“It’s a bold statement, isn’t it?” Those words of Chicago City Treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin hardly capture the moment. Yesterday, Conyears-Ervin declared that her office would no longer invest in U.S. Treasury bonds to protest what she called the “authoritarian regime” of President Donald Trump. It is more bonkers than bold. It makes about as much sense as President Trump saying that he will not eat deep-dish pizza to protest Chicago.
My hometown of Chicago is facing an economic meltdown due to towering debt and massive spending. Mayor Ben Johnson and the unions have pushed self-destructive tax schemes and borrowing plans that would only accelerate the flight from the city and the collapse of the city’s finances.
Now, the person in charge of investing that money is declaring that politics rather than economics will guide investments.
It is the ultimate virtue signaling at the cost of others. She is given a fiduciary duty to properly maintain and protect the investments of the city, which is currently facing a rising debt crisis. She is saying that the city will not invest in what Ald. Bill Conway (34th), a former investment banker, correctly described as “by far the most liquid and secure debt instrument in the history of the world.”
Chicago has held almost a quarter of a billion dollars in Treasury bonds in the last three years due to its healthy return for citizens. To forego such investments is Kamikaze economics, destroying your own portfolio and investors as a demonstration of true faith.
The position hurts only Chicagoans. However, the loss to the citizens could still provide gains to Conyears-Ervin, who is running to replace radical Chicago congressman, Danny Davis. Her announcement is meant to tap into the rage as she declared: “Chicagoans do not want us to bankroll the regime — the authoritarian regime — of Donald Trump where he has waged a war on our city. It’s a bold statement, isn’t it? And we need it to be.”
So, a city collapsing under debt will forego investing in one of the most secure debt instruments in the world.
Let’s recap. Mayor Johnson wants to float massive bonds to avoid cutting the budget while taxing large businesses for every new person that they employ. At the same time, the city will not invest in bonds that guarantee the most secure investment of money currently in city coffers.
This is coming in a week when many are questioning the logic of the government shutdown. After losing billions and putting many families and travelers into duress, the Democrats agreed to basically the identical clean CR that was offered over a month earlier. Yet, Conyears-Ervin makes that effort seem brilliant in comparison.
It is the same logic as burning money as a way to prevent its theft.
It is not clear where the money will go. Antifa does not currently offer an investment fund option that guarantees a total political return with no capital gains. On the other hand, over $200 billion is practically hard to stuff in the mattress of Conyears-Ervin.
This could work out in the end, resulting in practically no loss due to the new investment policies. As Johnson virtually chases businesses out of the city, there will be less money to invest. Problem solved.
I understand Russia, China, Venezuela, and Cuba will jointly offer a 100 year bond especially for Chicago. Perhaps New York City, Seattle, Minneapolis and Portland will leap to take advantage of this superb investment opportunity!
Re Anonymous, Now that it is clear that Trump is a pedophile…
Democrat: An individual seemingly possessed of two cognitive distortions at once (especially as relates to sexual matters!. Is it any wonder that those who struggle with the term “woman” would struggle even further with the similar phrase, “young woman”? While failing to recognize that so-called pedophilia is an (alleged) prepuscent attraction?
And how does this relate to the distorted fiscal beliefs of a Democrat treasurer?
Prepubescent?
The Curley effect: This model, named after four-time Boston mayor James Michael Curley, describes how a politician can use inefficiently large redistributive policies to encourage opponents to emigrate. By making policies that benefit their supporters while potentially harming or disincentivizing opponents, the politician can create a more favorable electorate for themselves.
Now for some funny news on a Friday
The union staff at the DNC was told everyone must now show up and work in house. (no more working from home)
The DNC staff answer was STRIKE! lol.
Idiot
There was a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing on Wednesday when the House Oversight Democrats dropped some emails between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell that had President Donald Trump’s name on them, as well as some redactions that weren’t there before, including the name of an Epstein victim who testified that Trump had never done anything inappropriate.
So the dems lied again. Tell me I’m shocked.
WTF are you yapping about?
https://x.com/AFpost/status/1988731216594637078
Clinton Body Count: Epstein Email to Disgraced Journalist Alleges Hillary Had Sexual Affair with ‘Suicided’ Vince Foster
– Gateway Pundit
OMG.. sex with her.. I need a paper bag quick.
