LGR4GM

I have repeatedly explained to you what I am saying. You are either A. deliberately ignoring it to have a completely different conversation or B. lack a fundamental understanding of why a US President calling for a Judge to be impeached over a disagreement is unconstitutional. The judge did not rule that they liked Terrorists or that Terrorists cannot be expelled from the US. You sound beyond ignorant when you repeatedly come back to your fox news/brietbart talking point. Read up on the ruling and what it did and why they did it. These terrorists being rounded up and expelled from the US is not the issue.

Yikes BTW, the bill this dude proposed is another step towards trying to make criticism of the Trump State illegal or punishable. That's anti-american.

I hope Benson goes on a pts streak so I don't have to hear anymore nonsense that he's somehow not ready or good enough or whatever else. Give me 15pts to close the season Benny boy.

You read that correctly. If putin doesn't get everything he wants, he'll go after more. I'd encourage everyone to study Hitler from 1936-1939.

The US Constitution was written for a reason. Discarding it because you dislike something is folly.

I'd get him and Quinn together. Benson learns shooting, Quinn learns... well just about all the rest of it.

Does this tactic typically work for you? You have deliberately ignored why this thread exists. Trump saying a judge should be impeached, and then getting a lackey in congress to attempt that process because the judge ruled against him is a Constitutional crisis. The remedy for this ruling is appeal. You want to turn this into something else. A battle over something that's not even part of the ruling. In fact your argument is strawman nonsense. Do you feel it is acceptable to have a judge impeached simply because they ruled against you? Yes, or no? Sidenote: you attempt to put words in my mouth like above again and my tone will rapidly change. Don't ever ***** accuse me of supporting terrorists again.

Haha I love getting Xd over this. Sending Zach Benson of all players, to the AHL after he's played 2 full NHL seasons, is a truly laughable idea. Thankfully, I don't have to worry about even a team as inept as Buffalo doing it. Oddly enough, I was just reading something my buddy texted me:

Not relevant. If trump thinks the judge ruled incorrectly you appeal. Impeachment of federal judges for disagreeing with trump breaks checks and balances. It effectively ends the judiciary.

It's irrelevant. Trump has no authority under the constitution to impeach a judge for ruling against him. That's entire crux of the issue, you're arguing something that's beyond irrelevant to that. You don't have to like a judges ruling, but the Constitutional remedy is appeal, not impeachment. Also the ruling is about having a hearing before deportation from my understanding. Surely that low bar shouldn't worry you.

But you said we're bad at development, so this won't have any effect. It's also a truly terrible idea.

Not sure why this won't embed

That's equivalent to Pegs losing roughly 30 million every year for a decade. Considering Buffalo didn't have issues selling out especially in 2015-2018, seems questionable with revenue sharing, ticket sales, and TV deals. Considering the guy built and maintains a 100 million dollar yacht... idk seems flimsy.

Seriously, I'd love to read up on him saying it. Even if it was just something reported and not a public comment.

Really, Got a link to that? Also he'd still be up about 500 million+ on the Sabres then.

I don't. He's already good in the NHL, no reason to send him to the AHL.

It's my favorite holiday.

I think we're going to see an executive order that classifies fentanyl as so dangerous the US can use military force to stop it. This gives pretext for a military intervention in Mexico and Canada.

I think the entire year Dahlin has been unhappy with the pack mentality the team lacked. I think the Cozens part is more coincidence.

They'll only do that for a time. Putin wants expansion.

Never said 1 v 1. Now you're editorializing. I think Ukraine can hold what they currently have with western support, not troops.

No but you're not interested in talking. You've got some agenda. You're also changing what I said. I said Russia can't roll over Ukraine, otherwise they would have.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/scoop-impeachment-articles-hit-judge-who-ordered-trump-stop-tren-de-aragua-deportation-flights If trump succeeds, they'll be no longer any perceived limit on his power and the US will cease being a functional Democracy. Why? Well, if judges and the judicial review process no longer apply, then the judiciary no longer applies, then Trump has no check on his power.

I think Russia being able to steamroller Ukraine when it has been unable to is Russian Propaganda. If they could, they would have. Your NATO point is either irrelevant or mixing in some new idea but it's unclear. I already said putin wants a ceasefire to re-arm and train more troops.

What is something we lack desperately?