SaintsInDome2006

Given the age of these victims this moniker is taking on a darker connotation.

President Donald Ibn Trump declared we will be working with our new Arab alliance to “stabilize” Sudan.

Looks like our Arab masters are sending us to Sudan.

FYI.

Lol - what in the world does the DNI have to do with any of this?

And TLP expelled him. Seems like the proper course to take with people like that.

Obligatory.

Actually I did not post that link. But this is a really odd thing: Ghislaine Maxwell was the founder of the Kit Kat Club. >>In the late 1980s she founded the Kit Kat Club, a salon held in a variety of locations, designed to bring together women from the arts, politics and society.<< Sydney Morning Herald

I agree. It’s about corruption.

I don’t think maga is aware of it. There’s this whole back story about Melania Knauss from Slovenia. Right now she & Michael Wolff are in litigation but there’s a lot more. Iirc Wolff says that Epstein claimed he “gave” Melania to Trump. He claimed that about at least one other girl.

President Ineverknewtheguywhatguy has signed the bill.

The Resolute Desk has seen some great, proud history. It deserves better. Then again maybe it’s fitting.

There’s a place here in the middle where you & I would agree that most likely cutting off the border might have prevented some sex trafficking. We’re both against it. And I do sense that maga wants this information to come out. I’m certainly not going to stop you from agreeing with me.

Another MAGA Smollett. >> A 26-year-old Ocean City woman who claimed she was brutally assaulted because she worked for Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-Ocean City) instead orchestrated the entire incident — paying a scarification artist to wound her and staging the scene with zip ties and “Trump ” written on her stomach and “Van Drew is a racist” on her back, federal prosecutors alleged today. Natalie Greene, a Rutgers law student, allegedly concocted the hoax in July, with an accomplice making a late-night 911 call to report that she had been ambushed by three men on a nature trail in Egg Harbor Township. Police officers found Greene bound with black zip ties, her shirt pulled over her head, and the political slurs scrawled across her torso. She told police that her supposed attackers had a gun and threatened to shoot her, and struck her in the head. Prosecutors say nearly every detail was fabricated. Greene allegedly drove to Pennsylvania and paid a body-modification artist $500 to carve the wounds on her face, neck, and upper body, using a pattern she had provided in advance. Investigators later found matching zip ties in her Maserati SUV. Cellphone records showed that two days before the purported attack, her co-conspirator searched online for “zip ties near me,” a discovery authorities cited as further proof that the incident was staged.<<

Just so much joking & the usual jabbing. We’re talking about rape, rape of minors, grooming, the worst kind of political corruption.

In which Steve Bannon & Epstein make funny jokes about Auschwitz & Kristalnacht. - In all seriousness I’m really curious if there will be any emails in the release. And if there will be pictures.

They were talking about the claim that the Bidens & Co. conspired to fire Shokin. So yeah third in a series of 3 lost laptop stories. Absolutely none of it turned out to be true.

Honestly kudos to her. It’s a hell of a thing chasing that dream. Good for her.

The core claim of the Hunter Biden story is that his laptop reveals a treasonous plot between the VP, his son, Zlochevsky (a Ukrainian energy magnate), and shadowy Ukrainian politicos including their former President, who together conspired against Congressional law & American security interests to fire a Ukrainian prosecutor, equivalent to their AG, for personal profit. Right now, Trump, Bondi & Patel could indict all of these people, including Burisma itself & sanction Burisma. Yes even Hunter Biden, because, you see, his pardon was faked. (And the people who forged his pardon could be indicted too). Any moment now I’m sure. Put it next to the Seth Rich story, another tale of a lost laptop with secret incriminating data. 5 years, no investigation, no indictments. Or next to the Huma Abedeen story, a tale of a forgotten laptop containing super secret data with incriminating highly classified data. 5 years, no investigation, no indictment.

>>The spectacle, which played out over nearly 90 minutes of tense courtroom colloquy, drove home just how slapdash the prosecution of Mr. Comey appeared to have been from its inception. Judge Nachmanoff declined to issue a ruling from the bench on Mr. Comey’s claims that the case was brought vindictively. But he appeared to be leaning in that direction. Given the other revelations of the day, he could now have more reasons to throw out the charges.<< NYT

>> The most surprising development might have been the government’s admission, first delivered by Mr. Lemons, that Ms. Halligan had never showed the revised indictment in the case — the one that was ultimately used to charge Mr. Comey — to all of the grand jurors. Grand jurors have to vote on indictments to approve them, but Mr. Lemons told Judge Nachmanoff that only the foreperson formally approved the second charging document, a move that could in theory cripple the case. When Ms. Halligan first went into the grand jury, she had initially sought a three-count indictment against Mr. Comey. And after the grand jurors rejected one of the charges, she did not re-present the case with only two counts, but simply had the original indictment redrafted to reflect the failure of a third.<< - NYT

>>In the end, Mr. Lemons, appearing unnerved under questioning, confessed that the prosecutors who had previously handled the case had indeed written a draft of a memo declining prosecution.<< - NYT

>>Judge Nachmanoff seemed stunned by the events, and asked Ms. Halligan to stand up in court to answer questions. He asked her whether the entire grand jury had the opportunity to see the second indictment. She told him it had not. He thanked her and told her to sit down.<< - NYT

>>Lawyers for James Comey are in court on Wednesday as part of the former FBI director's case against the Justice Department. Comey claims he's being selectively prosecuted as part of a revenge effort by President Donald Trump. CNN's crime and justice correspondent Katelyn Polantz revealed one "startling discussion" in court during which "things got very intense very quickly." One of the revelations was that the full grand jury never saw the final indictment of Comey before U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan announced it. "I mean, this is a big revelation, Katelyn. Have you ever heard of this happening before?" host Pamela Brown asked. Polantz said she's been in a lot of these DOJ hearings, and this one was "gobsmacking." "It was absolute silence," she said. "You could see the entire room shift. And from that point on this was the only thing mattering in this case. This was the only thing the judge and others were talking about." "In full, they had voted down indicting Comey because they had been asked to approve three different charges against him. That indictment was a no from the grand jury. And then there was no further discussion with the prosecutors to bring about the indictment Comey now faces," she explained. The judge then began asking questions about the missing pieces of the grand jury testimony. The transcript had chunks missing, even in the judge's copy and he wanted to know why. "The judge asked the question: 'The operative indictment in this case, that document was never shown to the entire grand jury?'" she cited. Tyler Lemons, the prosecutor at the table with Halligan said, "no." Another thing Polantz found surprising is how much the argument went back to Halligan. "Is she a puppet? Is she a stalking horse of Donald Trump [...] sent in to bring this case?" the judge asked at one point. "And the prosecutors kept saying, 'No, she was making decisions on her own,'" Polantz explained, describing Halligan as nodding vigorously in agreement. Once it became known that the full grand jury didn't see the indictment, it was about a different matter entirely, and Halligan became very "short" with the judge, Polantz said.<< Linkage

Eh technically it was Mike Johnson who was going nuts trying to change the bill, not Dems.