Oldman and others, especially Old Fish, see Nuremberg, the movie with Russel Crowe and Malek. Excellent acting and very good historical drama, even if not entirely accurate. It had movie clips from the camps that horrified me. I was somewhat disappointed about how the writers portrayed Judge Jackson. I was told it is a short run, so see it before it disappears.
Why did I include you, Old Fish? I think you are a decent guy, but the extreme left and, to a lesser extent, the extreme right are dangerous. They are moving toward a new Holocaust. That is something I know you don’t want.
So true, S. Meyer. So true. Here in Europe, specifically Italy, echoes of the 1930s are being heard. In one restaurant I saw an anti-Israel sign that was thinly veiled as a “No Jews welcome” statement. Palestinian flags hanging from balconies in the countryside. This is a whole new source of Jew-hate, but young Italians are more than happy to join the bandwagon. They have no clue about their own dark history as a venue for concentration camps (Fossoli) and extermination camp (San Saba).
Mary
Where in Italy?
I spent a year in Naples training their medical staff on Medical airlift.
Crime in that city was high.
Thank you, Mary. We need to shut down the venues for hate and recognize on the right that we have a problem with extremism as well, though not as bad as on the left. Not only can that extremism destroy, but it can distort the policies of the right, leading to a loss of power, which is a gain for the extremism on the radical left.
The Germans ran San Saba in Trieste after the King pushed Duce out. That said yes there is free Gaza crap there plus Communist party splinter groups
Anyone know why the US is funding the Chinese semiconductor lab which they’re using to try to dominate us in that field?
https://nataliegwinters.substack.com/p/exc-us-army-funded-research-at-chinas
Help me out. What was the crime? Where did the crime take place? What is the legal age of consent? Was the female victim abducted? Does the absence of an abduction mean consent?
Aninny below VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
I would very much like to hear Turley’s opinion on California’s and Texas’ redistricting.
Now that it is clear that Trump is a pedophile, MAGA is moving on to the next stage of denial, that being, it is not “REALLY” pedophilia.
Megyn Kelley on her show:
“I know somebody very close to this case…Jeffrey Epstein, in this person’s view, was not a pedophile…He was into the barely legal type, like he liked 15 year old girls…He wasn’t into like 8 year olds…There’s a difference between a 15 year old and a 5 year old.”
So Megyn Kelley, the mother of a 14 year daughter, sees no real problem with men being attracted to “barely legal” 15 year olds. After all is said and done, it’s not as if they were 8 or 5 years old.
No big deal.
“Barely legal” 15 year olds are fair game.
It’s not “REALLY” pedophilia after all.
Hey douche nozzle
SCJ Ruth Bader Ginsberg aka queen of the coat hanger wanted to lower the age of consent to 12 years old. Still haven’t seen anything yet you keep alluding to but hey, keep slinging.
So you would have no problem with your 12 year old daughter having sex with a middle aged man.
Your attempt at a defense of Trump is not really what you think it is.
You are so dimwitted that you immediately leap to his defense without really thinking through the consequences.
I have a giant landscaping rock in my back yard that is smarter than you.
Of course I believe the age of consent should be 18 years old as a minimum and I’m not leaping to Trump’s defense. That can be ascertained should any real evidence of inappropriate behavior is revealed, so far it’s a nothing burger.
I am calling out your incessant ridiculous unsubstantiated claims without any evidence as well as the hypocrisy of the Democratic establishment policies. I would putforth that your rock and you probably have long discussions about the color of the wind.
Now make like the wind and blow!
These are not even unsubstantiated claims – they are actually refuted claims.
The STRONGEST claim democrats have is Epstein saying in an email to Ghislain that Trump was alone with one of his victims.
That victim testified under oath to congress that Trump did nothing.
Even Epstein does not actually say Trump did something.
And Epstein was videotaping people without their knowledge.
What we have is refuted inuendo.
Absolutely Epsteins victims deserve justice.
But none of those victims have come forward naming Trump.
Democrats seek to use the fevered inuendo of Epsteins communications to overcome the actual testimony of the people involved.
If there was something irrefutable on Trump, the Dems would have come out with it ages ago. This is recycled garbage.
No one is defending Trump having sex with a 15yr old.p
They do not need to.
No such thing ever happened.
Epstein was a Pedo. He thinks nearly everyone else is a pedo to.
But even he does not actually say that Trump did anything.
ANON keepes posting about pedophiles DAILY. Sure looks like he/she is one too???!!! ALL they seem to think about!! Article is on CHICAGO- ANON BOZO!!
