The big news from the Dem debate came when it was over.
Hard to see the Sanders and Warren loyalists kissing and making up after this.
DO LET ME ADD: The Thirty Years Skirmish was funny, by which I mean stupid and pointless. Bernie beat a Republican incumbent in November 1990, 29 years and 2 months ago. Was that within Warren's parameter of "the past thirty years"? Progressive mathematicians are still sorting it out.
Here comes the đ„
http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=385307
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2020 at 02:14 PM
âWarren wears the same black outfitâ
Does she wash *that*?
Posted by: Another Bob | January 15, 2020 at 02:14 PM
One works, so the other doesn't have to....
Posted by: Melinda | January 15, 2020 at 02:15 PM
Why are you throwing out chaff (with apologies to the Captain) instead of just answering TK's three simple yes or no questions?
What exactly do you regard is chaff on my part?
I can answer those three questions but it would be pure speculation. Let's go with all three of them unaware that Flynn was running a sting operation at the time Flynn formulated and launched the sting.
I will say that for the sake of Flynn's reputation everyone here who is a Flynn supporter better hope and pray my speculation that he was running a sting operation against the Deep State turns out to be correct. The alternatives don't bode well for Flynn.
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 02:15 PM
He also had to shell out a rumored ÂŁ1M in fines because his other sportsball franchise was caught electronically hacking into the scouting system of a rival sleepy-time kickball club.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | January 15, 2020 at 02:15 PM
Was an agreement to back off on his son made part of the formal plea agreement? If so, did the prosecution honor that agreement? If they did, he has no basis to void the plea agreement.
If iit was not part of the formal plea agreement, is Flynn an idiot? Why would he plead guilty â especially to something that he did not do â in order to protect his son when he got ZERO protection for his son in the process? Nothing could stop the prosecution from going after his son anyway if it was not in the formal plea deal.
Sorry folks, the business about protecting his son doesnât make a lot of sense. If Powell does not take it on in her filings â and I gather she does not â itâs just a red herring.
Posted by: Theo | January 15, 2020 at 02:20 PM
Roberts' FISA Baggage Bad News for Trump Trial?
The Unseen Impeachment Missile
Posted by: KevlarKid | January 15, 2020 at 02:20 PM
Let's go with all three of them unaware that Flynn was running a sting operation at the time Flynn formulated and launched the sting.
That was easy!
What part of that undermines your theory though? Iâm still confused on that accusation you brought up.
Now to clarify, I asked if they know about the sting and you answered that they were unaware at the time the sting was formulated. Really not a direct answer, IMO, but I can be wrong.
At what point did they become players in the sting?
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 15, 2020 at 02:24 PM
I can answer those three questions but it would be pure speculation.
Sorry to ask another question, but isnât your sting theory pure speculation?
I thought we were reasoning through a hypothetical and not worrying about the speculation part.
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 15, 2020 at 02:26 PM
Melinda @ 2:02
Since Jane won't answer, do you have a citation for backing up that point?
I know it was a frequent talking point by Hannity and all the pro-Trump pundits who appeared on his show. What I have never seen is documented proof that it actually happened.
The accusation that Mueller/Weismann threatened to indict Flynn Jr if Flynn Sr didn't plead guilty just doesn't pass the smell test for me. If the accusation of coercion were true, that would have been perfect justification for Flynn Sr to withdraw the guilty plea as soon as the Mueller SC team gave control of the case back to the DOJ. He didn't.
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 02:26 PM
From CHâs Ace link:
#LedgeWorthy
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 15, 2020 at 02:29 PM
Theo @ 2:20
You and I think a lot alike because you are asking the same exact questions about the Flynn case that I have been asking for the past 2 years.
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 02:30 PM
TK "Some of this shit, he needs to straighten out personally."
What makes you assume he wants something different to occur?
