Alan Zweibel

If it's true what Zuckerberg is claiming, (and he had serious motivation to lie), the Govt didn't have to power to remove his license and stop facebook from operating. And the right wing Supreme Court itself ruled in favor of the Biden Administration against charges that it engaged in coercion. On the other hand, Carr, the head of the FCC clearly crossed the line.

You got proof of that?

I particularly enjoyed the clip showing Trump claiming credit for ending the war between "aberbaijan and albania"

Rep. Mikie Sherrill, D-N.J., the far-left Democratic nominee for governor, called Charlie Kirk a Christian nationalist who wanted to roll back the rights of women and Black people after the passage of a House resolution honoring the conservative activist. The House adopted a resolution to honor Kirk's "life and legacy" Friday, just over a week after he was shot and killed during a college campus speaking event in Utah. The measure got bipartisan support in a 310-58 vote, with both Democrats and Republicans condemning political violence after Kirk's assassination. Rep. Mikie Sherrill, D-N.J., the far-left Democratic nominee for governor, called Charlie Kirk a Christian nationalist who wanted to roll back the rights of women and Black people after the passage of a House resolution honoring the conservative activist. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/far-left-dem-says-charlie-kirk-wanted-roll-back-rights-women-black-people-after-house-tribute What makes this accusation so shocking, so ugly, and so unfair is that it happens to be true. (The headline pictured above was from the home page of fox news. Inside it reads differently.) Far-left Dem says Charlie Kirk wanted to 'roll back rights of women and Black people' after House tribute https://archive.ph/CfBBF https://www.foxnews.com/

Your comment is both irrelevant and establishes that you don't understand the situation. Laetitia James is an official of the State of New York. Not a Federal employee. So she can't be fired by Trump. And given that this article is about firing a Federal prosecutor because he doesn't believe there is enough evidence to proceed with the case, what does James' employment situation have to do with this?

"But Ms. James’s exchanges with the lender showed her having communicated clearly that she did not plan to live in the house, and there was no indication that the single document on which she said otherwise was taken into account during the transaction. Her niece, her accountant and others involved in the transaction testified before a grand jury over the summer, according to two people with knowledge of the matter." https://archive.ph/wLU5m "Pulte and Martin have argued that James committed mortgage fraud because one of the documents related to a 2023 home purchased by James falsely indicated the property would be her primary residence. However, investigators have so far determined that the document -- a limited power of attorney form used by James' niece to sign documents on her behalf when James closed on the home -- was never considered by the loan officers who approved the mortgage, sources said. Lawyers drafted the document itself for a third-party closing company based on a template that was never corrected, sources said, and every other document in James' loan file for the mortgage accurately stated that she would not reside at the home." https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-officials-pressuring-federal-prosecutors-bring-criminal-charges/story?id=125636577

This doesn't exactly look like evidence that Siebert is biased and incompetent. https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/staff-profile/meet-us-attorney I'm sure your evaluation has nothing to do with your political opinions.

Or, unlike you, he's actually seen all the evidence and has decided that it's not a case he thinks he has a good chance of winning. By the way, where are those threatened indictments of alleged Deep State perpetratos going?

I've seen lots of Trump supporters who are in dire need of Ozempic and whose faces could benefit from plastic surgery. Let's put them on trial, too,

For one thing, defense lawyers can bring up the issue of selective prosecution. Juries really don't like it when it can be shown that a prosecution is selective. Doubtless defense attorneys will bring up that fact that 3 cabinet officers in the White House have gotten 2 mortgages based on primary residence claims. "Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer entered into two primary-residence mortgages in quick succession, including for a second home near a country club in Arizona, where she’s known to vacation. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has primary-residence mortgages in New Jersey and Washington, D.C. Lee Zeldin, the Environmental Protection Agency administrator, has one primary-residence mortgage in Long Island and another in Washington, D.C., according to loan records." https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-cabinet-mortgage-fraud And it's far from clear that James did claim that the home in Virginia was her primary residence: “Director Pulte cherry-picked an Aug. 17, 2023 power of attorney (letter) that mistakenly stated the property to be Ms. James’ principal residence and at the same time absolutely ignored her very clear and all caps statement two weeks earlier to the mortgage loan broker that '(t)his property WILL NOT be my primary residence (.) It will be Shamice’s primary residence,'” Lowell wrote, referring to James' niece. https://archive.ph/hjYx2#selection-6759.0-6759.413 There's a lot more but who has the time. What seems clear is that Federal prosecutors don't like making cases that they can't be sure of winning.

