Alan Zweibel

Still thinking like it it's 2015

The Maryland city is well over an hour’s drive from the northern Virginia region known as Data Center Alley. But Kevin Stanley, a 57-year-old who survives on disability payments, says his energy bills are about 80% higher than they were about three years ago. “They’re going up and up,” he said. “You wonder, ‘What is your breaking point?’” It’s an increasingly dramatic ripple effect of the AI boom as energy-hungry data centers send power costs to records in much of the US, pulling everyday households into paying for the digital economy. https://archive.ph/eCQ6k#selection-1435.0-1439.200 The Trump plan is to build more high cost coal-fired and nuclear power plants.

For over 30 years right wing terrorist acts vastly outnumbered left wing ones. And even now, the left wing incidents are far fewer than than right wing ones were. Including Trump's first term.. But only now it's a problem?

You claimed a govt employee who approved a fraudulent claim should be fired. Clearly, you must believe that the technology is foolproof.

Wow! A foolproof technology that has been in place for decades. One that can't be hacked. This is so believable.

Because you know that whatever documentation was offered was the kind whose fraudulence could be detected by systems in place?

"Well somebody is issuing dodgy CDLs. " OK. The question is, who is that somebody? The governor released one license out of 125. Not exactly a valid sampling of who is issuing them.

Well, as I noted, I got that wrong. But I see you have no answer for the ridiculous claim featured in this thread that NY State is issuing anonymous driver's licenses to immigrants.

Did your vision tell you that Clayton Morris, the guy who did this video, is a scam artist? That he fled to Portugal where he now lives? "In March 2019, investors filed more than two dozen lawsuits in Indiana and New Jersey, claiming that Morris was running a Ponzi scheme involving the sales of some houses in C- and D-class neighborhoods that were marketed through his investment company, Morris Invest, in Indianapolis. The investors claimed they were sold rental properties which Morris Invest promised to rehabilitate and rent out, earning them rental income. These properties belonged to Bert Whalen. Some investors claimed that they later discovered the properties they received rental income from for several months were boarded up and vacant, and they began receiving city code and country health department violations. Others found they had purchased vacant lots, small shacks or buildings that were falling down. Morris denied responsibility, asserting he referred investors to Whalen and that Whalen was responsible for managing the properties, even though many investors believed they were dealing directly with Morris.[17] In November 2019, Whalen was indicted by a federal grand jury for defrauding investors; the indictment did not name Morris.[18] Whalen pleaded guilty in March 2022.[19] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clayton_Morris I decided to watch the beginning of this video and it's clear he's trying to scare viewers into making an investment. So I skipped forward in his video and sure enough he's promoting some new dubious digital currency. In other words, he's trying to scare viewers into investing in this digital currency. And your common sense and your gut tell you that this guy is legit? Laughable.

Really? A sovereign nation doesn't have the right to join alliances of its choosing? Isn't allowed to join whatever economic union it wishes to. From what source did you derive that cr#p formulation?

So, it turns out not maybe not exactly a hoax. But either the governor is an ignoramus or he's being deceptive. The explanation offered goes on to say: "By the way, Governor Stitt, you have the EXACT SAME RULES in your state. If a person's legal documents list only a surname, they have no first name on the DL, as your state requires that they match. So, are you going to arrest Oklahomans first?" Here's what USCIS says about one word names: One-Word Names Some benefit requestors may only have a one-word name, or mononym. The mononym may be a given name only, or a family name (last name) only. For example, in Afghanistan, it is common to have a name that consists of a given name only: Laila [Given Name] For purposes of properly filing benefit requests, data entry in USCIS systems, and issuing secure documents such as Permanent Resident Cards or travel documents, when a benefit requestor has a single name, USCIS considers the single name as the family name. USCIS may insert No Name Given as the given name in this circumstance. https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-1-part-e-chapter-5?utm_source=chatgpt.com

It looks to me like you've been a victim of Russian disinformation.

The first link does not lead to any interview. The second one goes to one different from the one that allegedly occurred on or around apr 2, 2009. Anyway, here's a quote from that article with a translation following by Google Translate "Was die Vorwürfe betrifft, es sei nicht ausreichend gewesen, Gorbatschow hätte mit der Nato einen Vertrag „über das Verbot der Nato-Osterweiterung“ unterschreiben sollen (vor Kurzem von Wladimir Putin wiederholt), so finde ich sie – mild ausgedrückt – befremdlich." "As for the accusations that it wasn't enough for Gorbachev to have signed a treaty with NATO "prohibiting NATO's eastward expansion" (recently reiterated by Vladimir Putin), I find them – to put it mildly – strange." Here's some more: "Die Bundesrepublik hielt sich und hält sich weiterhin an sämtliche Verpflichtungen. Ein „Vertrag über die Nichterweiterung der Nato“ wäre damals nicht einmal juristisch möglich gewesen. Denn bis Juli 1991 gab es zwei Militärbündnisse – die Nato und den Warschauer Vertrag. Die Mitglieder des Warschauer Vertrags brachten diese Frage nicht zur Sprache. Es wäre schon ziemlich merkwürdig gewesen, hätte die sowjetische Führung es getan." "The Federal Republic of Germany adhered and continues to adhere to all its commitments. A "Treaty on the Non-Expansion of NATO" would not even have been legally possible at that time. Until July 1991, there were two military alliances – NATO and the Warsaw Pact. The members of the Warsaw Pact did not raise the issue. It would have been quite strange if the Soviet leadership had done so."