Posted by: Old Lurker | January 15, 2020 at 02:32 PM
Theo:
"But my sense is that she dances around the question of how this would cause him to plead guilty to something he did not do"
Well, as I mentioned above, it's quite possible that Flynn was hoping to get the charges thrown out without having to expose the details of his plea agreement (especially if they impact his son). That said, however, people plead guilty to crimes they didn't commit, or putative "lesser crimes" all the time, for a whole cornucopia of reasons. That is part of why I believe that plea bargains are inherently corrupt, but that's another discussion. Process crimes, IMO are particularly suspect. Yes, lying to the FBI is a crime, but when the FBI designs its interviews to elicit a lie for prosecution, then it qualifies as a process crime. I think the FBI's refusal to record interrogations is designed to protect such practices.
In general being charged with a process crime means that you are not, in fact, the ultimate target of the probe, whom they hope you will inform on, or that they want to make an example of you, as they did with Martha Stewart. In any case, if prosecutors did not live up to their part of the bargain, then I don't think it's entirely beyond reason that a defendant should be able to change his plea. I don't know how deeply his lawyer needs to go into the details to make that petition. He would surely be asked about it in a trial, I should think.
Is it up to the judge to allow or deny the change of plea? I don't know the answer as I've actually pretty much stopped following the case.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 15, 2020 at 02:35 PM
What makes you assume he wants something different to occur?
I actually think he wants different things to occur on more things than he can actually tackle. In the mean time he negotiates with the swamp. When the Lock Her Up crowd starts to fatigue, he will drop a dime on someone. Or, if one of The First Rugrats puts their tit in a wringer again he will trade for their safety.
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 15, 2020 at 02:36 PM
Theo, it took me about 5 seconds to find a bunch of stories about how Flynn's plea may have been a result of the threat against his son. Here's one from 2017:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobfrenkel/2017/11/27/will-michael-flynn-plead-guilty-and-cooperate-to-protect-his-son/#15c09afd14fe
It gives a whole history of other cases, including Enron and Milken, where prosecutors engaged in this kind of behavior. In serious cases it may be fine, but here the crime was so minor that this technique of extracting a plea suggests a larger agenda (i.e. revenge against Flynn for going against Obama).
Here's another one from CNN of all places:
https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/08/politics/michael-flynn-son-special-counsel-russia-investigation/index.html
Posted by: jimmyk | January 15, 2020 at 02:38 PM
Sorry to ask another question, but isnât your sting theory pure speculation?
Of course it is speculation which I have stated multiple times in the past. As I have pointed out numerous times (and reinforced recently by Jack Straw and now Theo) the other possible alternatives to this being a sting operations are:
1) Flynn is an idiot.
2) Flynn is guilty as charged of something serious enough to warrant a prison sentence.
3) Flynn is innocent but AG Barr and the DOJ is corrupt.
There may be more possible alternatives to explain what is going on those are just the first three that came to mind.
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 02:39 PM
TK "When the Lock Her Up crowd starts to fatigue, he will drop a dime on someone. Or, if one of The First Rugrats puts their tit in a wringer again he will trade for their safety."
Since the first is happening with some, I cannot rule out #2 for his kids or himself.
Posted by: Old Lurker | January 15, 2020 at 02:43 PM
Of course it is speculation which I have stated multiple times in the past.
Oh. Thank you for the clarification on that. It seemed odd that you didnât want to answer my first questions because of âspeculation.â But I am glad you are on board with it!
So, what is your speculation on when Covington, Powell and Sullivan found out that Flynn was running a sting?
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 15, 2020 at 02:43 PM
Forward progress with Judical Watch is my bellwether that Trump is finally giving a bone to the encore waiting concert goers, OL.
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 15, 2020 at 02:46 PM
Hope so, TK. But you know "encore" implies there was already a show, right? Didn't Madonna get sued recently for keeping her ticket holders standing for hours and hours before going on stage?
:-)
Posted by: Old Lurker | January 15, 2020 at 02:49 PM
Theo,
I believe the concern about Flynn's former attorneys was they had a conflict of interest.
Flynn was threatened with a FARA violation that his attorneys had assisted him on. Because the DOJ alleged a form the lawyers had prepared and Flynn signed was a crime his attorneys were themselves potentially criminally liable. Regardless they proceeded to advise him to take a deal in which the FARA violation disappeared if he copped to a plea they had no exposure on. That does seem to be just a bit of a conflict.
As you indicate Powells' problem is most of her complaints about prosecutors relate to the FARA violation which Judge Sullivan has understandably asked what that has to do with the charges Flynn did plead to?
