FORUM POSTING RULES - Read before posting

Forum Rules.

(1) The guiding principle for posting in this forum is moderate yourselves.

(2) Don't write a post that attacks, impugns or denigrates another poster's character. There's an obvious difference between the language of humor and hateful, debased language. Know the difference and post accordingly.

(3) This is a Michigan sports forum. The forum welcomes posts from M's sports rivals. Talking smack, posting sass is what college sports rivalries are all about. Rules (1) and (2) above apply. If you don't want to view the posts of a rival talking smack or sassing, use the ignore feature in User Controls.

(4) This forum is about sharing thoughts, ideas and viewpoints about all sports, any number of subjects and issues, learning stuff from other posters and having fun. There are threads by subject matter within the forum for doing this. Keep the threads on point.

NB: The rules above are not intended to build a case to ban a poster. There are consequences for rule breaking as specified below. That's as far as it should go. Only the most egregious and persistent rule breaking would cause the moderators to consider a ban.

Due Process.

(1) The forum has 6 moderators. Jeff Buchanan, Jon, JD, Hannibal, Oracle, Entropy. None of them want to moderate adult posters who should know better. There may be posts that break the rules.

(2) Posters who, at the sole discretion of a moderator, break a rule will be given a warning post that will site one of the rules listed above as the reason for the deletion.

(3) If the rule breaking behavior continues, a moderator can remove an offending post and any ensuing post that whines about that action. If a moderator removes a post(s) the reason for the removal(s) will be posted with the removal notice that appears in the thread. This should be the end of it. Man up, take responsibility for breaking the rules. The forum moves on. If not, see below.

(4) A poster who has had a warning or a post(s) removed can certify a question by PM to any moderator about that action. Do not complain about the action or attempt to make your case in the forum/threads. Moderators shall do their best to address the question within 72h. At the end of 72h the majority opinion of the moderators responding will be the answer.

(5) Banning a poster for egregious and repeated rule breaking requires a unanimous vote to ban from all 6 moderators. We don't anticipate this will ever happen.
See more
See less

Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Lol the bold.

    really driving home the script drama, Michael Bay


    • that's the only one that hits home since stroizak is the one that went to England and helped get the fisa warrant going


      • Originally posted by crashcourse View Post

        that's the only one that hits home since stroizak is the one that went to England and helped get the fisa warrant going
        and interviewed Gen Flynn


        • Comment

          • A major construction company owned by the Chinese government was awarded another contract this week to work on the Trump golf club development in Dubai, further raising questions about potential conflicts of interest between Donald Trump's presidency and his vast real estate empire.


            • Plus, my god damned name is all over the legal documents investigating his staff


              • Scandalous!
                In Columbus, of course, the fanbase holds the University accountable for doing the wrong thing. -Talent, Esq-


                • Comment

                  • DfradKEVMAAT99-.jpg:large.jpg


                    • In Columbus, of course, the fanbase holds the University accountable for doing the wrong thing. -Talent, Esq-


                      • Of course you follow that nutjob


                        • N Korea to destroy their intercontinental ballistic missile engine testing site


                          • The Strzok-Page texts are obviously what will draw the attention of conservative pundits, because the ultimate conclusions drawn by the IG report didn't give them what they really wanted. Like I predicted, all the protocol breaches and violations Comey committed had the effect of helping Trump, not hurting him.

                            So Strzok vowed to "stop Trump". Well, what did they actually do? Not a peep about the Russia investigation was leaked to the media before the election while tons about Hillary made it to Giuliani and the press.


                            • Originally posted by Kapture1 View Post
                              Of course you follow that nutjob
                              Says the Alt-right parrot.

                              Lol. You are a clown.

                              I don't even know who the guy is, but he put pointed out the truth and put the smack down on your boy today.

                              Of course, the #Trumpbuttlickers see a win...

                              In Columbus, of course, the fanbase holds the University accountable for doing the wrong thing. -Talent, Esq-


                              • Originally posted by iam416 View Post

                                I don't know what the substance of the case is. The fact that the NY AG filed it does not mean it lacks merit. What I think, for certain, is that this isn't a "good government" case, but rather it is politically motivated. It may be a happy coincidence that it's substantively viable. I dunno. But I feel almost certain that this case doesn't get brought against, e.g., the Clinton Foundation. This particular AG office has shown a real capacity for politically motivated actions including issuing preposterous subpoenas to energy companies on climate change.

                                I also feel almost certain that if this foundation were in Georgia there'd be no such case.

                                AG offices are, fundamentally, political. There are a lot of nuts and bolts shit that gets done no matter who is in charge, but if you want to make a name you need a big cause. It's why, IMO, some AGs sued re Obamacare.

                                So, you know, "PDJT Derangement" aside, I think you're able to acknowledge the the NY AG just might have some political motivation on this one.
                                I'm fine acknowledging a political motivation. As you say, every AG in the country launches politically-motivated cases from time to time. But the little I've seen seems to indicate the AG has a pretty good case that Trump and his family were using the charity funds illegally.