mrcunning15

8 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

I have to think at some level this is satire. Right? I looked at the Twitter account its endless tweets like i the one i quoted. It just seems like a schtick or mockery of these people but then again I can't really tell whats sincere or just being ironic, I guess that's kinda the point.

1 hour ago, Metalhead said:

This morning I had a bizarre conversation with a typically outlandish far-right dude at work. Full-time Fox News zombie. He was saying that the U.S. has stopped ALL oil exports (Texas, Dakotas, Louisiana, offshore, etc.), that Biden shut it all down, and that is why gas prices are high. He was getting quite animated to boot so I had to start steering the conversation into other safer areas. I don't keep up with oil news but is someone able to explain what this is about?

 

I can't find anything except Keystone.

 

Last I checked, oil is nearly a quarter of Texas' economy.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/bipartisan-group-warns-biden-not-halt-us-oil-exports-letter-2021-12-09/

Not really sure what this guy is talking about. There seems to be some chatter about stopping oil exports unless something changed in the last month i don't think it's happening.

Just now, tshile said:

Ugh. Decided a long time ago I did not like him. 
 

he seemed like the primary driver of “let’s rehash the same unintelligent hot takes for the umpteenth time because that’s what drives ratings”

 

to the point where you could basically hear lurch imply “if we’re doing this again I’m sitting it out because this is dumb. You guys can do it.”

 

Always felt like he was the primary person driving that show into the ground over the years. 

EB and his stupid COVID & right wing talking points has really ruined the show the last few years. 

I don't mind JP. I can kinda see how his schtick could be annoying but to me all of them have a few traits that i can't stand its pick your poison to a degree.

of all the junkies EB is the only one that has made me change the station.

5 minutes ago, Cooleyfan1993 said:

 

i doubt it’s true. Think about it, 1) why would Jon gruden be at MGM in VA(DC?) and 2) even if he was, why would he be giving information to a nobody, a random stranger? 

6 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I saw that this morning, and it's probably the saddest rumor TotalProSports has ever posted, and that's saying something.

 

Some rando says he runs into Gruden at a casino and he just starts spilling all the beans to him, sure...mmmkay.

I understand this but what does Gruden have to lose at this point? Is it really far-fetched that he would be on a scorched earth campaign and just running his mouth to whoever? This seems pretty bogus but damn I want it to be true.

I'll take any other rich guy for the most part as owner of this team, as long as Synder is gone. 

https://www.totalprosports.com/2021/10/24/jon-gruden-rumor-jeff-bezos-buying-washington-football-team-dan-snyder-sell/?fbclid=IwAR3wliNFk8k0DBY7e_kHNbKwIHkIoArkcypMB4OVFcMacIGChiZ2vNdqBuo

Don't know if this was posted elsewhere but i wonder if there is some truth to this.

On 10/19/2021 at 7:49 AM, Larry said:

Caring for patients this morning. Fox News is repeating every 5 minutes that Dem voters are leaving the Party in droves because McAulife flat out stated that he thinks parents should have no input in children's education. And that Kamala Harris made a video that she sent only to black churches, and federal law for decades has forbidden churches from being involved in politics. 

That's rich.  I'm assuming FOX news didn't bring up Youngkin's visit to a leesburg church (cornerstone chapel) a few weeks ago or that this same church is hosting Charlie Kirk next week. Uggh

^ Yeah the under on Corbin was more of a system play. He's very inconsistent I liked the value at plus odds. Once i saw that we had a low pitch count going into the sixth i knew the over would probably hit he ended up pitching 8.1 innings.

Ended up 5-2 on those plays so can't complain.

On 6/14/2021 at 12:59 AM, abdcskins said:

3-2 last post, I haven't had a losing day since I returned.  Keep it rolling - 6/14 picks.

 

Angels +135

Blue Jays +101

Royals -133

over 2 -115 Czech Republic/Scotland (UEFA)

76ers -3

damn bro bad break. Tail or Fade Best of Luck!!!