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | January 15, 2020 at 02:50 PM
TK @ 2:43
1) Not enough evidence to form a conclusion
2) When he hired her
3) When Flynn's sentencing memo indicated Flynn believed himself to be innocent of the charges but for some unknown reason continued to refuse to withdraw his guilty plea despite given multiple opportunities. Based on the news articles published at the time the judge sounded like he was annoyed/pissed off with what was going on.
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 02:50 PM
Like when Sullivan begged him earlier to withdraw his plea and he refused?
Why he said no then was his reason, before Miss Sidney. I donât know and heâs never said. No one has. So youâll have to wait like everyone else.
He also didnât say over dinner with Gretchen Smith.
Quite obviously he doesnât live for the press, but the founders of CrowdStrike and Area 1 Security do. Iâd be wondering why now, not why then, other than to play catch your tail again.
Posted by: Melinda | January 15, 2020 at 02:52 PM
Thanks Tom. Do you think Powell and the judge have coordinated?
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 15, 2020 at 02:52 PM
Hope so, TK. But you know "encore" implies there was already a show, right?
Just his smashing of the media is enough show for me to be satisfied that he has slowed our inevitable decent.
If he can secure 2020, I have faith that more will be done. I still donât think the right people will go to jail.
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 15, 2020 at 02:55 PM
Done. Bye.
Posted by: Melinda | January 15, 2020 at 02:55 PM
here we go. Bail revoked.
EminentHat @Popehat
now
So: Judge Selna in CDCA has detained Avenatti and ordered him shipped to SDNY for trial, which he will undertake in custody. Props to @laplanck for well-done livetweet of hearing.
Posted by: henry | January 15, 2020 at 02:59 PM
I just had a long telephone chat a a-mom. Delightful woman. We are both Michigan grads, so I suppose that helps. :)
Posted by: DrJ | January 15, 2020 at 03:01 PM
I've always thought Awan was connected to Hezbollah. The fake company looks an awful lot like the money laundering scams Hezbollah was running.
I don't think Trump is done with them yet.
Posted by: JackStraw at January 15, 2020 02:24 PM (ZLI7S)
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2020 at 03:01 PM
Melinda @ 2:52
Can't tell if you are responding to me, TK or someone else.
I've tried to stay informed on Flynn's case but have to admit I don't know who Gretchen Smith is. Curious to know why you mentioned here. Is she related to Peter Smith?
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/10/gop-operative-who-sought-clinton-emails-had-ties-to-michael-flynn.html
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 03:02 PM
Glad to hear that Dr J. Hope things get better for you.
Posted by: henry | January 15, 2020 at 03:02 PM
*with*
Posted by: DrJ | January 15, 2020 at 03:02 PM
I am listening to a replay of Devin Nunes on Laura Ingraham last night who said that IN HIS REPORT IN 2017 they had been told by the FBI that Flynn had NOT lied to them and maybe he (Nunes) would have to speak to the court on behalf of him.
Also, the statement by the FBI was REDACTED on the Mueller report. How about that? Laura said that constituted withholding exculpatory evidence.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 03:02 PM
Things are picking up, henry. Thanks for the concern.
Posted by: DrJ | January 15, 2020 at 03:03 PM
I'll call you next month when I'm in Santa Cruz, DrJ.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2020 at 03:06 PM
Please do, CH. We can work out details.
Posted by: DrJ | January 15, 2020 at 03:07 PM
The latest from O'Keefe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=P3PWDNkLliE&feature=emb_logo&fbclid=IwAR1rfjc4WNS4PiALa2_0O1m9hwonZyFKu8DoL1C2Wp9Lz73Ejt0dzUjo9fM
Posted by: Jane | January 15, 2020 at 03:12 PM
Theo,
That could never be part of a plea agreement. It was an illegal threat. Are you suggesting they wouldn't go thru with it?
Posted by: Jane | January 15, 2020 at 03:13 PM
Havenât got to the retirement list yet, but this popped out at me in the AT Q article:
Resignations, retirements, and unexpected deaths from major players in politics, media, charities, and corporations all point to possible deals being made quietly without the public fanfare of arrests.
