would be interesting if the Dems throw up their hands and say 'ok, fine, Repubs. We'll let you raise everyone's healthcare prices by huge amounts. Let's do it. Your plan, you own it.'
The Rs would raise everyone's healthcare costs by a huge amount and then lose elections because of it.
Dems right now are fighting to stop the Rs from shooting themselves in the head. It's a very weird setup. Let them shoot themselves in the head and then let the Dems fix it.
That's occurred to me, as well. I'm not taking any credit for that brilliant thought, it seems so obvious. However, I'm surprised that I haven't heard it mentioned much, if any, by journalists and commentators. Are we missing something?
The way to pay for the extended healthcare premium assistance is by reducing the tax gifts to the uber-rich. That would less donating money flowing to Trump.
Fact: Republicans control the White House, and have majorities in both the House and Senate.
Fact: Republicans are unwilling to present a reasonable proposal to Democrats to reopen the government.
Fact: Donald Trump is a convicted felon, serial rapist, and pedophile.
Your junk grew old long ago. Give it a rest. We are tired of it.
Cry harder snowflake. Don’t read the thread if you can’t handle somebody posting the truth about Donnie the convicted felon, serial rapist, and pedophile. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Your junk grew old long ago. Give it a rest. We are tired of it.
Cry harder snowflake. Don’t read the thread if you can’t handle somebody posting the truth about Donnie the convicted felon, serial rapist, and pedophile. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Donnie Davo is a newbie. A troll name which arrived just a day ago. "We are tired of it," tells you it's most likely Sally.
yes, what this country needs is more highly politicized people with guns.
Trump is always right!
When the November election results came in, the Dems/Libs here were so beaten down. Defeated. Just like the ladies on the View and MSNBC. They were distraught. It was funny to see Agip and other Libs just wander off and never come back. I worry what they will do when Vance wins in 2028. Are they going to trot out Kamala again? That would be a major mistake. No one likes her.
You are a goddam liar Darko. Agip was here long after the November election. He was doing his vaunted Crime Blotter which upset the MAGAs, so they pummeled him unmercifully, stomped him to the gutter, and had him banned from our midst. They crushed him and humiliated him with bannage because of his political and religious beliefs. And now you guys take lopsided punk shots at him when he can't defend himself as a human being on account of his BANNED status.
"The Biden administration helped broker two ceasefire and hostage-exchange deals between Israel and Hamas — one in November 2023 and one in January 2025. Hamas released 105 hostages in the November 2023 deal and 33 in the January 2025 deal, a total of 138. The incoming Trump administration also participated in the January 2025 deal. As of this writing, Trump's October 2025 ceasefire plan resulted in Hamas releasing 35 hostages."
So you're saying Biden should get the Nobel Peace Prize, eh?
When the November election results came in, the Dems/Libs here were so beaten down. Defeated. Just like the ladies on the View and MSNBC. They were distraught. It was funny to see Agip and other Libs just wander off and never come back. I worry what they will do when Vance wins in 2028. Are they going to trot out Kamala again? That would be a major mistake. No one likes her.
You are a goddam liar Darko. Agip was here long after the November election. He was doing his vaunted Crime Blotter which upset the MAGAs, so they pummeled him unmercifully, stomped him to the gutter, and had him banned from our midst. They crushed him and humiliated him with bannage because of his political and religious beliefs. And now you guys take lopsided punk shots at him when he can't defend himself as a human being on account of his BANNED status.
El Bumpkin - you need to chill out. Don't get your panties in a bunch. NO ONE talks to me like that. Go take a timeout - you Loser.
When the November election results came in, the Dems/Libs here were so beaten down. Defeated. Just like the ladies on the View and MSNBC. They were distraught. It was funny to see Agip and other Libs just wander off and never come back. I worry what they will do when Vance wins in 2028. Are they going to trot out Kamala again? That would be a major mistake. No one likes her.
