Imagine the joy Trump and his billionaire inner circle must get when they see flyover America Maga arguing online that Trump deserves his 200 million ballroom, Qatar plane, 200 million payback from DOJ and a new arch.
It goes to the saying that "Nobody defends billionaires better than dudes making 40,000 per year".
Republicans love to respond to Trump’s corruption with “everyone does it”. Let’s see what that would mean if it were true.
When you look at the sorts of bribes members of Congress get caught taking, or Eric Adams, they tend to be in the low six figures. Generally less than $200,000.
If you assume that every governor (50), member of Congress (535), and mayor of a large city (38 over 500,000) is on the take for $200,000 per year, that would total $124,600,000. Trump’s Qatari plane alone, not even the only instance of nine-figure corruption, is worth $400,000,000.
In other words, Trump is certainly more corrupt than all other American government officials combined.
Trump just sh!t on another long time friend and Ally.
“Trump on the president of Colombia: "He's a thug and bad guy. He's a guy that is making a lot of drugs. We just as of today stopped all payments going to Columbia. The country Colombia. Also, the school Colombia. No, we settled ... he better watch it or we'll take very serious action against him and his country"
The entire East Wing of the White House will be demolished “within days,” according to two Trump administration officials. The demolition marks a significant expansion of the ballroom construction project from what President Trump said earlier this summer.
The ballroom is worth $900 million for loan purposes and $100 million for tax purposes 😉
More corrupt than all other American officials combined.
Why did Biden pardon his crackhead son and other family members? How much did they receive from Ukraine?
Politico: “James Biden laid out his vision for the fund’s future. “Don’t worry about investors,” he said, according to the executive, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing fear of retaliation. “We've got people all around the world who want to invest in Joe Biden.””
That’s not what I posted. I posted that “I can't recall any other federal case being pursued and directed by someone outside the DOJ like this one appears to be, and for what seems to be political, or even personal revenge reasons” which is quite different.
If we are discussing the merits of a vindictive prosecution defense, I certainly do disagree. Trump did raise that defense in both his Fake Electors and Bathroom cases. But I don’t recall ANY evidence Trump had that was anywhere near close to this:
"Pam: . . . We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility."
That’s a lengthy compilation of public statements (attached to Comey’s motion to dismiss) that Trump has made about Comey from 2017 to 2025. I don’t think anyone could deny it shows years long obsession, hatred and desire for revenge. And again, I don’t recall anything like this in Trump’s criminal cases. There were certainly no written demands/orders from Biden, or anyone else, to the Attorney General to hire a Biden-picked prosecutor along with statements like “[He is] guilty as hell, but nothing is being done” and “We can’t delay any longer” and “JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED NOW!!!”
I did explain exactly what you got wrong. You posted that “1) he lied to Congress (the multiple times he responded 'I don't recall' to questions that enough members of the grand jury believed he knew, and 2) he leaked confidential information to news outlets (or more accurately, provided the information to someone who then leaked it).” He was not charged with either (1) or (2).
He was not charged with (1) “[lying] to Congress the multiple time he responded ‘I don’t know’ to questions.” That is not in any Counts, nor is anything similar to that in any Counts.
He was not charged with (2) “leak[ing] confidential information to news outlets” either directly or indirectly through “provid[ing] the information to someone who then leaked it.” That is not in any Counts, nor is anything similar to that in any Counts.
Apologies if I misunderstood you (now...am I being humble or faking it?)...you claim that the prosecution was ordered by Trump and that no other prosecutions were.
To be clear, I said that Comey has evidence, for purposes of his motion to dismiss for vindictive prosecution, that Trump is directing his prosecution – in particular, Trump’s (mistakenly public) order to Bondo to charge Comey – and that I was unaware of any other federal case that had evidence like that. So when you say “you claim that the prosecution was ordered by Trump” it seems like another mischaracterization. Comey is claiming it, and I stated that it looks like he has decent evidence not found in other cases. Yes, there is a difference between those two things.
Fair enough...but how do you know that no other proseutions were ordered by the Chief Executive? You don't.
Agreed. I don’t know that. I never said I did, but I agree that I don’t know that.
You can't take the absence of evidence as proof. It's a matter of faith.
In this situation, I agree that you can’t take the absence of evidence as proof. So it’s a good thing that I didn't do that.
And your reasoning, I hope you will concede, is highly motivated.
No, I would not agree or concede. Highly motivated for what? Whatever. I would not concede. Perfectly capable, as are you, of reading the Indictment and related documents and considering what they say without any motivations.
Does that rhyme with "Exact words, Greg!" To me, it does. You might think I'm insulting you or trying to prove you wrong. Perhaps I am. But look at your motive and the conclusions you have drawn, and, if you want, explain how an absence of evidence proves a fact. Or don't. It is a waste of your time, and it turns me into a pedantry machine.
