Alan Zweibel

That really wasn't the main issue headlined in the article.

Judge says DOJ failed to give full transcripts of Halligan’s Comey grand jury proceedings On Oct. 28, U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie issued an order that said she needs to “determine the extent of the indictment signer’s involvement in the grand jury proceedings.”... Currie had ordered that by Monday, Nov. 3, the DOJ was to provide her with “all documents relating to the indictment signer’s participation in the grand jury proceedings, along with complete grand jury transcripts.” But on Tuesday, Currie issued a new order that said the material she received “fails to include remarks made by the indictment signer both before and after the testimony of the sole witness, which remarks were referenced by the indictment signer during the witness’s testimony.” https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/james-comey-grand-jury-transcript-lindsey-halligan-rcna241879 Oops!

More chaotic than Trump? As chaotic as Trump? Is that even possible? https://finance.yahoo.com/news/contributor-trumps-tariffs-already-hurting-170000755.html

Lying to the DOJ to conceal possible crimes?

I don't agree that being lying scum is grounds for prosecution. If that were the case, I can think of a certain current US president who would most certainly be liable to face prosecution for his multitudinous infractions.

Who says the left loves Brennan so much? to your way of thinking does opposition to prosecution equal love?

Maybe he should be but I suspect that statute of limitations considerations might rule that out.

And the fact that Durham found no basis to prosecute him shows who demonstrates who the real authoritarians are.

During Trump's 1st term, 2 special Federal prosecutors and 1 Inspector General looked at such claims. I recall how Trump supporters were gloating about the coming convictions of alleged members of the Deep State. John Durham, who was the 2nd special prosecutor publicly criticized the Inspector General's report in which he said that he could find no evidence of Justice Dept officials conspiring against Trump. And how did his 3+ year investigation turn out?

Do you understand that Trump destroyed his father's very successful business? And went bankrupt in several others. The only reason that he held on to much of his inherited fortune is that bankruptcy laws made it very difficult for local banks to recover their money. All they could do was to boycott him in the future.

It was the 17th century for Christ's sake. (Or is that for Muhammed's sake?) No such thing as civil liberties back then.. There were no ghettos as you claimed. Jews were free to come and go. As were Christians. The Jews fled persecution in Europe. And under Ottoman rule, Christianity thrived in Eastern Europe. Apart from ethnic Albanians, not a lot of Muslims there. How do you reconcile that with persecution? Interesting how you repeatedly ignore the fact that Muslims are also the target of these militias. What perverted notion of the US Constitution underlines your belief that Christians are entitled to special concern? And just because I don't support military action, that means I don't care? Your belief is exactly the kind of dangerous nonsense that precipitated the Iraq war. Were you one of those who cared enough about the fate of Iraqis to support that war?

American manufacturers contracted for the eighth month in a row, a new survey showed, and there appeared to be no end in sight because of high Trump administration tariffs. A closely followed manufacturing index slipped to 48.7% in October from 49.1% in the prior month, the Institute for Supply Management said Monday. Any number below 50% signals contraction. The ISM surveys executives every month about how their businesses are doing. https://www.morningstar.com/news/marketwatch/2025110370/business-continues-to-be-severely-depressed-us-manufacturers-blame-tariffs

You can repeat it all you like. But given your refusal to provide any evidence from the text, it's overwhelmingly likely that either you haven't read it or that there's nothing in there that addresses my points. And even if were a person who believed that government should control the means of production, in other words, a socialist, what has that got to do with this case?

You've done nothing to prove that you've read any of it. Should be easy for you to counter what I've written with evidence from the text if you had read it. To borrow a phrase from Harrisfan, it looks like "you've got nothing"..

Just some badly beaten police officers. And the patriotic cry of "Hang Mike Pence"

Another irrelevant comment. Especially given that Trump can't run again. And there's no way of knowing how his party will feel about him in 2028.

I read enough to know that they were devoting a lot of text to Richman.. And given that you offer nothing from the text of the document to counter what I've written, how is anyone to know that you've read it? You got any specifics from the text to offer?

What don't you understand about significance of the fact that at virtually the same point in their presidency, Trump is doing worse than Biden. Who knows what depths he might yet plumb?

Thanks. I don't what the chances are that those documents will ultimately be open to public inspection.

You think the fact that the government contests the Comey defense teams claims are somehow dispositive? It's clear that the government's claim that the indictments against Comey for his testimony to Senator Cruz are clearly false, The prosecution claiims that Comey lied about authorizing Daniel Richman to release information. The transcripts of Comey's testimony before the Senate committee clearly show that Comey never testified about Daniel Richman. In fact, Senator Cruz asked him about Andrew McCabe, not Daniel Richman. The evidence for that is unambiguous. So all the ink they're spilling about Richman is irrelevant. The second charge is that Comey lied about the investigation of the Clinton Foundation. Once again, the prosecution is lying. He was asked by Senator Cruz about the Clinton administration not the Clinton Foundation. I wonder if the judges have the authority to open up the grand jury investigation to see how Halligan characterized the evidence. Rather than Comey being convicted, it seems more likely to me that she could be facing possible disbarment if it's shown that she misrepresented the evidence to the grand jury. (Spellcheck suggested I change "Halligan" to "Gilligan". It makes a good point)

That only works when you first provide evidence or arguments or both. By itself, it's just an empty comment.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_biden_job_approval-7320.html https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/donald-trump/approval-rating

Paging Dunning-Kruger.

In reference to Turkey, either you are badly mistaken or wores. Please provide evidence that Jews were confined to ghettos. There were mild restrictions imposed on where they could live. But nothing like the situation in Europe. AI does a nice summary of it. No, Jews were not confined to ghettos in the Ottoman Empire in the same way they were in many parts of Christian Europe. Unlike the mandatory, closed ghettos with strict curfews prevalent in cities like Venice, the Ottoman Empire did not have a system of forced residential segregation for Jews. Instead, the Ottoman Empire implemented the millet system, which organized non-Muslim communities as largely autonomous groups based on their religion. This system offered Jews: Administrative autonomy: Jewish communities had their own legal courts (Halakhic courts), schools, and social services, and were represented by the Hakham Bashi (Chief Rabbi) to the Ottoman authorities. Freedom of residence: While Jews often chose to live in specific neighborhoods or quarters of cities (like Istanbul, Salonica, and Izmir) for social, religious, and community support reasons, they were generally not legally restricted from living elsewhere. These areas were not walled off or locked at night like European ghettos. Economic opportunities: Jews in the Ottoman Empire faced fewer professional restrictions compared to Western Christian countries and were active in trade, finance, medicine, and printing, with some reaching high positions in the Ottoman court and administration. While Jews, as dhimmis (protected non-Muslim subjects), were considered second-class citizens and subject to certain restrictions (such as paying a special poll tax, wearing distinctive clothing in some periods, and restrictions on building places of worship), the overall environment was one of relative tolerance and safety compared to the widespread persecution, expulsions, and forced ghettoization in many parts of Europe. Indeed, the Ottoman Empire became a safe haven for tens of thousands of Jewish refugees fleeing the Spanish and Portuguese Inquisitions and other European persecutions.

Even Rasmussen has him at -12%