You are a goddam liar Darko. Agip was here long after the November election. He was doing his vaunted Crime Blotter which upset the MAGAs, so they pummeled him unmercifully, stomped him to the gutter, and had him banned from our midst. They crushed him and humiliated him with bannage because of his political and religious beliefs. And now you guys take lopsided punk shots at him when he can't defend himself as a human being on account of his BANNED status.
Agip said he was banned because of the mods' stupidity. I can completely believe that.
You are a goddam liar Darko. Agip was here long after the November election. He was doing his vaunted Crime Blotter which upset the MAGAs, so they pummeled him unmercifully, stomped him to the gutter, and had him banned from our midst. They crushed him and humiliated him with bannage because of his political and religious beliefs. And now you guys take lopsided punk shots at him when he can't defend himself as a human being on account of his BANNED status.
El Bumpkin - you need to chill out. Don't get your panties in a bunch. NO ONE talks to me like that. Go take a timeout - you Loser.
What are you going to do, get me banned like you did to Agip? You want to squelch me like you did to Agip? You want to string me up by the balls like some kind of goddam effigy? Go ahead. Do your worst, fishface.
If I may, and I realize you are not responding to or asking the question of me. The McCabe issue is complicated to explain, but here goes:
1. The Comey quote in the Indictment -- "falsely stating . . . that he, JAMES B. COMEY JR., had not 'authorized someone else at the FBO to be an anonymous source in news reports'" -- is itself false. Comey never said the quoted words (above) that the Indictment attributes to him. Hallirans filed a deficient Indictment.
2. The quoted words were actually spoken by Senator Rafael "Ted" Cruz in a lengthy, heavily premised question at the 2020 Congressional hearing. Here is the relevant part of the transcript (quoted words in Indictment bolded):
Senator Cruz: On May 3rd, 2017, in this committee, Chairman Grassley asked you point blank, "Have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation?" You responded under oath, "Never." He then asked you, "Have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton administration?" You responded again under oath, "No." Now, as you know, Mr. McCabe, who works for you, has publicly and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to the Wall Street Journal and that you were directly aware of it and that you directly authorized it. Now, what Mr. McCabe is saying and what you testified to this committee cannot both be true. One or the other is false. Who's telling the truth?
Mr. Comey: (01:52:43) I can only speak to my testimony. I stand by the testimony you summarized that I gave in May of 2017.
Senator Cruz: (01:52:50) So your testimony is you've never authorized anyone to leak? And Mr. McCabe, if he says contrary, is not telling the truth, is that correct?
Mr. Comey: (01:52:58) Again, I'm not going to characterize Andy's testimony, but mine is the same today.
3. So you can see from the transcript that the question (which is actually Senator Cruz recasting Senator Grassley's similar question from 2017) that Comey is alleged to have answered falsely is directed to or premised on Andy McCabe's leak.
4. McCabe was Comey's second in command at FBI or something.
5. In 2016, McCabe leaked to the Wall Street Journal that the FBI was investigating the Clinton Foundation.
6. In 2018, the FBI investigated the McCabe leak and wrote a Report. Here it is:
7. The Report found that McCabe leaked the Clinton investigation to the WSJ, but that he never sought nor got authorization from Comey to do the leak, and that he only told Comey about the leak after the fact.
8. So the question by Cruz actually has a false premise in it -- "as you know, Mr. McCabe, who works for you, has publicly and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to the Wall Street Journal . . . and that you directly authorized it." Comey never authorized McCabe to leak, so it raises the question of whether one can even provide a false answer to a question with a false premise in it. Sound legally impossible to me.
9. But anyway, one would reasonably assume that the thread-bare, sketchy Indictment is related to the Cruz question about McCabe, and that McCabe he is Person 3. What else could it be about?
10. Reasonable people are apparently wrong. The media is now reporting that sources at the DOJ are saying Person 3 is not McCabe but rather Daniel Richman. Hallirans strikes again. Nothing in the Indictment remotely supports anything like this, in fact, the opposite.
