AURex

Taking on a billionaire like Trump in court requires a LOT of money. Does it matter where the money for her suit comes from? He is either guilty of the crime or he isn't.

Goodbye and good luck. If you can't make it even at Auburn, given our current situation, welp, try again somewhere else, right?

1. Lifetime appointment to ANY government office should be prohibited. 2. Thomas was appointed despite his criminal behavior. 3. Thomas (and his sidekick wife) have always sucked the toes of the rich right-wingers, so this latest report is really no surprise.

It will for sure NOT get dismissed. Bragg has compiled a massive truckload of evidence or he would not have brought the case. That said, even if convicted of all or any of these 34 felonies, Trump will not get jail time. Nobody ever does in these sorts of cases if they are a first time offender. He will just be *A FELON* But in reality, his lawyers will exploit every loophole, back alley fabricated nutsoid concocted strategy to delay and drag on this case into the next century. That is the strategy of Trump in all cases brought against him. He doesn't actually defend himself in court. It is delay, delay, delay, to wear down the plaintiffs until they run out of money or energy to continue. The more dangerous cases for Trump are (1) the defamation/rape case by E. Jean Carroll, which will get him by the balls and drag him into ignominy, and huge reparations and massive payoffs to the Plaintiff, (2) the attempted Georgia election vote overthrow attempt, which actually could land him and his butt-lickers in jail, (3) the NY State case against business fraud by the Trump organization, and (4) the January 6 special counsel investigation into his role in instigating an insurrection. This first case is just a beginning. The Donald has some real legal problems and, as the Don of his mob syndicate, he and his children will eventually go down.

Geez, this thread quickly devolved into garbage. What a load of crap being spewed here, Ugh!

Goodbye and Good Luck young man

They have INDICATED ! Oh No! "indicated"? defined 1. point out 2. suggest as a desirable or necessary course of action.

Frankly, Westry didn't show me anything memorable this past season, but I put it all on his injury. But if CBP is happy to see him depart, he must have spied other issues that had nothing to do with the injury. Personally, I'd be glad to see some other guys head out, but I know that CBP will work with what he's got. This past season, he had not so much.

UI'm wondering if the media giants are having total meltdown. This final four has almost no mass market appeal. Of these teams, other than their own fans, does anyone care? Nope. There's zero excitement in this final four. Of course, JMO. Yours may vary.

This thread continues to be heterosexual men mansplaining and hating on people whose gender identity and life needs conflict with their conservative personal conception of what is "acceptable" and their drive to dictate how others should live. One of the reasons I found myself drifting away, as a Libertarian, from Conservatives was that I realized that conservatism = coerced conformity. White Nationalism? okay. Control over women's work and life and bodies? okay. Control over education, religious freedom, political expression? okay Conservatives blabber a lot about freedom, but in reality, they are absolutely opposed to individual freedom -- the rights of individuals to live their own lives as they prefer. As a libertarian, there is no shared ground with these neo-Nazi conservatives who want to control the lives of everyone in society. Have I offended you yet? I've tried! 👿

Not true. The deal was that the Afghan government in power and its army would continue fighting the Taliban, based on the training and materiel that the U.S. and Allies had provided. The Afghan government and army did not follow through. They mostly invited the Taliban in with welcoming arms. But based on the Trump deal, the U.S. was required to get out. If the Afghan military were not willing to fight for their own freedom/country, surrendering to the Taliban, well, the U.S, was still required to get out. Fact is, all of America was tired of the loss of lives of American soldiers, the loss of billions of dollars annually. Everyone wanted out. But just like in Vietnam, when the U.S. pulled out, the government we had been propping up surrendered to the enemy. This is not a Biden failure. It's not a Trump failure. It is actually stupid US foreign policy dating back to the Bush administration. Like Vietnam, it was a no-win war that the U.S, should never have been in.

Well, IMO, no. I am old school. I believe in the tremendous value of a great foundation in the liberal arts, even for STEM and business people. IMO, education in history, literature, philosophy, social sciences are the solid foundation for not only our cultural advancement, but for success in life. That said, so much emphasis is placed of higher education as almost a "technical school" degree aimed at some notion of what employers might be looking for, all we see these days are a few required liberal arts courses thrown into curricula. You and I are on the same wavelength, ican. I'm sure you know that by now.

Welp, point out one single woman, one single LGBTQ+ person participating in this thread. It is all men mansplaining, and just like all the male conservatives in state legislatures who are of the opinion that they, men who have zero medical or research or scholarly foundation, are just spitting out their opinions that will become law dictating life limitations and condemnations for LGBTQ+ people.