Hmmm. Maybe Mitch really is out there skulking around.
Posted by: Manuel Transmission | January 15, 2020 at 03:15 PM
It was an illegal threat.
Jane keeps reinforcing my belief that Flynn was never coerced by Mueller/Weissman. If Mueller/Weismann illegally threatened Flynn then why didn't he withdraw his guilty plea when given the opportunity multiple times by the judge?
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 03:25 PM
henry, Hastings was not convicted and the Senate did not vote to remove him from office.
Hastings was convicted and removed from office. It says so right in the article Porchlight linked to:
As it also says, Hastings was not precluded from holding other offices.
Posted by: MJW | January 15, 2020 at 03:29 PM
That could never be part of a plea agreement. It was an illegal threat.
Is that true? The Forbes piece I linked above seems to suggest it's SOP in prosecutions where family members are implicated. Which doesn't mean it's legal, I guess, but it isn't a secret.
The Forbes piece doesn't mention Weissman by name, but was he a player in the Enron case?
Posted by: jimmyk | January 15, 2020 at 03:29 PM
Not good at all.
Blackface Northam is trying to induce a bloodbath.
For those not aware, Virginia is attempting to crack down on firearms in ways that amount to bans/confiscations.
There is a large pro-2A rally planned at the Capitol.
Blackface has declared an emergency and has decreed that all weapons will be prohibited at said rally.
Blackface fears Charlottesville-style violence.
That would be violence engineered by the authorities.
I presume there will be widespread defiance of the decree.
Shit about to get real?
Posted by: Another Bob | January 15, 2020 at 03:33 PM
"He can just step into any office and declare that he'll be making all the decisions for the next several hours."
No he can't, really. For starters he needs someone to read him in on the background and make sure he knows all the relevant details (no surprises, please!), along with running through all the possible scenarios which might play out from that situation. He will need to consider how it might affect other current or future decisions and/or all the other things he's trying to get done, or deals in progress, whether inside or outside gov't. He's got to assign people to suss all that out -- instead of doing something else -- which means someone will already have to have persuaded him that it's important enough to his agenda to spend the man hours and political capital it will require. He certainly doesn't have time to follow the ins and outs of all the potential exercises where folks might like to see him intervene or interfere personally. That list is very long.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 15, 2020 at 03:37 PM
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dems-drop-impeachment-files-ahead-of-vote
Additionally, Parnas' attorneys had stated last year that he would be willing to testify as part of the Democrats' impeachment inquiry, amid reports of a possible immunity deal to secure his appearance. Those discussions led Republicans to question whether Parnas simply was seeking to avoid jail time through his testimony.
Glass half full explanation:
The DOJ under Trump indicted Parnas for engaging in the kind of quid pro quo corruption Trump promised he would end.
Glass half empty explanation:
The DOJ is still corrupt and Parnas got indicted because the Trump-appointed SDNY US Attorney is actually in cahoots with the Democrats to help destroy Trump.
PS: How exactly would House Democrats be able to give Parnas immunity for crimes the DOJ has already indicted him on?
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 03:45 PM
Yesterday I spent a couple hours with the guy who manages most of my investment accounts.
Mostly mundane stuff about switching a few investments, rebalancing needs and some tax strategies.
Then he said "you know you could be spending more money, don't you?"
It was right then that I wished I hadn't brought Mrs. Buckeye:)
Posted by: Buckeye | January 15, 2020 at 03:47 PM
Another Blasey Ford will suddenly appear.
Chad Pergram
@ChadPergram
· 3h
Nadler: Under todayâs resolution, the managers also have broad authority to submit to the Senate any additional evidence the House may acquire on its own, and we will do so.
Posted by: lurkersusie | January 15, 2020 at 03:50 PM
I am sure that an agreement not to go after Flynn's son would never have been memorialized in writing. Yet another reason for not recording interviews! I presume the official agreement would consist of trading a guilty plea for a specific sentencing recommendation.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 15, 2020 at 03:52 PM
Thread: Bolton or his double spotted in Qatar.
https://twitter.com/Joyce_Karam/status/1217485440560791552
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 03:53 PM
lurkersusie:
Was Nadler referring to a Senate resolution or a House resolution?