11. Richman is the guy that Comey gave his notes from his weirdo meetings with Trump to. That's an entirely new can of worms and analysis.
This was discussed more in depth on pages 2003-2006 of this thread.
Dude, you win! I can only type so much. So what did Comey say in 2017? If he said "no" and there is evidence to the contrary, then he lied, which is a crime.
Here is the relevant Comey testimony from 2017. He is answering questions from Senator Grassley (which are then recast by Senator Cruz in 2020).
MOTION to Dismiss Indictment based on Vindictive and Selective Prosecution by James B. Comey, Jr. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit)(Carmichael, Jessica) (Entered: 10/20/2025)
I'm starting to feel like a librarian here. Why am I chasing down easily locatable information for people who have opinions on stuff they never read?
The New York times, which you cite as evidence that Comey told the truth, is neither an unbiased source, nor does it have any authority in the matter.
I have not cited the New York Times as evidence of anything, much less evidence that Comey told the truth. The New York Times has nothing to do with this, and I never suggested for a second that it did.
To repeat, the only time I have mentioned the New York Times was in response to YOUR statement that the New York Times should not be reporting on grand jury vote results. I now regret commenting on your statement, as you have twice now conjured needless and strange strawman arguments about it.
So let me see if I have your argument right: Comey denied any part in the leak (or, more specifically, denied authorizing the leak, which is not in evidence until we have his statement from 2017), therefore he told the truth when he did so. Did I get that right?
No, you did not get that right or even close to right, starting with your characterization of what I posted as an "argument" that I was making. I was trying to answer your question "Who is Andy McCabe?" I suppose I could have simply said "He's a guy who worked at the FBI." But I thought I'd give you the benefit of the digging around on Andy McCabe that I did 3-4 weeks ago when the Indictment was filed. Hence the long, detailed answer to your question. I hope it helped inform you on things, but it doesn't look like it did.
What if you're wrong? Or is that out of the question?
What if I'm wrong about what? Who Andy McCabe is? Then I'm wrong, I guess. I doubt I'm wrong about who he is, given the links I have provided you above. Senators Cruz and Grassley were asking Comey about someone named Andy McCabe who worked at the FBI, and the FBI wrote a Report about an employee named Andy McCabe. See links above.
I may well be wrong, but I haven't even expressed an opinion on the matter. Instead, my argument is that he was charged with an actual crime, will receive a fair trial, and the outcome will be known when the jury gives its verdict.
Agreed, except that it may not get to a trial, but if it does, it will be a fair one, and we will know the outcome when the jury gives its verdict. Agreed.
......oh MA-GAs.....it's almost time to buy groceries for Thanksgiving !!
Remember LAST November, when you actually believed that Donny would bring down prices?!
Eggs are $1.15 per dozen. Gas is below $2 in many places. We have incredible beef, both foreign and domestic. We also have great poultry now - poultry like we've never had before.
Egg prices in the US have plummeted 86% since March. They dropped from $8.17 a dozen to just $1.15. Thats huge! Why? Inventories are high, and demand changed with the seasons. Prices fell more than 40% in the last month alone...
Nothing to see here. Mainstream, highly respected news outlets will be forbidden from covering the pentagon and outlets like Lindell TV and Gateway Pundit will be delivering the military truth to America.
“Today, the Department of War is announcing the next generation of the Pentagon press corps. We are excited to announce over 60 journalists, representing a broad spectrum of new media outlets and independent journalists, have signed the Pentagon’s media access policy and will be joining the new Pentagon press corps. Twenty-six journalists across 18 outlets were among the former Pentagon press corps who chose to sign the DOW media access policy. New media outlets and independent journalists have created the formula to circumvent the lies of the mainstream media and get real news directly to the American people. Their reach and impact collectively are far more effective and balanced than the self-righteous media who chose to self-deport from the Pentagon. Americans have largely abandoned digesting their news through the lens of activists who masquerade as journalists in the mainstream media. We look forward to beginning a fresh relationship with members of the new Pentagon press corps”.