K posted above. NOT AN ANON!!
This thread is all in response to the comment at 6:13 PM, which IS ANONYMOUS. If you posted it, you forgot to sign it.
Now that it is clear that Trump is a pedophile, MAGA is moving on to the next stage of denial, that being, it is not “REALLY” pedophilia.
And then there’s GEORGE CLOONEY!
So says the dumbocrap who lost the idiotic “shutdown” and pivoted to the “nothing burger,” Epstein.
Wasn’t it Epstein’s girl who said she serviced George Clooney?
Aninny doesn’t mention George Clooney’s relationship with the Epstein Gang!
Why?
How is it clear that Trump is a Pedophile ?
pWhat actual evidence do you have ?
Innuendo in a few Epstein emails – epstein himself does not even come out and say he witnessed something.
The man who videotaped people without their consent does nothing more than hint about the person who threw him out of Mar A Lago years before.
That – and the testimony of the alleged victims that nothing ever happened.
That is what you nitwitts think is evidence ?
If there was actual evidence Biden’s DOJ would have gone after Trump.
They did chased down for stupider claims.
Takes one to know one.
LOL, pulling stuff out of your butt.
So your evidence that Trump is a pedophile is statements and emails by other of their opinions – none of which say Trump is a pedophile or did anything wrong.
The democrats most damning claim from the recent document dump is epstein saying to ghislain that Trump was alone with one of Epsteins victims for an hour or so. But as a member of congress points out – that victim testified before Congress that Trump did nothing wrong.
All of this is not merely heresay but it is heresay that engages in speculation.
Bill Clinton is a Pedo.
Trump is one of the few people who had any relationship with Epstein at all who avoided the seedier side of Epstein and who ultimately ended the relationship – and that was more than 20 years ago.
If there was anything beyond inuendo – Biden would have gone after Trump 4 years ago.
Judge hears challenge to James Comey, Letitia James indictments
Trump foes have challenged appointment of Trump ally Lindsey Halligan as interim US attorney
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A federal judge said at a hearing Thursday she would rule before Thanksgiving on whether to dismiss the high-profile criminal indictments against former FBI Director James B. Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
Judge Cameron McGowan Currie gave no overt signs about how that ruling might come down, as attorneys grappled at the hearing over the wording of an 18-year-old statute that governs the attorney general’s ability to appoint interim U.S. attorneys.
By: Ryan Tarinelli ~ November 13, 2025
https://rollcall.com/2025/11/13/judge-hears-challenge-to-james-comey-letitia-james-indictments/
Ref: the wording of an 18-year-old statute
By: Ryan Tarinelli ~ November 12, 2025
https://rollcall.com/2025/11/12/high-profile-cases-to-test-wording-of-us-attorney-law-from-2007/
Comey bombshell: Grand jury record section MISSING — Live from Federal Court
“… Judge Currie revealed that there’s a more than two-hour gap in Comey’s grand jury record. There was no court reporter present between 4:28 p.m. Eastern Time until the return of the indictment at around 6:47 p.m. ET.
Mind the gap
That means there is no record of what happened in those nearly two-and-half hours when a razor-thin majority of grand jurors decided to return a two-count indictment—and rejected what would have become the top charge.
As a legal matter, that could doom the government’s case against Comey entirely. …”
By: Adam Klasfeld ~ Nov 13, 2025
https://www.allrisenews.com/p/comey-bombshell-grand-jury-record
WTF, why was the court reporter gone for 2.5 hours? That’s just wacky.
I read that originally the DOJ had sought to bring three indictments that the Grand Jury were to consider, but drop one. The one that was dropped directly implicated Hillary Clinton’s involvement. (Speculation: which may have led to the absence of the Court Reporter being there, as discussions pertained to Clinton – That said it could be that the Court Reporter knowingly did not want to be in the room or was told not to be in the room)
Re: Clinton was designated PERSON 1, and Daniel Richman as PERSON 3
https://clearinghouse.net/case/47005/
Ref:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/comey-charge-involves-role-sharing-info-hillary-clinton/story?id=125977399
Looking back and re-reading a AP report from September 24, 2025, and reflecting on the closing paragraph of the piece:
“… Prosecutors in the first Trump Justice Department declined to prosecute Comey following an inspector general review into his handling of memos documenting his conversations with Trump in the weeks before he was fired. He also was not charged by a special counsel, John Durham, who scrutinized the FBI’s handling of the Trump-Russia investigation and was conducting his inquiry at the time Comey gave his testimony.”