Because, in your estimation, being such a horrible woman biased and incompetent" is a criminal offense?

I'm sure that the completely trusting and non-paranoid Taliban would love to have a US Airbase stationed there. Especially since the Secretary of the War Dept. sports a Crusader tattoo.

President Donald Trump is expected to fire the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia after his office was unable to find incriminating evidence of mortgage fraud against New York Attorney General Letitia James, according to sources. Federal prosecutors in Virginia had uncovered no clear evidence to prove that James had knowingly committed mortgage fraud when she purchased a home in the state in 2023, ABC News first reported earlier this week, but Trump officials pushed U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert to nevertheless bring criminal charges against her, according to sources. Administration officials have told Siebert of Trump's intention to fire him, sources familiar with the matter said. https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-poised-fire-us-attorney-resisting-effort-charge/story?id=125700904

"He would have never done what he did, except that he didn't respect the leadership of the United States," Trump said, speaking of Putin. "They just went through the Afghanistan total disaster for no reason whatsoever. We were going to leave Afghanistan, but we were going to leave it with strength and dignity. We were going to keep Bagram Air Base — one of the biggest air bases in the world. We gave it to them for nothing." https://www.npr.org/2025/09/18/g-s1-89474/trump-suggests-u-s-troops-could-return-to-afghan-base-over-china-concerns This is an outright lie. Not only did the agreement Trump forged with the Taliban specify a total withdrawal, but in his final months of office, Trump actually tried to accelerate it.

DOJ says Trump protesters could face RICO charges for yelling at him while he was ‘trying to enjoy dinner’ The No. 2 official at the Department of Justice was so aghast at the idea of anti-Trump demonstrators protesting the president while he was “trying to enjoy dinner” that they could face federal anti-racketeering charges that were designed to bust up organized crime. In recent days, the Trump administration has threatened to prosecute demonstrators and groups that support them as part of a wider campaign against left-wing opposition, raising alarms that it will crack down on dissent by infringing First Amendment rights. Asked Tuesday how, exactly, a protester could be charged under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told CNN that the law is “available to all kinds of organizations committing crimes.” https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/todd-blanche-trump-protesters-rico-b2828408.html He's only threatening to investigate them RICO violations? Why not just charge them with terrorism? That seems to be a favorite gambit of theirs.

Aldi's.

"The big wage growth experienced by low-income workers during the pandemic has petered out. Those workers are curbing their spending and in some cases are struggling to find jobs. Unemployment for Black Americans and many young people has jumped. Home prices and rents have risen sharply, making housing increasingly unaffordable." https://archive.ph/rgQFL Where are all the great jobs that were going to open up once those illegals were kicked out? Where are all those great manufacturing jobs that tariffs were going to promote?

AG Pam Bondi Says "We Can Prosecute You" for Refusing to Print Posters for Charlie Kirk Vigil But there doesn't seem to be any federal law actually authorizing such prosecutions (or civil lawsuits). https://reason.com/volokh/2025/09/16/ag-pam-bondi-says-we-can-prosecute-you-for-refusing-to-print-posters-for-charlie-kirk-vigil/ “Businesses cannot discriminate,” she told Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Monday evening. “If you wanna go in and print posters with Charlie’s pictures on them for a vigil, you have to let them do that.”“We can prosecute you for that. I have Harmeet Dhillon right now in our civil rights unit looking at that immediately, that Office Depot had done that. We’re looking it up.” https://nypost.com/2025/09/16/us-news/bondi-takes-heat-from-the-right-after-vowing-to-prosecute-after-hate-speech/?utm_campaign=nypost&utm_medium=referral

The type of individual who has a wife that shoots off her mouth?

I don't understand why citizens of the UK wouldn't be enthused to see the guy who is waging economic warfare against them. Just makes no sense at all.

Reminds me of the crack that someone is born on third base and thinks he hit a home run. Trump was raised by an immensely wealthy father. He destroyed that business and after several other failures had to use bankruptcy court to protect what was left to him by his father

OK. But he went on to make the point that they were punished for their crimes. I think that qualifies as an own goal.

I used a few AI apps (Chatgpt and Gemini) to see if they could find any eminent conservative political scholar who thinks Trump has a strong case against the NY Times. It came up zilch. There were some like Jonathan Turley and Eugene Volokh who thought his case was weak. Really couldn't find anyone of note who thought he would succeed.

You're the one who raised the issue of the Proud Boys. Not me.

The study was about domestic terrorism.