I'm still more than a little annoyed at Comey for handing Taco a "win" back in 2016, but this is some bullshit here.
this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2025
198 points (97.6% liked)
politics
25783 readers
2690 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I really dislike this meme that everything is a distraction from Epstein. Distractions are something you're supposed to ignore. This is a president engaging in politically-motivated prosecutions of his political rivals. Calling it a distraction is dangerous and unhelpful.
I'd take it a step further and say the Epstein files themselves are the distraction from all the brazen corrupt power grabbing Republicans are pulling right now. What would the release of the full, unredacted files even accomplish at this point? Sane people will feel even more justified in their hate of the admin, and the cultists will write it off as fake news. There is zero chance Congress impeaches and convicts, even if it comes out Trump was spending his time on the island literally sacrificing children to Satan.
If releasing the files wasn't likely to have an impact, they'd have been released by now.
For even some of the most diehard MAGA folks, diddling kids is a step too far.
Of course there's a likelihood that the sheer number of folks involved would mean a huge amount of current and prominent politicians would have to go and that would almost certainly amount to what could best be described as a "reset" of the current political system and, well, maybe that's the real reason they haven't been released because neither side wants that, even though it's painfully obvious that the system is broken and needs it.
If the files themselves have become the distraction, then of course they haven't been released. MAGA folks say diddling kids would be a step too far, but they won't acknowledge it, no matter how concrete the evidence. Saying they believe one thing while their actions prove another is their whole MO. Take, for example, how they say they only oppose illegal immigration while also making it harder to be here legally (and now arrest people who are here legally anyway), or how they claim to be Christians who support the sick and poor, while gutting every program designed to fill those needs.
I don't see what mechanism would be activated to get Trump removed, let alone enough other politicians that it would constitute a "reset." It'd be far better for the rest of us with functional brains to be discussing the latest constitutional violations and corruption, like how Tom Homan took a blatant $50,000 bribe and isn't being prosecuted because he has the magic R, or how the FCC is allowing anticompetitive corporate actions to go unchallenged (Intel and Nvidia's newly announced partnership, Paramount paying Trump $16 million to get their merger with Skydance approved), and on and on. These are important stories that can keep people motivated to organize, to talk to each other, and to take real action. Not repeatedly filling every comment section with the exact same words.
Another concern is that the people likely to be implicated in those files are the same ones in charge of them, so the only way they could ever come out is in a state that is either heavily redacted or outright edited to replace the names of loyal Republicans with those of political opponents, and that means spending all this time specifically calling for the files is going to backfire if it ever does happen. We can already say with confidence Trump is likely a pedophile. He was good friends with Epstein, we have creepy correspondence between the two, we have fucking photos of them together, we have so many people coming out to say they were there, they were abused. MAGAs say they wouldn't support a pedophile, but they'll never believe Their Guy could be one. The evidence already exists! These are the type of people who called COVID a hoax even as they lay dying in their hospital beds.
I dunno, it's not like Trump's connection to Epstein should be forgotten about, but calls specifically for the files in every fucking comment section aren't helping. Honestly, if you still really want to spam every comment section with it, just directly call him a pedo. It's already clear, and we don't need the files for that.
Better.
"The full extent of the charges being prepared against Comey is unclear, but the sources believe that at least one element of the indictment — if it goes forward -- will accuse him of lying to Congress during his testimony on September 30, 2020 about whether he authorized a leak of information," Dilanian tweeted.
The reporter noted that the five-year statute of limitations on that charge would lapse next Tuesday.
lol
What a disgusting joke this administration has made everything.
Don't know about the US, but in most european places the statute of limitations limits when something can start being prosecuted - i.e., if you were indicted a minute before the statute is up, and the process takes years to complete, it doesn't prevent the process from continuing.
Same here - they just have five days for this new head of the 300-person prosecutor's office who handles a lot of government cases to create an illegal false prosecution scheme against the former head of the FBI and have their slip-and-fall-lawyer director get it in front of a judge and convince them it's really important to do this in the equivalent of the next few minutes because Predisent Demented Rapist Babyhands is gonna cry.
Technically possible. Practically - less so.
I know these particular charges are probably bullshit, but I don't think there should be a statute of limitations for lying to Congress.
Five years seems to be plenty of time to fact-check someone's testimony. Anything longer than that, and most people simply won't recall their own words well enough to hold them accountable for them anymore.
Congress has cameras. If you're lying to Congress about factual things, your memory of the event shouldn't matter.
The problem is that the DOJ isn't as independent as people would like it to be, so you basically need a change in administration to hold someone to account, which could take longer than 5 years.
You can still run investigations in the meantime, though. Republicans are notorious for that. Even when they have no real power to do anything about it, they will investigate all the craziest shit that they can imagine...just to make it look like they're doing something. Then when they have more control again, they have the option to pull the trigger or not.
Democrats should definitely take something from that playbook, but there's been many cases of someone lying in front of Congress and not facing consequences. It happened in the leadup of both Iraq wars, and I don't think people should just be allowed to get away with stuff like that just because the clock ran out.