In light of the newly discovered Burn Bag evidence, I suspect that new Charges will be brought against Comey and subsequently extend into John Durham and Michael Horowitz handling of their investigations.
Justice Department to try to charge ex-FBI Director James Comey, AP sources say
By: ERIC TUCKER and ALANNA DURKIN RICHER ~ September 24, 2025
https://apnews.com/article/trump-fbi-james-comey-indictment-bondi-doj-cf18d2b6d411cd323d9a501c49f5b8a4
–
The Inspector General (circa August 2019) Michael E. Horowitz in charge of:
Review on FBI and DOJ actions in the 2016 election
[Link] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_E._Horowitz#Review_on_FBI_and_DOJ_actions_in_the_2016_election
[Official] Report of Investigation of Former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James
Comey’s Disclosure of Sensitive Investigative Information and Handling of Certain Memoranda
[Archive Link – PDF] web.archive.org/web/20221128094652/https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2019/o1902.pdf
Review on 4 FISA Applications and the Crossfire Hurricane investigation
[Link] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_E._Horowitz#Review_on_4_FISA_Applications_and_the_Crossfire_Hurricane_investigation
Ref:
Watchdog: Comey violated FBI policies in handling of memos
By ERIC TUCKER ~ August 30, 2019
https://apnews.com/article/ee2870cb0c9148e08161d851b26092e9
I’m guessing that Michael Horowitz (Frm. Inspector General) is biting his nails over his investigation of Comey’s Disclosure of Sensitive Investigative Information and Handling of Certain Memoranda (As new evidence was found in a Burn Bag). And Horowitz’s discoveries into the Crossfire Hurricane investigation in regard to Merrick Garland’s and Jack Smiths activities (as email discoveries come to the light of day).
As an Inspector General, Michael Horowitz appears to have been ‘blind in one eye and can’t see out of the other’ in light of these recent revelations. Which can lead to new and broader investigation.
Indeed, it’s time to bring Michael E. Horowitz in for a cup of tea and a bit of a chat.
Do not pi$$ on Horowitz too much. He did a pretty good job given the limits of his powers.
IG’s can only question people currently in the government.
He did an excellent job considering.
The intention of having Frm. Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz and Special Counsel John Durham come in for a Cup-of-Tea, is not to put them under the gun, but to reflect upon the recent Evidence discovered in the Burn Bags and Email Transmission, in regards to their Investigations:
‘Report of Investigation of Former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James
Comey’s Disclosure of Sensitive Investigative Information and Handling of Certain Memoranda’
and ‘Review on 4 FISA Applications and the Crossfire Hurricane investigation’
In addition to recent discoveries into Operation Arctic Frost, particularly that of Merrick Garland and Special Counsel Jack Smith.
In obvious light of the new evidence, They were deceived (lied to) by James Comey and Others. A sworn Affidavit attesting to; How, When, and as to What the Inspector General and Special Counsel were deceived by Comey and Others would be the extent of the request.
This clears them (Horowitz & Durham) of negligent duty and makes the record of this period of time a bit more transparent.
Can’t speak for Horowitz, but I think John Durham is chomping at the bit to swear an Affidavit.
Especially after They sic’d the Media Dogs on him. The Press is as much guilty of a cover-up as Comey is.
Regardless (sans) of Horowitz & Durham sworn Affidavit at this time, the Burn Bag and Email evidence can be time-collated to show that Comey and Others lied to the Inspector General and Special Investigator (Horowitz & Durham et.al.). Comey and Others (i.e. Garland, Brennen, McCabe, … ) and lied to cover-up the operations, and it is plain obvious why they needed to lie (because the Operations were orchestrated in concert to overthrow an Election and defeat a Candidate).
The timing mentions suggests this was while the GJ was deliberating.
court reporters are present for testimony.
The GJ’s deliberations are never on the record.
OMFK – what also came out today was that Eric Siebert the attorney who refused to bring charges appears to have been deliberately trying to run out the clock. He purportedly is friends with one of Comey’s sons.
He never should have been on the case.
Of course, judges, justices, and the American judicial system are IMPARTIAL!
The guilty go free on a liberal technicality!
Why not?
ATS – why should anyone beleive you ?
I have no idea whether any ofyour claim is true.
That said – you claim there was no court reporter for two hours before the GJ indicted.