I’m not following you at this point. Are we still talking about Comey’s motion for vindictive prosecution? I believe all I said was that those motions are hard to win, but that Comey seems to have more evidence in support than any other case I can recall. I’m still not aware of any case where a defendant had anything close to evidence like Trump’s inadvertent order to the Attorney General regarding prosecution of Comey. Are you aware of any? Would you agree that Trump’s order to Bondo is pretty astonishing and glaring evidence of an executive outside the DOJ directing the DOJ to prosecute someone?
Trump raised the defense of targeted prosecution and it was rejected.
Trump raised “vindictive” and “selective” prosecution (I don’t think the legal term is “targeted prosecution”) in both his Fake Electors and Bathroom cases. But I’m pretty sure the judge never ruled on those issues (motions), so they weren’t "rejected."
I think the same thing will happen here. Some people who dislike Trump more than I do agree.
I tend to agree Comey will not prevail on these defenses, and I have said that those defenses are hard to prove. But those Comey’s defenses look stronger than in any other cases that I’m aware of, for the reasons I mentioned.
I didn't read all of the motion to dismiss, as it is quite lengthy and also repetitive in addition to being a snoozefest, but I did read enough to see Trump's social media posts. Let me put on my "Trumper who will defend this" hat and tell you that, in addition to being President, Trump is also a private citizen. He has the right to say awful things about James Comey. And, in turn, Comey can use those statements against him in his defense. I think they are irrelevant.
I agree that the First Amendment says Trump can say whatever they want about anyone, whether he’s President or a private citizen. And I agree that Comey can use what Trump says as evidence in pursuit of defenses to criminal charges.
I disagree that Trump’s statements will be considered irrelevant by a Court. Comey will not lose these motions to dismiss because the judge considers the evidence to be irrelevant. He may, or likely will, lose the motions, but it will not be on evidentiary relevance grounds. I guarantee that will not happen.
I am twisting and strawmanning. Perhaps. But I'm also engaging with your argument carefully, even if you feel that I am misrepresenting what you said. Your argument so far boils down to: I have gotten everything wrong about your argument. That's possible, as I don't share your zeal for why the charges should be dismissed.
I was not making an “argument” in the sense I think you are claiming I did. My recollection is that I have “argued” that Comey seems to have a much stronger than usual defense of vindictive prosecution. I think I’ve also pointed out some significant defects in the Indictment, starting with the fact that the Indictment actually misquotes Comey on the only thing the Indictment alleges was his false testimony.
The Indictment also provides ZERO factual support for any false testimony about Daniel Richman, now rumored to be "Person 3." Zero. It is unclear to me, unclear to YOU, and I’d guess unclear to everyone else (except maybe Houlihans) how you can argue that an accurate answer to a question about McCabe is somehow a false answer to a (non-existent) question about Richman. Maybe we will find out the legal theory some day.
My zeal is for the back-and-forth and hopefully getting you to consider your argument more carefully. So let me be direct: Do you think Comey lied or not? And why? (Let me anticipation an objection: that isn't moving the goalposts, it's the crucial question at the heart of this case...I am, of course, dismissive of the opinion that it should never have been brought before a court, simply because it has been brought before a court, so...who cares whether or not we have opinions on that matter?)
What's your opinion on that?
In my opinion, a lot depends on how the Judge will rule on as yet unfiled motions regarding the scope of the allegations in Count I. If, as I suspect, the Judge rules (either by an order on evidence or through jury instructions or both) that this case is limited to allegations regarding a question about Andy McCabe, then I believe it is HIGHLY likely that Comey will be found NOT guilty (and I believe he is actually innocent of that as well). All the evidence the DOJ has with respect to McCabe is already public and set forth in the 2018 FBI Report that I linked for you. McCabe himself testified to the FBI investigators (contrary to the premise in Cruz’s question) that Comey never authorized McCabe’s leak to the Wall Street Journal, and McCabe only told Comey about McCabe's leak after the fact. There is no other evidence, no emails, no memos, no notes, no texts other than what's in the Report I linked. There’s simply no way Comey’s answer can be a lie as to McCabe.
If the judge somehow lets in evidence or makes some ruling that the Cruz question “covers” individuals Cruz never mentioned, including Daniel Richman, then it’s a different case, and I don’t know enough to form an opinion. As far as I know, other than the Comey notes he gave to Richman, there are no other documents publicly available for us to look at. The DOJ may have emails or notes or texts or other evidence of Comey’s interactions with Richman. We shall see (maybe).
That said, I think (but I'm not sure) Comey publicly admitted that he gave his notes to Richman and told Richman to “leak” them BEFORE Comey's 2020 testimony to Congress. So it would be pretty weird to lie about something you had recently and publicly said you did beforehand. If (big IF) I’m correct on that fact pattern, I think a jury would have a hard time finding any intent to make a false statement, which I believe is required. Make sense?
And....another thing (even I have to admit this is getting ridiculous), if you want to accuse me of mischaracterizing what you wrote, perhaps deliberately, go ahead. My argument is: the motion to dismiss won't be successful because it doesn't engage with the charges involved. Instead, it says "this is selective prosecution, and therefore should be dismissed." If I'm mischaracterizing your argument, let me try to summarize it: this *is* selective prosecution and should therefore be dismissed. I think I understand you and we are just pointlessly going back-and-forth. I enjoy that, as it forces me to think more clearly about my argument. Why do you do it?