This entire thread is men dictating how people SHOULD live their lives and men's opinions about them. Why do men feel it necessary or even appropriate to compartmentalize others, define them, hate on them. I lived in SF for 6 years. I met a lot of lesbian, gay, and trans people. Reality is, they are people. They are human beings. As a hetero male married to a hetero woman, we accepted and were accepted by friends and acquaintances of all ilks. Vilifying people based on view through personal hetero male glasses is repugnant and I might add, totally unChristian.

The exit was brokered by Trump. The Biden administration was just following through on the commitment Trump made.

It s extraordinarily important in the realm of education. The whole purpose of education is to prepare students for the avenues to success in the real world. This is especially important in higher ed. JMO as an academic, of course.

I was beginning to think that today would not present as many upsets as yesterday, but then ...... 11 seed Pitt upsets 6 seed Iowa State, and then the big one 16 seed Farleigh Dickenson upsets 1 seed Purdue I'm hoping the upsets continue tomorrow with Arkansas upsetting Kansas, Maryland upsetting Bama, and of course Auburn upsetting Houston.

Great Win! Auburn defense won this game. But we gotta recognize the guys who came through. My offensive player of the game --- Donaldson. He made all 3 of his shots -- all 3 were 3 pointers. Plus he made both of his free throws.

Well, except Iowa is a higher ranked team, a higher seed in the tourney, and odds favored. Do I *want* Auburn to win? Yes, of course. But as to "no excuses" well excuse me.

So, lots of you seem to criticize CBP for not taking Sears. I don't follow recruiting that closely, but (1) might that have been because ... um ... Westry? and (2) Wasn't it logical that his priority would be to try to deal with the loss of Jabari and Kessler, thus Broome and Traore? or (3) Might there have been some other reason, maybe personality fit with CBP that was an issue? I don't know how many spots he had available, and I'm sure not deep into recruiting. I'm just asking about this particular criticism because it seems to be a very specific criticism that some of you keep belaboring.

I like starting out in Bham. Can't figure out why Iowa is an 8 seed and Auburn a 9 seed. I'm not complaining about the draw, given how bad we've played in recent weeks. I'm just confused about the Iowa seeding. And apparently, Iowa is favored over Auburn in this game. Okay, why?

I keep seeing over and over how the current dismal situation with Auburn basketball is "all on CBP." It's his fault. Some seem to think his game day play calling (or lack thereof) and player development are lacking (player regression). But most of all, it seems some posters are really criticizing CBP for the current roster situation. And I can understand that this team is sorely lacking in important regards -- outside shooting, midget guards, etc. And the criticism seems to be recruiting. CBP recruited these guys, so he owns the situation. But my question is -- Is all of this really "ON CBP"? Does anyone actually think he did not TRY to find the best possible recruits to replace departing Jabari and Kessler? Do you think he intentionally passed over better players, on purpose? Does anyone really believe that any coach at any school can just magically lure every 5 star dude? Is not Auburn actually competing with other SEC and non-SEC schools for the best talent? Don't players make the final decisions, not coaches, when they are being recruited? Maybe I'm completely misunderstanding the rampant criticisms of CBP, but I just don't get it. IMO, and this is just my faith in CBP as a coach, he did go after the best possible players available and he ended up with the ones he ended up with. Notably Broome, Westry, Traore. Maybe not the guys he would have preferred, but the best he could pull in. What am I missing? All of you "it's all on CBP" critics (I won't name you, but you know who you are), please explain it to me. Patiently, please. I'm not trying to be argumentative. I just don't get it.

Hockey is a recognized NCAA sport. This is non-NCAA club hockey. Not that it is uninteresting, and it can certainly be fun to watch. How long has Auburn had a club hockey team? I certainly never heard of it in the past.

Your confidence is truly orange & blue impressive. 😂

Fact -- this is an issue between doctors and patients/families. Politicians are not health professionals and their intrusion into the healthcare decision-making of Americans violates health professional and patient boundaries. Fact -- there is no scientific evidence that gender-affirming care damages the patient in the short term or the long term. In fact, most research indicates that those who received treatment years ago remain glad that they did and are living happy lives. Fact -- It is not "experimental" treatment any more than breast augmentation, jawline procedures, facelift procedures, liposuction, leg-lengthening, hair implants, etc. These procedures have been going on for many years. Suddenly, it is a right wing political issue needing to be condemned and eradicated. Fact -- you did not provide scientific data. You provided right wing talking points. There is real scientific research. It does not support the conservative march to vilify segments of our citizenry. Finally -- You have ZERO evidence to assert that I've lost my mind. Like most conservatives, when you can't deal with facts, launch personal attacks.