t see how this behavior isn’t encouraged going forward. It worked without repercussion. The curtain has been pulled away and we see now how tenuous rule of law really is. At this point the only effective countermeasure that I can see is similar behavior from the Democrats.

No idea if its going to be a strategic mistake. I hope not. The behavior, and support of that behavior needs to be punished or it will repeat. I agree with your likely scenario. I don’t see a path to a Senate conviction. It frustrates me that the Senate is so shortsighted about the likely implications of non-conviction. It is not at all entertaining to me. I think our children will suffer greatly for this.