Fogbow

Foggy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 10:00 am Poor pigeons.

So ol' Wifehorn has been telling me that Melanie offered a very stylish hat she once wore for sale at the low, low price of a quarter of a million dollars ($250,000.00).

And ol' Wifehorn has many speculations and guesses about why she might be selling her clothing like a person who needs to raise money, especially the version of money known as cash.

So who knows? Maybe Trump will be lucky again, and end up in a single-wide trailer in some trashy trailer park in Bumfuck, Alabama.

People noticed a “portion” of the proceeds would be donated to charity and wondered why, since this isn’t a company donating money out of profits it still needs to make.

pipistrelle wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 10:07 am

Foggy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 10:00 am Poor pigeons.

So ol' Wifehorn has been telling me that Melanie offered a very stylish hat she once wore for sale at the low, low price of a quarter of a million dollars ($250,000.00).

And ol' Wifehorn has many speculations and guesses about why she might be selling her clothing like a person who needs to raise money, especially the version of money known as cash.

So who knows? Maybe Trump will be lucky again, and end up in a single-wide trailer in some trashy trailer park in Bumfuck, Alabama.

People noticed a “portion” of the proceeds would be donated to charity and wondered why, since this isn’t a company donating money out of profits it still needs to make.

The charity is herself. She's supposedly donating the money to herself as "Be Best." FYI.

Trump's office says some of the proceeds will go toward an initiative that is a part of the former first lady's Be Best program, but it's not clear how much will be donated.

CNN has reached out to Trump's office for clarity on the number of NFTs sold and the profits, as well as what portion would go to support foster children, which Trump's statements have indicated will be the case. The last paragraph of Trump's latest announcement about the three auction items on her personal website includes the line: "A portion of the proceeds derived from this auction will provide foster care children with access to computer science and technology education. "
CNN has sought clarity numerous times from Trump's spokesperson about the "portion of the proceeds" the statement says will be donated to "Fostering the Future," which is described as a "Be Best Initiative." The statement about the auction says Trump will "grant the opening round of scholarships to recipients during the first quarter of 2022," though details about the scholarships were not included.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/01/04/poli ... index.html

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 10:16 am

pipistrelle wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 10:07 am

Foggy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 10:00 am Poor pigeons.

So ol' Wifehorn has been telling me that Melanie offered a very stylish hat she once wore for sale at the low, low price of a quarter of a million dollars ($250,000.00).

And ol' Wifehorn has many speculations and guesses about why she might be selling her clothing like a person who needs to raise money, especially the version of money known as cash.

So who knows? Maybe Trump will be lucky again, and end up in a single-wide trailer in some trashy trailer park in Bumfuck, Alabama.

People noticed a “portion” of the proceeds would be donated to charity and wondered why, since this isn’t a company donating money out of profits it still needs to make.

The charity is herself. She's supposedly donating the money to herself as "Be Best." FYI.

I did see that and promptly forgot. I thought “that thing is still a thing?”

filly wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 11:12 am

Didn’t realize this was not the Melania thread.

So what's scary is the paltry number of replies the DOJ has for this tweet.

Yeah, sorta my bad on the hijack, we were talking about whether Garland's DOJ will put Trump behind bars, and I compared it to why they didn't put Nixon behind bars. I was there for that one, it still affects my thoughts on similar topics. I suspect that, like Nixon, Trump never will be locked up, and I'm OK with that, PROVIDED that he really, really suffers financially. I think that would be worse, for him.

I dream of him being homeless. I may need to seek professional help.

And in recent days, ol' Wifehorn has been arguing that even if he never goes to prison, he is already becoming a financial clogged toilet with nothing but shit in his future, and she brought up Melanie selling her hat as evidence that their little world of three-card monte is already swirling down the toilet.

Ol' Wifehorn, she would like you to know, has never been forced to sell any of her hats for $250,000.00.

So it really was sort of on-topic up to that point, but then the boogle got hold of it, and you KNOW that never ends well.

Yeah, that's right: I'm blaming EVERYBODY EXCEPT ME for hijacking the thread.

Let's get back to Merrick Garland's plan. Is he going to put Trump in prison, or is he going to take every penny that freakin' turdstain owns and let him go sleep under a bridge in a cardboard box, with one tattered suit and a bag full of oversized red neckties.

Geez, tough choice. Red has always been his color, y'know ...

