TBayXXXVII

That would be funny.

I get the sentiment about Jones being a reach, but that's stated a lot. Sometimes it pans out to be true... Josh Rosen (to hit home), as an example. Sometimes it's not... Bo Nix as an example. Just because someone(s), sees a player as a "reach", it doesn't mean they're right.

NFL teams have proven that they don't care about that. I have zero doubt that he gets signed soon.

Oh, he's not a good starter, but he's better than virtually every backup in the league. Plus, he'll be cheap. I honestly think Arizona would jump at the opportunity. He's basically the same player that Kyler Murray is and if Murray were to get hurt, they wouldn't have to change their playbook at all and let's be honest, do you really think they'd rather go into a playoff run with Clayton Tune? The Colts could be interested when Richardson proves that he still stinks. There's also teams that while possibly in the market for a QB next year, they might not be in position to draft one. From what I hear, there's only like 3 QB's in next years draft worth a 1st round pick... Sanders, Ewers, and Ward. There are 9 teams right now with 3 wins or less, among them are Tennessee, Las Vegas, NY Giants, NY Jets, & Cleveland. Two of them won't get a QB in next year's draft. Obviously the Giants will look to the draft and have a great shot at a top 3 pick, leaving on 2 players for the other 4 teams. There's even other teams where he'd definitely be a better back up like in Miami or every other team in the NFC West. Why can't he be the next Sam Darnold or Baker Mayfield? Personally, I don't think either are really all that good either, but both are playing well on teams that have a lot of talent on offense.

Yeah, he can now go to a team that will either possibly give him a chance to play (Las Vegas for example), or to a good team who needs a backup where he could learn (KC for example... I can see Reid kicking the tires on a potential Donovan McNabb type player as a backup).

Good for him. I'd think there'd be a lot of teams looking to pick him up.

Nah, they have nothing to worry about. Liberals don't see conservative women as "women", just "conservatives"... or, the enemy. Once someone is the enemy, there's no such thing as race, religion, or gender... just "the enemy".

Sounds good, Project 2025... LET'S GO!!!!

The switch at QB is a financial decision, not a football decision. Jones is still, easily the best QB on the roster... as bad as that sounds. Neither Lock or DeVito are starter worthy QB's... they're both emergency-type guys who you hope never has to play. There is no upside to either of these two, than what was already in place.

The right decision should have been to vacate the seat and have a new election to fill out the remainder of term next November, and neither of the two morons who ran, can't run in that election. Seeing the ads of these two the last few months... no one should've voted for either person.

What did Trump do that was treasonous? Never mind, don't answer. You're just going to give me some Communist propaganda that you'll swallow hook, line, and sinker.

I expect conservatives to say, "just get rid of them"... and Leftists to call anything he does, "racist".

That's normal SOP for liberal "fact" checkers.

Yup. My mom and dad both smoked... they'd pull up to the door of the local liquor or stationary store and my brother and/or I would hop out and buy their cigarettes. No questions asked.

LOL, too funny. I told you, your posts are very entertaining. So Trump did call the NG, and Pelosi (who's responsibility it was to deploy them), said "No". You wanted Trump to usurp her authority and call them in himself... so you can what, call Trump out for doing that? Fine, let's say he did, illegally go over her head and call the NG and tell them to go in. Then what? The NG does their job and says "No, sorry President Trump, that order has to come from Speaker Pelosi". Then what do you want him to do? Looks to me like you're trying to paint Trump as the one who was treasonous when the only person in your scenario who that would apply to, would be Pelosi... UNLESS, Trump broke the law.

Stop... @thegeneral needs to nitpick about Trump and doesn't want facts about the past to get in the way of that.

Ok, then why the question? Weren't we talking about deporting convicted criminals?

Like I said, you're constantly calling out Republican's for doing things that Democrats are currently doing, hence the nickname. It wouldn't be so bad if you were doing it from a pedestal of superiority, but here we are. What would you like to know about my opinion of January 6th? That Trump gave a heads up to the Capitol Police and to make sure they kept everyone in check? That when he said to send in the National Guard, Pelosi said "No"?

Certainly. Do you want the food you're about to eat, be prepared by convicted criminals? I certainly don't.

You are King Irony. Virtually every post of yours is calling out Republicans of doing things the Democrats are doing and/or have done. Your posts are pretty entertaining.

Are they convicted criminals

If we eliminated sanctuary cities and states and didn't have an open border policy, this issue would be negligible.

LOL, King Irony has an opinion.

The criminals should be Phase 1 and the one should/must be carried out. Even though common sense says that everyone should be in favor of this, we know for a fact that there have been local elected officials protecting these people in terms of, letting them back out into society. If they had just turned them over, then I think there'd be a lot less of an issue. The government always screws things up... even perfectly laid out plans (even though, if the government is coming up with those plans, they aren't perfect), but that should prevent them from actually trying to their job. Heck, they screw things up that are legal.

People crossing into the US are committing a crime. The federal government has the legal right to deport them. If there are elected officials preventing the federal government from doing their job, that could be seen as treason. I'm ok with that. I'm ok with using the federal government to use the military (if necessary, generally just an FBI agent doing this... but leftists are pretty intolerant and hateful), to arrest such government officials. Now, I'm a very reasonable person. I'm willing to be rather lenient. If said elected official committing treason were willing to say "Yeah, sorry, I was wrong. I'll help you carry out the rule of law.", then this person can be allowed to do their job and go back to the position they held. Now, if they want to be a belligerent leftist scumbag, again, I'm still willing to be lenient. I'd allow them to choose their penalty for committing treason. How many governments would allow that? See, I'm a nice guy. They can either chose to forfeit their citizenship and be exiled from the US forever. OR, they can choose the death penalty. I think giving these people 2 chances to help themselves for committing treason way more than fair.