06/15 picks

Portugal - ML -232

Germany @ France Under 2.5 -115

Corbin-Nats under 4.5 Ks +100

Yankees +107

Mets -143

San Diego -1.5 -167

Marlins @ cardinals NRFI -145

10 hours ago, abdcskins said:

 

Glad I went moneyline!  Hot streak continues, 4-2 today.  Royals paid well.  Here are my plays for 6/11.

 

Orioles +138

Braves -131

Mets -163 

Under 5.5 +100 Mets/Padres.  deGrom and Snell on the mound, this game has 3-2 written all over it.

Suns +105.  Don't know how you can bet on the Nuggets after last game.

Bonus French Open, Stefanos Tsitsipas -250.  Kind of unfair taking such a big favorite, but I really like his chances to win against Zverev.  He has won nine matches in a row on clay.  If you don't want to bet so much, take the spread -4.5

 

good call. I’m not sure why Bruce brown is taking those shots down the stretch. I had Brooklyn +3.5 but I cashed out  overs killed me.

6 hours ago, abdcskins said:

3-2, another winning day.  10-5 my last three posts.  I'll keep posting until I have a losing day lol, I don't want to just keep talking to myself in this thread.  Hopefully you guys get in on the action and win some free money.  Buy yourself some new sunglasses for the summer 😎  Here are my plays for 6/10.  I always post the night before so lines may change.

 

Bucks -165.  Nets have been the much better team so far, but I think this is the game the Bucks steal.  They are desperate.  Taking the moneyline and avoiding the -3.5 spread, could be close.

Avalanche +117

Royals +130

Reds -102

White Sox -107

Bonus French Open, Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova -170

 

 

 

 

I like the over in the Bucks game. I would just take the spread, i get not wanting to take the risk but the games haven't been close (this series or playoffs in general) and if the bucks win they more than likely win by 4 or more 

I like the Avalanche for the first period. I think the Knights take this and end the series.

As for your MLB picks i see the value in the Royals pick. The Reds seems kinda risky with Castillo on the mound, White Sox usually a pretty good pick. 

Personally with baseball I really like to bet on the YRFI & NRFI. Makes for a quicker sweat.

11 hours ago, Larry said:

 

Pay no attention to who it was who actually voted for something. Pay attention to their claims about how someone else is responsible for their actions. 

I know that is the case but it's fun from time to time to feed into TWA's mental gymnastics. 

4 minutes ago, twa said:

 

By doing so it naturally followed....as he was warned at the time.

Two wrongs don't make a right but I get it Dem's are always supposed to take the higher ground, but what where the Dem's to do if the other side wasn't governing in good faith and being unreasonable with their use of the filibuster. So I guess the Dem's will have to return the favor when they get the chance.

40 minutes ago, B&G said:

Justice Kennedy will step down in July.  Trump will nominate a Gorsuch clone before the election and he/she will be confirmed quickly by a simple majority.  Thank you, Harry Reid.  Huge win for conservatives as Justice Kennedy was the swing vote at SCOTUS.  Major implications to Immigration, Abortion, and many other issues.

 

 

 

 

Wasn't it Mitch McConnell who changed it to the simple majority and not Reid for the Supreme Court. I know Reid switched it to a simple majority for the lower level judges so i'm not really seeing how this is Reid's fault.

25 minutes ago, zoony said:

 

Do you put any stock in Russian meddling and support of his campaign or no?

 

The only thing that is clear from the hard intelligence surrounding russian interfernce is that they really, really, really did not like Hillary.  I would love to learn more as to why, specifically.  If someone has a link that does not involve an unsubstantied dossier, id love to read it.  Clearly there were some ploicy things that they felt very threatened by

6

Watch the PBS Frontline Putin's Revenge it gives a really good overview of the whole situation.