Foggy wrote: ↑Mon Jan 10, 2022 5:15 pmYeah, that's right: I'm blaming EVERYBODY EXCEPT ME for hijacking the thread.

Report yourself to Dick Tater Supreme, toot sweet!

Foggy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 10:00 am Poor pigeons.

So ol' Wifehorn has been telling me that Melanie offered a very stylish hat she once wore for sale at the low, low price of a quarter of a million dollars ($250,000.00).

And ol' Wifehorn has many speculations and guesses about why she might be selling her clothing like a person who needs to raise money, especially the version of money known as cash.

So who knows? Maybe Trump will be lucky again, and end up in a single-wide trailer in some trashy trailer park in Bumfuck, Alabama.

Poor Bumfuck.

ABC News
@ABC
·
35m
NEW: Citing "elevated threat from domestic violent extremists," DOJ official announces creation of new domestic terrorism unit "to augment our existing approach." https://abcn.ws/3GjXCNE

Better late than never, but really, really late.

Just popping in here to wish a hearty Fuck You to Merrick Garland and his DOJ on the behalf of the Freemans and really all the witnesses from today's hearings. He really ended up being a piece of crap, how disappointing.

The indictment of the Watergate 7 was 21 months after the break-in.

The Indictment of Oliver North came 16 months after the sale was made public and nearly a year after he testified before a Congressional panel (Watergate indictments also happened after Congress started investigating).

The Indictment for the Plame affair happened 22 months after the CIA requested an investigation.

We are 18 months from January 6. Only 865 indictments so far. Others may be more coming after US attorneys (who do the investigating, not the AG) finish their work and have decided they have a very airtight case to take to the GJ and later the court (which you have to have if you are looking to indict a former president).

Do we want blood fast instead of actually succeeding?

Just saying.

northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 21, 2022 9:03 pm The indictment of the Watergate 7 was 21 months after the break-in.

The Indictment of Oliver North came 16 months after the sale was made public and nearly a year after he testified before a Congressional panel (Watergate indictments also happened after Congress started investigating).

The Indictment for the Plame affair happened 22 months after the CIA requested an investigation.

We are 18 months from January 6. Only 865 indictments so far. Others may be more coming after US attorneys (who do the investigating, not the AG) finish their work and have decided they have a very airtight case to take to the GJ and later the court (which you have to have if you are looking to indict a former president).

Do we want blood fast instead of actually succeeding?

Just saying.

Incorrect. The five burglars were of course arrested on Jun 17, 1972. Hunt and LIddy were outed and arrested within a couple of weeks. All seven were famously indicted on Sept 15, 1972--the day John Dean had his first semi-private (with Haldeman) meeting with Nixon, who praised Dean for manipulating the FBI/LE into believing that was as far as it went. So that's less than 3 months (not 21). Trials were that winter, and all seven began serving their sentences in the spring of 1973.

FBI was openly though ineptly investigating WH involvement within weeks. Sirica, of the DC District Court, handled the burglars from the get go. There were three federal prosecutors, forget their names (one was Silbert?) also investigating. The Senate Select Committee was established in Feb 1973, Nixon was named an unindicted co-conspirator in around March, and the first special prosecutor (Cox) was appointed in May.

All that in 11 months, and no secrets about who was being investigated or why.

p0rtia wrote: ↑Tue Jun 21, 2022 9:26 pm

northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 21, 2022 9:03 pm The indictment of the Watergate 7 was 21 months after the break-in.

The Indictment of Oliver North came 16 months after the sale was made public and nearly a year after he testified before a Congressional panel (Watergate indictments also happened after Congress started investigating).

The Indictment for the Plame affair happened 22 months after the CIA requested an investigation.

We are 18 months from January 6. Only 865 indictments so far. Others may be more coming after US attorneys (who do the investigating, not the AG) finish their work and have decided they have a very airtight case to take to the GJ and later the court (which you have to have if you are looking to indict a former president).

Do we want blood fast instead of actually succeeding?

Just saying.

Incorrect. The five burglars were of course arrested on Jun 17, 1972. Hunt and LIddy were outed and arrested within a couple of weeks. All seven were famously indicted on Sept 15, 1972--the day John Dean had his first semi-private (with Haldeman) meeting with Nixon, who praised Dean for manipulating the FBI/LE into believing that was as far as it went. So that's less than 3 months (not 21). Trials were that winter, and all seven began serving their sentences in the spring of 1973.