I went to the official NY State Dept of Motor Vehicles Website and this is a sample they offer of what a Commercial Driver's License looks like: https://dmv.ny.gov/driver-license/sample-license-documents-for-endorsements-and-restrictions Not the same format. Looks like a hoax to me.

I dont know runs www.gorby.ru but I searched for that interview on the internet couldn't find it.

Less similar than Spanish is to Italian. Less similar than Italian is to French. Ukrainian and Russian share roughly 55% to 62% lexical similarity, which is not enough to make them mutually intelligible—no more than an average English speaker could automatically comprehend Dutch. In practice, Ukrainian and Russian have vocabulary differences that can quickly confound a non-native speaker. https://www.trustedtranslations.com/blog/do-ukrainians-and-russians-speak-the-same-language?utm_source=chatgpt.com Spanish and Italian have around 82% of their vocabulary in common. This doesn't mean that the words are exactly the same between the two languages, but that they have similar roots and that they are linguistically related. To compare, Italian has 89% of its vocabulary in common with French and Spanish has 89% in common with Portuguese. https://autolingual.com/italian-vs-spanish/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Did NATO Promise Not to Enlarge? Gorbachev Says “No” It is abundantly evident that Russian President Vladimir Putin is no fan of NATO. Indeed, he displays a pronounced—almost obsessive—antipathy toward the Alliance. He claims that NATO took advantage of Russian weakness after the collapse of the Soviet Union to enlarge to its east, in violation of promises allegedly made to Moscow by Western leaders. But no such promises were made—a point now confirmed by someone who was definitely in a position to know: Mikhail Gorbachev, then president of the Soviet Union. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/

From that article: "We found that left-wing terrorism has increased since President Donald Trump’s rise to political prominence in 2016. Indeed, 2025 marks the first time in more than 30 years that left-wing attacks outnumber those from the far right." In other words, on a yearly basis, right wingers are winning by at least 30 to 1.

You have no answer for the fact that there is no defendant in a grand jury proceeding. So the Brady Rule can not apply. That's why you refuse to engage with that simple fact.

You mean like when the government stops telling businesses what business decisions that they can and cannot make? T The White House says it blocked US Steel’s decision to stop processing steel at Illinois plant https://apnews.com/article/us-steel-trump-nippon-steel-granite-city-7d9acc7f1a1b08b971b374c40574beec

What defendant?

Where in that provision was the Brady rule invoked? Or even mentioned? It wasn't because the Brady Rule doesn't apply. Your invocation of it was based on your misunderstanding. The Brady rule applies to criminal trials where the prosecution withholds significant evidence from the defense. The specifics of the evidence provided by Halligan has nothing to do with the Brady Rule because it was a grand jury proceeding. There is no defense to provide exculpatory evidence to.

Whether or not exculpatory evidence was presented, has nothing to do with the Brady Rule or Brady material. The Brady Rule only applies to criminal trials/. In order to try Comey, first he had to be indicted. So, in the the unlikely event that prosecutors managed to convict Comey and it turns out that the withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense that was significant enough to invalidate the verdict, that would be grounds for the Brady Rule to be apply. As you may not be aware, there is no defense in a grand jury proceeding. It must be that "someone else" you're referring to is me. Clearly, you haven't got a clue. How very, very unBrady of you. Brady rule The Brady rule, named after Brady v. Maryland, requires prosecutors to disclose material, exculpatory information in the government's possession to the defense. Brady material, or the evidence the prosecutor is required to disclose under this rule, includes any information favorable to the accused which may reduce a defendant's potential sentence, go against the credibility of an unfavorable witness, or otherwise allow a jury to infer against the defendant’s guilt. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/brady_rule?utm_source=chatgpt.com

You're the party who raised the issue of Brady material. Not me. Clearly it's incumbent upon you to explain why it's relevant here. But it's clear you've got no good explanation for it. That you don't understand what Brady material is.

Because the top is about the DOJ targeting Comey. Not about alleged misconduct by Democrats.