Of course not – GJ deliberations are secret.
The court reporter is present for testimony – not deliberations.
Was there any testimoney
“A person appointed as United States attorney under this section may serve until” the “expiration of 120 days after appointment by the Attorney General under this section.” 28 U.S.C. § 546(c)(2)”
Attorney Halligan is “a person appointed” and so, on its face, the law seems to indicate she may serve 120 days. I suppose one could argue that “A person” means “all people together” but I believe the defense has an uphill battle to convince the court to adopt that meaning. They are apparently relying on the fact it says “a person” instead of “the person.” That’s not an unreasonable position to take as defense counsel, but it seems like a kind of strained reading of the text.
P.S. I’m not sure why you bonded “18 year old statute” since the age of the statute has no relevance.
“P.S. I’m not sure why you bonded “18 year old statute” since the age of the statute has no relevance.”
“18 year old statute” was a hyperlink inside the original story – it was made separately for FYI purposes into the ‘statute’.
The question isn’t who is “a person appointed”, it’s whether more than one appointment may be made. The most straightforward reading of the statute is that the AG gets one chance to make an appointment, and if that person’s 120 days expire without a confirmation then the court makes the next appointment. It doesn’t say the AG gets a second (and potentially a 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc) chance to appoint someone. If it meant that then why provide for the court to make appointments at all?
That’s one possible reading, but not the only logical one. The government has a colorable argument on this.
It is not even the correct reading gramatically,
No Milhouse the most straight forward reading is that the AG can make multiple successive apointments – and historically that has occured.
The “18yr old statute” thing is no big deal. The revision 18 yrs ago was minor and reverted changes made during the clinton era that are not relevant in this case and not consequential. ‘
The law in very nearly its current form has been in place for many decades, and many AG’s have made successive appointments.
No the statute does not say the court gets the next shot, nor does it say that the AG can not make multiple appointments.
Your not very good at ordinary english.
The rule in interpreting these things is that the statute must say clearly what it means
If it says a person can only serve for 120 days without being confirmed – that is what it means.
There is no language limiting the AG from further 120day apointments.
The 120 day limit is about the PERSON not the AG.
As noted- the current circumstance has occured many times before over decades.
Andrew McCarthy – whose is not a Trump supporter – agrees with you that Haligan will likely be tossed.
Which I disagree with.
What you claim is straightforward is NOT the natural reading of the law.
But he also said this is much ado about nothing.
McCarthy says that even if Haligan is tossed and the indictiment throw out,
DOJ will get 6 months to re-indict before the Statute of limitations becomes a factor again.
McCarthy also noted that we are getting more informaton on why Eric Seibert refused to seek an indictment.
He is freinds with one of James Comey’s son’s.
While Siebert’s is entitled to an opinion that the evidence is not sufficient to indict.
He does not have the final say. Constitutionally Trump does.
It is not common for DOJ to reject the opinion of attorney’s
but there is no law or regulation or rule that specifies that the opinion of one attorney controls.
Especially where that attorney should have removed themselves from the case.
As long as various individuals continue to be appointed as “a person,” the expiration point will never be arrived at; each person appointed is provided 120 days.
The expiration will arrive – every 120 days, after which that person must be confirmed by the senate, removed or latterally moved to a different position.
The 120 days applies to the specific person – not the position. The position is not required to stay vacant after 120 days.
OK – are the at this point mythical ‘classical liberals’ ready to admit they have a big, big problem now, or not? No sane person is going to support this, and the numbers always point to the ‘right’, but a whole lot of us are not included in that, and we think this is sh*t. I and others repeat ourselves: there. Is. No. American. Democratic. Party. It is done, *poof*. Wake the **** up.
Literally everything hangs in the balance. All of those bleeding hearts that wanted to send food to the starving kids in the third world – that is about to be YOUR kids, if we do not change course, and seriously – today, right now. Even if you are rich, you can’t buy what is no longer available to buy.
Wake up. What Trump is doing would have absolutely been the *DEM* agenda 20 years ago. You have been asleep for far, far too long.
James,
Unfortunately, it appears that the ‘classical liberals’ as you say, are no longer in charge of the Democrat party. We thought there was only a small, but loud minority of the progressive/regressive DSA. After recent elections, the DSA is taking more and more command of the Democrat party. What we are seeing is the same thing that happened in the 1930s Germany.
Classical liberals are all Republicans, not Democrats.