FBI was openly though ineptly investigating WH involvement within weeks. Sirica, of the DC District Court, handled the burglars from the get go. There were three federal prosecutors, forget their names (one was Silbert?) also investigating. The Senate Select Committee was established in Feb 1973, Nixon was named an unindicted co-conspirator in around March, and the first special prosecutor (Cox) was appointed in May.

All that in 11 months, and no secrets about who was being investigated or why.

I was referring to the later 7, the ringleaders which included Mitchell, Halderman, Eirlichmann, Colson. They were not indicted until March of 1974.

I'm sorry if folks here don't want to understand but I am more interested in actually doing this right than having my need for instant vengeance assuaged. In the long run, the AG sets policy, not specific investigations, and I have no doubt that Garland is following that custom (I don't know where he is on that and I won't guess). Too also, this is like the later 7 conspirators of Watergate. In those cases, and in Trump, it is better to go slow and not screw it up.

If you rush, screw it up, and thus fail to convict, the right wins and we lose. It is as simple as that.

I also included more than just Watergate and they also had longer timelines or were just getting to indictment soon (and already had Congress investigating).

Garland is appointed by Biden. If we are saying fuck Garland, then we are saying Go Brandon. I won't do that. Sorry.

northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 21, 2022 9:52 pm Garland is appointed by Biden. If we are saying fuck Garland, then we are saying Go Brandon. I won't do that. Sorry.

No you're not. Biden doesn't die by the sword of whoever he appoints. I thought Garland was a good appointment at the time. Now, not so much. I don't fault Biden for that.

Also, I hope you're right about how things are going to go and I get to eat my words in a year. Nothing would make me happier. We'll see.

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Tue Jun 21, 2022 10:03 pm

northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 21, 2022 9:52 pm Garland is appointed by Biden. If we are saying fuck Garland, then we are saying Go Brandon. I won't do that. Sorry.

No you're not. Biden doesn't die by the sword of whoever he appoints. I thought Garland was a good appointment at the time. Now, not so much. I don't fault Biden for that.

Also, I hope you're right about how things are going to go and I get to eat my words in a year. Nothing would make me happier. We'll see.

To be honest, there is a part of me that is concerned because leaks are a way of life in Washington, and this has been leak-free, or not happening. However, I am keeping my concern in check and not assuming that a lack of information is a lack of progress.

No offense, but I too hope you have to eat your words.

On a related note... I really hate hot weather. That may be showing in my posts.

northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 21, 2022 9:52 pm
I'm sorry if folks here don't want to understand but I am more interested in actually doing this right than having my need for instant vengeance assuaged. In the long run, the AG sets policy, not specific investigations, and I have no doubt that Garland is following that custom (I don't know where he is on that and I won't guess). Too also, this is like the later 7 conspirators of Watergate. In those cases, and in Trump, it is better to go slow and not screw it up.

I, for one, am with you on this.

Another thing that is different about this and Watergate is that for Watergate a Special Prosecutor was appointed to handle the investigation. But Special Prosecutors are hard to do these days. Reagan era GOP didn't like Watergate so they changed the rules, then they weaponized the Special Prosecutor as a political hangman's noose for the Clinton Inquisition, and nobody wants to go through that again.

I remember Watergate clearly. I was just a little kid.

Me and my dad knew all about Watergate from the start. We toured the perimeter on one trip. Nixon was trying to throw the election, it was obvious, as it filtered in through the body counts. Nixon was a crook. How he fucked Eagleton was really fucked up. We were hanging around McGovern's cabin in the Black Hills when that went down.

I was a big McGovern fan. He was a regular mid-western dude. I sent him $5 I was saving to buy a baseball glove. He sent me a signed thank-you note back. Made me a certified member of the Million-Member Club.

What really pissed us off was that they postponed the inquiry until AFTER the election. WTF? When they finally held the hearings, that was pretty good stuff, but it came way too late. They broke my trust, and I no longer had any respect for entities like the so-called United States.

It was a good lesson. I was just a little kid.

Jeffrey Clark's house got raided by the FBI

Not sure we saw this yesterday

Russ Vought, Jeffrey Clark’s boss, adds the detail that federal agents put Jeffrey Clark “in the streets in his pajamas, and took his electronic devices.“

Am I a bad person if I laugh, cuz I'm laughing my ass off.