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 15, 2020 at 03:54 PM
The Forbes piece doesn't mention Weissman by name, but was he a player in the Enron case?
Yes, he screwed a number of people particularly Arthur Anderson officers according to Sidney Powell. Some of his actions were unanimously reversed by the Supreme Court but Arthur was already out of business and the clients and worker bees had gone to the unscathed firms.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2020 at 03:55 PM
Bolton or his double spotted in Qatar.
Maybe he'll get "lost" there.
Posted by: Buckeye | January 15, 2020 at 03:57 PM
I presume the official agreement would consist of trading a guilty plea for a specific sentencing recommendation.
JMH @ 3:52
In that case how do you account for Barr discarding that coerced deal that Mueller made recommending no jail time to now trying to get a harsher sentence with jail time?
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 03:58 PM
Buzz Patterson for Congress
@BuzzPatterson
·
4h
President Trump literally just sold rice to China.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 03:59 PM
JMH,
The House resolution.
Posted by: lurkersusie | January 15, 2020 at 04:01 PM
See you later, Mel.
Posted by: hoyden | January 15, 2020 at 04:05 PM
Justice for Shemp
http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=385301
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2020 at 04:10 PM
https://bongino.com/biden-claims-he-couldnt-afford-childcare-on-42k-salary-in-1973-equivalent-of-250k-when-adjusted-for-inflation/
He claimed this in the debate last night. Jan Brewer said on Twitter that this was not true, that adjusted for inflation 42K was the equivalent of 250K and if he couldn't manage his household money, he couldn't manage the nation's budget.
I know for a fact this is BS. in 1973 I was working full time for 17,000 per year and I was paying a day care $15/week. I had no trouble affording it.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 04:13 PM
I think the simplest explanation of the Flynn situation is that he did lie about something, whether or not it was important. Now that it can be proved that prosecutors tampered with evidence, he wants to withdraw his plea, go to trial and have the charges thrown out due to prosecutor misconduct.
Posted by: John S | January 15, 2020 at 04:15 PM
Headcount upped, age range drops again:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7891717/Jeffrey-Epstein-trafficked-hundreds-girls-recently-2018.html
Posted by: Melinda | January 15, 2020 at 04:16 PM
Decisions Decisions
Poll: West Virginia voters would view Manchin negatively if he votes to convict Trump | TheHill
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/478408-poll-west-virginia-voters-would-view-manchin-negatively-if-he-votes-to
Posted by: lurkersusie | January 15, 2020 at 04:18 PM
Captain Hate,
I discovered I am no longer banned on Axe.
Here is the post I left about Shep Smith at #107:
"I NEVER forgot Shemp and Jerry Rivers tooling around in a pontoon boat after that hurricane (in Louisiana I think) and both of them carrying on like George Bush was refusing to rescue people. He should have been struck by lightning over that lie. He will be a curse for whichever channel signs him."
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 04:26 PM
Ace, not Axe!
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 04:26 PM
I thought you'd posted a comment there a while back.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2020 at 04:28 PM
CH 3:55
My recollection of the Enron scandal is that multiple Enron executives deserved to go to jail for white collar crimes. My recollection is Arthur Anderson was a key player in helping Enron executives cover up their cooking of the books. IIRC AA got caught shredding documents that proved they were guilty of conspiring with Enron executives and that is what got them in trouble with the Feds.
If an ethical DOJ prosecutor (don't laugh) other than Weissman had prosecuted the case, would they have been able to get a conviction against Arthur Anderson that would not have been overturned by SCOTUS?
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 04:28 PM
--Resignations, retirements, and unexpected deaths from major players in politics, media, charities, and corporations all point to possible deals being made quietly without the public fanfare of arrests.--
--Hmmm. Maybe Mitch really is out there skulking around. --
Very possibly, MT, since all the deaths attributable to Hillary were not only expected but predicted.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | January 15, 2020 at 04:29 PM
I have been banned on Ace since the day I first tried to post a comment shortly after I found out about the site. If I post while @ work I have to go thru a web proxy site. Ace himself has twice e-mailed me with promises to fix it, but he never got around to it.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | January 15, 2020 at 04:30 PM
BTW since some people here don't like it when I ask questions let me go ahead and rephrase my 4:28.