Alan Dershowitz
Jonathan Turley
Jonathan Haidt
and one from the past: Daniel Patrick Moynahan
These are NOT classical liberals – they are liberals.
Classical liberals would be Ronald Coase, Milton Freidmen, Thomas Sowell,
or in the 19th century – Ricardo, Say, Bastiat, Smith. and a plethora of others.
Classicial liberalism is the orthodox economic alternative to Keynes, or neo-keynes.
It is similar but not identical to the heterodox economics of the Austrians – Mises, Hayek.
John, this is really a matter of definition, because classical liberalism isn’t the rigid box you make it out to be. You can break the term into different schools, and that’s where the differences show up. Milton Friedman is an example of an economic classical liberal, while Dershowitz falls into the civil-liberties side of classical liberalism.
Hayek said that limiting power and protecting individual liberty is at the heart of classical liberalism. On that point, Dershowitz fits the tradition, even if he isn’t walking Friedman’s exact path.
Though my preference is the more minimalist style of Friedman, I recognize the broader concept.
No they are libertarians.
Classical liberal is a label typically used to describe the economists and economic theories that are the foundation of libertarianism.
James PLEASE do not use the term liberal to label the left or even democrats.
The democratic party today is not liberal in ANY sense of the word and the left is progressive and illiberal.
Democrats STOLE the term “liberal” from what we call libertarians today – in the 30’s when their prefered term “progressive” had started to smell so bad no one wanted to be a progressive.
Regardless the term liberal as it has been used for 50 years applies to people like Derschowitz or Turley, or maybe Barri Weis or Glenn Greewald.
It does not apply to democrats or the left today.
But you make things worse still when you use the term “classical liberal”
Classical Liberal is NOT the same as liberal and has not been ever.
Classical liberal is the label used over the past 50 years for 19th century liberals.
I post under the pseudonym jbsay – that is Jean Batiste Say – the “classical liberal” economist who formulated the laws of supply and demand. I have been posting under that name for almost 20 years.
Milton Friedman, Ronald Coase, Thomas Sowell are Classical Liberals. – these are nothing like any democrat today and nothing like the liberals of the past 50+ years.
I am afraid to ask them how stupid a person can get, because they might take it as a personal challenge.
Who exactly is in Chicago?
Clearly it is a “discordant intermixture” that has had a momentous and egregious “injurious tendency.”
That “discordant intermixture” must never have been admitted under the Naturalization Act of 1802 and must now be culled according to that same law, which was never abrogated.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities. In the composition of society, the harmony of the ingredients is all-important, and whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency.”
– Alexander Hamilton, The Examination Number VIII, [12 January 1802]
_____________________________________________________________________________
Naturalization Act of 1802
United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” March 26, 1790
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof….
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Culling
AI Overview
An entity should be culled when its continued presence causes a negative impact, such as a decline in quality, poor performance, or the spread of disease. For produce, culling should occur to remove damaged or substandard items before they degrade the whole batch. For livestock or wildlife, culling is necessary to manage overpopulation due to resource scarcity, prevent the spread of disease, or remove animals with poor genetics or health. In computer graphics, culling is performed to remove objects that are not visible to the camera to improve performance.
Chicago is still being run by Gangsters. The current crop of bosses, underbosses, caporegimes, and soldiers: have raided the public coffers beyond empty. Chicago’s credit rating rests just above Junk, Moody’s Baa3, S&P BBB- with negative outlook, Finch A-1 negative, Kroll A- also negative.
Illinois isn’t much better, in July Finch wrote a commentary on Illinois $1.7B Go Bonds, and under the title RATING SENSITIVITIES “-Imprudent budget management that builds in significant new recurring spending or revenue reductions without offsetting actions, threatening progress toward structural balance.”
Mr. Ponzi would award a Tin Star to the Gangsters.
If anyone wishes they can go to Chicago.gov for their Financial report 12/31/2024.
@GW
This is a warning about a larger issue IMO; GEB said below that these people are moving out of IL in droves to Indiana; Westfield there has seen exponential population growth that would make one’s head spin.
It’s something to pay attention to – the people fleeing these places have to go somewhere, and in great numbers – do we honestly believe they have left their politics behind? It is one reason i actually do NOT oppose redistricting, because all of the boosheet and baggage is coming right along with them. Do not kid yourselves about this, and it is only going to be more common going forward. Even GEB seems to be mildly unaware of the implications, even though it is unfolding for him in real time, and that kind of reticence is precisely the thing that is going to end us.