1 hour ago, gbear said:

Quick question on pass through companies: Does a pass through corporation allow the same protections for the owners against being sued that normal corporations pass along?  Namely, the corporation is a legal entity, so when you sue it, you will never have a right to the companies owners' money.  Are these pass through companies corporations?  It's bad enough we are setting up our economy for millions of pass through companies rather than individuals so nobody will pay the income tax save those too poor/uninformed to know how to file the paperwork to be a pass through company rather than an employee.

 

Which brings me to my second question, "What stops all employees from becoming an employee of their own pass through company that happens to contract out for their current position's job?"

Pass through means that the income is taxed at the owner's individual level instead of at the corp level. There is no such thing as a pass-through corp per se the income transferred from the Corp to owners can be classified as pass-through. Most corps or partnerships classify as an LLC or LLP to protect their personal assets from ligation. The tax classification arrangement of the company ie (C corp, S Corp, Partnership, etc) of the company has no bearing on legal liability. However, if an individual business owner or partnership does not classify their business as an LLC, LLP or corporation then their personal assets could then be in play if the business is ever sued.

So Tax status doesn't really set the precedent for legal liability of individuals and companies.

7 minutes ago, Riggo-toni said:

It's a tax break, not a tax cut.

Cuts are things that reduce rates in hopes of incentivising work/investments, etc. This is a break/loophole - one that conservative thinktanks like The Heritage Foundation advocated getting rid of because the only incentive it provides is to spend more on insurance.

 

So you're saying that The Heritage Foundation is advocating for keeping the taxes? Am I reading that correctly?  

8 minutes ago, @SkinsGoldPants said:

 

Rings more true this AM. If you have candidates running against Pelosi while not even having to mention the leader of their party until after the election. The Dems are idiots for trotting her out in front of the camera a few times a week. 

Yeah, Pelosi seems to bring out the same hatred from the white male suburbanite baby boomer demo as Hillary does. Why exactly is there so much hatred for her? I understand she made that stupid comment about ObamaCare but what other baggage does she have? or is it just a very effective smear job on the part of the right wing media?

18 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Well she was the other option, though I can't blame ya'll for wanting to forget choosing her. 

She who shall remain unnamed is a bit bulky.

Not my choice. But yeah keep deflecting. I don't really get your point besides you just wanting to bring up "She who shall reamin unnamed" since this is a thread relating to Trumps ties with Russia and has nothing to do with "SWSRU". Your argument holds little weight when you deflect to SWSRU you just sound butthurt even though your team won, it's almost like gassp you don't know what to do now that your team has control and GASSP you have to be held accountable and actually lead and not blame everything on SWSRU.

11 minutes ago, twa said:

 

1 makes no sense at all, him owing money would be the least of his worries.

 

2 is always a possibility, but it is about the same odds for Hillary...or less 

 

Here we go again with the H word. 

1 minute ago, Kilmer17 said:

Apples and Oranges.  If this info had come up before the election, it certainly would have been used (appropriately) as an example of Trump's disqualifications to serve.

 

Careful, mentioning the H word will bring out the TDSers.

What are you talking about the russian connection was brought up ad-nauseum during the campaign, I guess it wasn't used appropriately.

You're really the only one bringing up H it must be awful to be an republican and not have your favorite whipping boy around, gosh you mean republican's might actually have to govern now instead of witchhunts and blaming everything on Dems.

TDSers? what's that Trump Down Syndrome 

4 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

46 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

 

Actively supporting and participating in an illegal hacking operation. 

 

Colluding with a foreign nation hostile to U.S. interests to fraudulently sway the results of a U.S. election.

 

Hiring prostitutes. 

 

Damaging hotel property.

 

For starters.

I doubt any of those are true, proveable or impeachable.

 

I do think the key would be to prove bribery.  But I'm not sure if him accepting a bribe BEFORE he was POTUS would qualify.

The "Actively supporting and participating in an illegal hacking operation to sway the the U.S. election" sounds alot like watergate to me so I think that would be impeachable.