I think Arthur Anderson was guilty of what the DOJ/SEC accused them of but SCOTUS overturned the conviction due to incompetence and/or corruption on Weissman's part during the trial.
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 04:32 PM
I'm disappointed that AJ Hinch and Alex Cora weren't named Impeachment Managers. They're both available and have exhibited just the sort of trustworthy character as the rest of the group.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | January 15, 2020 at 04:32 PM
--As it also says, Hastings was not precluded from holding other offices.--
Well, naturally. The last people on earth who want to establish any standards for serving in Congress, even [and especially] not being a crook, are the gruesome, greasy reprobates already oiling up its hallowed halls.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | January 15, 2020 at 04:33 PM
TomR:
I am going to try and help you understand this blog and the people who post here.You recently postedâ Since Jane wonât answerâ
Jane is under no obligation to you to look up anything or provide proof of any stand she takes.
You make demands of posters and then get offended when they donât respond.
Please know that you speak in generalities almost every day and that I personally do not believe you are correct about anything.
Please try and read the room.
There is absolutely no sting operation.
That is a fiction you made up to support your views.Magical thinking is fun for awhile but then you have to wake up and smell the coffee.
Posted by: D | January 15, 2020 at 04:35 PM
Lurkersusie:
Excellent find.
Even the House managers know their case has bupkis and are waiting for the unicorn nugget of corruption to magically appear.Reminds me of a poster here.
Posted by: D | January 15, 2020 at 04:38 PM
Captain Hate,
I may have and forgotten. Remember, I had that semi-stroke episode about a year and a half ago and detail things in my memory have disappeared.
Anyway, at least it's now in my brain that I can comment there, although I won't do so much.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 04:38 PM
My husband keeps saying she has 4 eyebrows.
Now every time I see her I see the same thing.
Caleb Hull on Twitter: ""Vladimir PLOOTIN" https://t.co/RdKAFSx42m" / Twitter
Posted by: lurkersusie | January 15, 2020 at 04:40 PM
There is absolutely no sting operation.
That's definitely an opinion. It also happens to be mine, but another opinion (TomR's) is that there is a sting operation. TomR might get overbearing with his expectations of others, or whatever, but I enjoy reading his opinions - they're interesting.
Posted by: hrtshpdbox | January 15, 2020 at 04:41 PM
If an ethical DOJ prosecutor (don't laugh) other than Weissman had prosecuted the case, would they have been able to get a conviction against Arthur Anderson that would not have been overturned by SCOTUS?
It wasn't just overturned it was unanimously overturned. As in blatant prosecutorial wrongdoing. As to the facts in the Enron case, I'm not sure anyone should've been convicted because it was a very emotional time.
Sometimes bad things happen because a perfect storm of events happens. I've read that they held a lot of options which went south in the worst way possible producing catastrophic losses. Sidney Powell writes about it from her clients standpoint. Maybe Mel remembers some of the details.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2020 at 04:47 PM
Hrt:
Glad you are entertained by TomR.
Yes my post is an opinion but I try to live in the real world.
Discuss real things that are happening and I love the breaking stories that Lurkersusie, and MM post as well as the opinions expressed by Rocco, Jimmyk. Porch, Anonamom, and OL.
I am happy to see Buford Gooch here and want to hear his take on all the upcoming events including the Dem primaries.I love Henryâs take on events.
I welcome lurkers to post more so new views are heard.
Posted by: D | January 15, 2020 at 04:50 PM
Welcome to Team Enabler, box. We've got great craft beer.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2020 at 04:51 PM
Maryrose @ 4:35
I am going to try and explain to you why I think you are sometimes oblivious to reality.
Jane made an assertion that appears to be her expressing her speculative opinion as a definitive fact. I politely asked her to provide a citation to back up her claim. The fact you don't realize that is why you cause me to perceive you as frequently oblivious to reality.
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 04:56 PM
Yes, he screwed a number of people particularly Arthur Anderson officers according to Sidney Powell.