Expect a great deal more of this ‘migration’ within the continental US going forward, and if you value what you have, you had better be prepared to defend it, hopefully at the polls.
James
In the West where I live, names may be changed to: Azfornia, Nvfornia in the near future, bringing in Ninnies galore with unknown political genes. Reminds me of yesteryear when I drilled a deep well in Oklahoma 11+thousand ft looking for a gas bonanza only to find a trickle and a major hit on the bottom line, I kept saying there gas there, like the leftists of America thinking there’s more money the deeper you go into debt.
The Democrats will eventually bankrupt every state and local venue which they control if they have not already done so. Any decent hard working people should get out of any area controlled by the Democrats, Chicago, NYC, California, etc., as quickly as they can. For lefties such as Melissa Conyears-Ervin, nihilist left wing ideology demands that they destroy America and they are eager to pursue that goal. They will continue to wreck that portion of the country which they control, until they are defeated or nothing is left but burned out hulks and rubble.
“The position hurts only Chicagoans.” Nope. As usual, Chicago will suck funds from the rest of Illinois. Chicago is a giant burn pit that our ridiculously gerrymandered government throws our money into.
Well Illinois voted for Pritzker too so they will get what they voted for…good and hard.
Chicago and suburbs voted in Pritzker. Except for a few University cities, the rest of the state is red.
That is true throughout the country – outside the cities, university towns and SOME suburbs the rest of the country is deep red. Even in very blue states.
More pain for the libs
NYT
After Trump Split, Epstein Said He Could ‘Take Him Down’
Jeffrey Epstein cast himself as a Trump insider and wanted to leverage potentially damaging information about the president and his business dealings, according to emails with associates.
Yep, it’s a nothing burger. They’re rehashing emails from a disgraced never-Trumper and a convicted con man and pedophile.
If that kind of evidence ever actually existed, Biden would have used it. They got nothing and they’re desperate.
No Chit Diogenes
If Epstein had anything on Trump it would be in video or recordings format. This is the Democrats smear machine once again trying to cast their own shadow onto Trump.
The theory, which I subscribe to, is that the Democrats needed a story (any story, however ridiculous) to take the failed shutdown out of rotation. The media always carries water for these scoundrels.
Diogenes,
Well said and I agree with the theory. Watching the aftermath of the vote to re-open the government, there are those within the Democrat party calling for those who voted with the Republicans, for them to be challenged in primaries. In short, vote out those who voted for the country and not the party.
Emails are gossip. Why aren’t they private property?
In this instance democrats in congress supeonad the epstein estate.
I am fine with that.
But GJ material can not be made public.
Honestly nor can DOJ investigations of people they chose not to prosecute.
But Congress can conduct its own public investigations they can supeona the same documents and call the saem witnesses.
Ditto
The redacted victim was Virginia Giuffre, who said she never saw Trump, and did not accuse him of any wrongdoing. Democrats blacked out her name to prevent people from realizing that the salacious story directly contracted Giuffre’s own statements.
Democrats tried to rewrite the testimony of a suicide, trafficked victim.
It has now come out that the redacted Epstein victim referred to in the email was none other than Virginia Giuffre, who stated under oath that she never saw Donald Trump, and never accused him of wrongdoing.
Democrats know who this was when they pushed that email hoax. They tried to change the story of a suicide victim of Epstein. Truly depraved behavior.
I don’t think Democrats care that the stories they spread are false. The purpose is to spread disinformation about Trump, discredit him, undermine his presidency, and gin up violent hatred against Trump and conservatives.
Often, people who despise Trump give debunked hoaxes as the reason. Once the damage is done, it’s difficult to restore anyone’s reputation.
It is not even evidence.
it is a combination of hearsay and inuendo.
Everything testable in this stuff has been examined and been denied by all involved.
Old pedo man dustoff is here
The lead pollster of the conservative Rasmussen organization predicted that Republicans would continue to underperform throughout the midterm elections because President Donald Trump failed to deliver on his campaign promises.
During a Thursday interview with Steve Bannon, pollster Mark Mitchell said, “Republicans are going to lose because they don’t understand politics.”
“People under 50 don’t really care about conservatism,” he explained. “The problem is that all these values have basically failed America.”
“The numbers are just absolutely abysmal. And you have the Republican Party that’s just like, well, you know, they’ll be fine just voting for us because nobody likes socialism. Well, we’re getting to the point where people are considering socialism.”