I read that carefully twice and don’t understand what you are saying. In any case, (1) you have mischaracterized what I said at least three times now, and (2) the motion to dismiss is not directed to the actual charges, but that happens often in motions to dismiss. It is not a reason to deny them. For example, Trump was successful in getting his Bathroom charges dismissed by claiming the special prosecutor was un-Constitutionally appointed, which is a claim that obviously had nothing to do with the fact that he was storing classified documents in his bathroom. Such dismissals happen.
Republicans love to respond to Trump’s corruption with “everyone does it”. Let’s see what that would mean if it were true.
When you look at the sorts of bribes members of Congress get caught taking, or Eric Adams, they tend to be in the low six figures. Generally less than $200,000.
If you assume that every governor (50), member of Congress (535), and mayor of a large city (38 over 500,000) is on the take for $200,000 per year, that would total $124,600,000. Trump’s Qatari plane alone, not even the only instance of nine-figure corruption, is worth $400,000,000.
In other words, Trump is certainly more corrupt than all other American government officials combined.
I was a big fan of Adam’s. Shame he dropped out. Wish cuomo and Sliwa did or that Mandani was deported
More corrupt than all other American officials combined.
Why did Biden pardon his crackhead son and other family members? How much did they receive from Ukraine?
Politico: “James Biden laid out his vision for the fund’s future. “Don’t worry about investors,” he said, according to the executive, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing fear of retaliation. “We've got people all around the world who want to invest in Joe Biden.””
I did the math above. If you don’t like it find some other info.
More corrupt than all other American officials combined.
Why did Biden pardon his crackhead son and other family members?
Because he knew Trump was petty enough to go after his political rivals and their families with "trumped up" charges despite declaring "the age of lawfare is over."
some of the idiots claim to this day that Trump doesn't tell lies.
White House demolition: President Trump’s plan to add an expansive ballroom to the White House will mean the demolition of the entire East Wing, which was expected to be fully torn down by this weekend, according to a senior administration official. Mr. Trump had pledged that the East Wing would not be touched by the construction, one of the largest renovations to the building in decades even before the change in plans. Read more ›
Why did Biden pardon his crackhead son and other family members?
Because he knew Trump was petty enough to go after his political rivals and their families with "trumped up" charges despite declaring "the age of lawfare is over."
Biden was correct, of course.
And yet he didn’t pardon Kamala, Jill , or other Democrats who Trump might dislike but who aren’t criminals…
some of the idiots claim to this day that Trump doesn't tell lies.
White House demolition: President Trump’s plan to add an expansive ballroom to the White House will mean the demolition of the entire East Wing, which was expected to be fully torn down by this weekend, according to a senior administration official. Mr. Trump had pledged that the East Wing would not be touched by the construction, one of the largest renovations to the building in decades even before the change in plans. Read more ›
Price just went up to $300 million. Was $250 million yesterday.
Hey everyone!! I’m excited to share something I’ve been quietly tinkering with lately: “Running Made Easy” (link below) — my side-project website built for runners (especially if you’re just getting started or returning to the sport after a break).
It’s by no means a business — just one runner’s attempt to bring together helpful tools and clear guidance in one place.
What you’ll find A no-fluff fundamentals hub — covering form, gear, pacing, injury prevention, and more
Articles and tips tailored for different levels of running experience
A Workout Plan Builder — plug in your current fitness, time availability or goal, and it will help craft a plan for you
Bonus resources: curated reading lists, links, FAQs for new runners
Why I built it I love running and have felt frustrated at how scattered (and sometimes confusing) the info out there can be. So I decided to build a simple, direct resource. It’s not monetized, no flashy business model — just something I hope fellow runners might find useful.
How you can help Since this is in its early stages, your feedback would mean a lot:
Try the workout plan builder and tell me what you like, what you don’t, what’s missing.
If you spot any gaps or topics you wish were covered (for beginners, returning runners, etc.), holler.
If you find something helpful — please share with a running buddy or someone you know who might benefit. Word of mouth would be huge for me.
Thanks for taking a look, and I hope this site helps you enjoy your running journey a little more.
I’ll be adding new content and features based on what I hear — so your voice genuinely matters.
Happy running!
Note: I know mobile is bad.. sorry, working on that one!
some of the idiots claim to this day that Trump doesn't tell lies.
White House demolition: President Trump’s plan to add an expansive ballroom to the White House will mean the demolition of the entire East Wing, which was expected to be fully torn down by this weekend, according to a senior administration official. Mr. Trump had pledged that the East Wing would not be touched by the construction, one of the largest renovations to the building in decades even before the change in plans. Read more ›
Price just went up to $300 million. Was $250 million yesterday.
The Big Dig (Boston tunnel project) was originally slated to cost $3 billion but ultimately ended up costing $22 billion.