Thanks, I should have remembered that, but this whole farce exceeds the capacity of my diminishing number of brain cells.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 15, 2020 at 04:57 PM
https://www.foxnews.com/media/jimmy-hoffa-fbi-eric-shawn-fox-nation
FBI wants to talk to the subjects of the Jimmy Hoffa investigations. Two people have told Fox where Hoffa is buried.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 04:57 PM
LOL, CH.
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 15, 2020 at 04:57 PM
MJW, thanks. Sorry I read the Hastings article wrong. He was convicted on some counts and removed from office, but the Senate must vote separately to bar him from future office and they did not do that.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 15, 2020 at 04:59 PM
Adorable
Julio Gonzalez on Twitter: "God is Good! This little boy blessing everyoneâs breakfast is the most amazing video you will see this year. Amen đ https://t.co/gM0KV8VdBP" / Twitter
Posted by: lurkersusie | January 15, 2020 at 05:00 PM
Video of President Trump at the link.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 05:06 PM
--TomR:
I am going to try and help you understand this blog and the people who post here.--
LOL.
I sometimes wonder if TomR pays Maryrose to say things like that just to see if anyone will jam her up the way they do him for equally ostentatious remarks.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | January 15, 2020 at 05:09 PM
CH @ 4:47
Standard disclosure the source is Wikipedia so take with a grain of salt.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen_LLP_v._United_States
The conviction got overturned because of really bad jury instructions. Whether those bad jury instructions were due to incompetence and/or corruption on Weissman's part is beyond my knowledge. It doesn't change the fact AA shredded a lot of documents which seems like a sign of guilt to me.
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 05:10 PM
Watching the build up to the Engrossment Ceremony.
How quaint.
Posted by: Buckeye | January 15, 2020 at 05:11 PM
https://nypost.com/2020/01/14/feds-blame-de-blasio-for-murder-sex-assault-of-92-year-old-woman/
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 05:11 PM
Forbes so no link
@iblametom
New - The FBI used a GrayKey to get into a locked iPhone 11 Pro Max. That's the latest model.
So why is the FBI demanding Apple help unlock much older versions of the device?
I've published court docs within from a case in Ohio...
Posted by: henry | January 15, 2020 at 05:11 PM
TomR, killfile allows people to list commenters whose posts they do NOT want to see.
A number of people use it--jane being one, I do believe.
You can ask her all the questions you want.
If you are on her killfile list, she doesn't see them.
So, she's not "not answering my question"--she never saw your question, if she has you "killfiled."
Posted by: anonamom | January 15, 2020 at 05:14 PM
https://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2020/01/15/democrat-attorneys-general-demand-fast-track-work-permits-for-illegals-and-migrants/
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 05:17 PM
Might get to it via the tweet:
https://twitter.com/iblametom/status/1217564036067471361?s=21
Given the models in the Pensacola shooting case are iPhone 5 and 7, itâs unclear why a GrayKey hasnât proven useful in that investigation. Forbes has previously revealed a GrayKey brochure that showed it worked on older devices too.
Making things secure is very difficult (and perhaps impossible). The FBI is lying here. That doesnât help.
Posted by: henry | January 15, 2020 at 05:18 PM
â
40Head
âââââ
@40_head
·
42s
Did Nancy Pelosi just call our 1st president
"Jewish Washington"?
Damn...lay off the sauce lady!!!
============================================
Since I avoid seeing her, I have no idea if she did this or not. Anyone know?
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 05:24 PM
Old bag is milking the photo op for all it is worth.
Posted by: Buckeye | January 15, 2020 at 05:26 PM
Of course timed so as not to cut too deeply into happy hour.
Posted by: Buckeye | January 15, 2020 at 05:31 PM
Video at the link.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | January 15, 2020 at 05:32 PM
Anyone know a farmland price index? How did it respond to this news? Asking for a friend.
Posted by: henry | January 15, 2020 at 05:34 PM
Art of the deal. We will soon see how bad Iraq wants US troops to leave.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/us-prepares-cut-all-military-aid-if-iraq-asks-troops-leave
And now the US State Department has confirmed it and the Pentagon are preparing to cut all $250 million of foreign military aid for Iraq from the 2020 military aid budget already approved.
Posted by: Tom R | January 15, 2020 at 05:35 PM