Obviously part of the problem is that Democrats don't seem to be interested in prosecuting stuff like that in the name of bipartisanship, but that's how they got where they got now.
The biggest problem with all this stuff, is trying to prove that the person in question actually "lied" versus "I genuinely believed what I said at the time" versus "Oops, I was obviously mistaken".
It's impossible to know what's going on in someone else's mind, so unless you have some kind of date-stamped confession, that clearly contradicts their testimony...you're never going to get a conviction.
By that logic, there shouldn't be a statute of limitations beyond 5 years on rape. Is that what you're saying? (I'm being very over inflammatory)
I mean, that's literally a change some states made in response to the Weinstein scandal. If it's reasonable to assume the truth isn't going to come out before the statute runs out, I'm definitely in favour of making it longer. It should probably still exist, but 5 years seems very short for serious crimes, especially considering how slow the justice system works.
They're bullshit enough that the previous AG refused to prosecute and got fired for it.
He's really doing a good job of QA testing of USA v1. We'll know what to patch in v2.
“But the sources believe that at least one element of the indictment — if it goes forward — will accuse him of lying to Congress during his testimony on September 30, 2020 about whether he authorized a leak of information,” Dilanian tweeted.
I wonder if there's evidence Kash Patel lied to congress and if he'll be charged too
Trumps first AG explicitly lied to Congress and - bupkis.
Oh boy I’m positive that this will fix the economy and cause the price of groceries, gas, and housing to drop. So much winning!
Ohhhhh yeah. A bunch of people did temporarily believe that shit.
Morans.
Oh didn't you hear? Trump said the price of gas was below $2.00/gal. You should look at the gas pump more closely next time.
I'm sure he'll bring it down even further, maybe 1200% like drug prices.
I thought Grand Jury proceedings were supposed to be secret? Why are they leaking this now?
I bet they are afraid that the Grand Jury will refuse to indict, and they are trying to build up outrage among the MAGAs when that happens
Grand juries are only needed on certain levels of charges, like a felony. Lower-level infractions do not need a grand jury indictment.
I've never understood why Trump hates Comey when he owes his presidency to the man.
💯
Trumps is a spoiled child with no impulse control, no forethought, and no empathy.
He wants everyone to obey him, right now, with no exception.
Comey must have broke one of those rules.
Because Trump is loyal to no one and never pays his debts.
Worse than a Lannister.
He resents anyone who's ever held power over him, even if they did go his way.
so much for helping trump get elected the first time
Everyone Who Supports Trump Will Be Shit On.
No Exceptions
Orange Jesus needs to conduct some good ol' struggle sessions in which people deemed insufficiently "maga" (nonsense baby-talk word meaning: properly sucking up to this demented old geezer) need to really sit and reflect - with lots of Party apparatchiks castigating them - on just why they are not sufficiently "maga".
I mean, hell, Taco has already appropriated many of the shittiest of ideas from craptacular regimes like USSR...he's got his own Lysenkoists like RFK junior...
Comey is the guy that helped get Trump in office
Comey deserves the hassle. He helped put Trump in the WH. Reap what you sow.
No, he doesn’t deserve to be brought in on trumped up charges because he had bad judgement as the FBI director.
If what he did as FBI director was illegal in some way, sure, charge him. But, we know this is just some bullshit political game the president is playing to silence his critics and it has very bad implications for the country.
If bad judgement as FBI director gets prison time, Kash Patel has an interesting future.
We don't deserve the injustice, but Comey helped bring it upon us and is reaping what he sowed.
There was a really interesting part of that story where supposedly Rudy Giuliani who was all buddy buddy with the SDNY FBI office somehow "leaked" that they were going to announce the Clinton email case would be reopened when in fact they weren't because they knew there was no reason to, and Comey decided he couldn't be upstaged by SDNY so he did it first.
True? Dunno. Plausible? yeah.
Is the office someone called "trumpland"?
Bet a Grand Jury won't let this through. Fuck Trump and his cronies. Anyone who gets selected for an indictment panel should automatically shoot it down if it's coming from these clowns.
“Mr. Comey and Mr. McCabe’s statements are irreconcilably contradictory,” Cruz wrote. “Mr. McCabe says that he told Mr. Comey of the leak and that Mr. Comey approved — effectively authorizing the leak after the fact."
This statement itself is "irreconcilably contradictory". Did he "authorize" the leak before or after it occurred? Cruz seems to be implying that he found out after, but approved. Which means he didn't know before hand, and therefore couldn't have actually authorized it.
"effectively authorizing the leak after the fact" They mean he made no effort to punish the leak.
That's a whole different set of words, that don't mean the same thing as what he's being accused of, though.
They're claiming that he authorized the leak...which means he either did or he didn't...and it would have had to have happened before the leak occurred in order for it to be true. So, "after the fact" is not how that would have to have happened.
If all they were concerned with was why he didn't punish the guy, then that is a completely different accusation than him authorizing it.