“We have daily tracking on Trump,” he noted. “So what happened is about three weeks into this [government shutdown] when Donald Trump’s flying around the world talking to dignitaries and we’re building the east wing of the White House and now food stamps are going to get defunded and we’re walking into an election, all of a sudden his numbers started tanking.”
“And it was very clear that in my opinion, the Republicans had no plan, and everybody went on the internet and everyone was ripping their faces off.”
Mitchell argued that Democratic wins in recent elections reflected the new political reality.
“We got 355 days to an election and the Republicans are going to lose this one,” he added. “They are just going to lose it. It looked like their plan was a gerrymandering war of attrition that they’re now appearing to lose.”
https://rumble.com/v71nfnu-everythings-falling-apart-gop-pollster-panics-after-trump-started-tanking.html
WOW one person opinion does not make a majority
Dustoff
He is the lead pollster for the admittedly hard right Rasmussen, the favorite pollster of you MAGA morons.
It is not HIS opinion.
It is not one man’s opinion
It is the opinion of the people he is polling.
What a moron !!!!
Not worried. I guess you are. His poll numbers have bounced around, Nothing like Bidens.
The econ is doing fine, jobs are steady even with the AI issues. Along with all these lib judges stopping everything
is it true you diddled Vietnamese babies?
The issue is not about opinions.
If the 2026 midterms were held today – Republicans would lose the house.
But they are not today.
They are in a year.
They are after the things that have already been started get a chance to take effect.
If that effect is good – which is likely – it is democrats in trouble.
2026 is not predictable right now – in early 2020 – Trump had a 10pt lead on all democrats,
And then Covid struck.
If there is no huge surprises between now and next november, if the seeds that have already been planted grow and bear fruit – democrats are in trouble.
That is likely. Democrats are in disarray. Their party is fractured. The infighting is getting worse. The far left faction controls the party. but the cracks are getting larger and larger.
Republicans would likely lose the house if the election was today.
But it is not.
I just met with a financial planner, and found out what I should have known – my taxes – and everyone over 65 are going to be much lower this april. Most people do not know that yet.
But seniors voting in Novembr 2026 will be voting after April 2026 an they will know.
There are many other things that have been started but need time for their impact to grow.
And as always “all skill is in vain if an angel pees in the barrel of your gun”.
There is still lots of time for some unpredictable disaster.
But barring Deus et Machina – it is Democrats that are most likely to be in trouble in 2026.
diddle any kiddies lately?
Start a blog. Call it the Idiot Blog. We’ll all go there. Get the —- outta here. See you at your Idiot Blog. Buh, bye.
BAN FOR LIFE!
This is how democrats win: through the emotional havoc of mass-hypnosis: “predictive” innuendo, rumors, slanders, bent-statistics, fake news and the resulting collective hysteria.
democrat wins in “recent elections” reflect their infection with the above mentioned effects of that collective hysteria, also called mass-formation. We’re not dealing with politics anymore; w’ere dealing with a mass of infected blackguards. That is truly the real PANDEMIC.
This particular, hopeful but deluded, utterly-infected Anon falls squarely into that geographic range of cliquey mental-emotional-social illness.
All I am doing is reporting the stated opinion of the lead pollster for Rasmussen.
Nothing in my comment was my OPINION.
Everything I posted was simply the words of Mark Mitchell, transcribed verbatim from Steve Bannon’s show.
The comment is not my words , opinion, or prediction.
Your comment is severely delusional gobbledegook.
If Trump fails to deliver on significant portions of his promises republicans will lose in 2026 – and they should.
But things that have already been done will start to have an impact in 2026.
The economy is better than it was when Trump took office and better than it was almost anytime during Biden.
But it still leaves alot to be desired.
If it does not improve – Republicans are toast.
But the early signs of improvement are already appearing with more to come.
Trump promised lost of things would happen on day one – they did not.
But that does not mean they will not happen.
Without the shutown we would have seen 3% growth in 4Q 2025 after inflation.
If we see 3% or more through 2026 which is likely – Democrats are in deep schiff.
If we only see 2% – Republicans will lose the midterms.
Pity for Chicago. Pity for New York State and City. Pity for Detroit. Pity for Minneapolis. Pity for San Francisco and for Los Angeles. Pity for any city or state controlled by the Democratic Party. They are all on the way to ruin. The Democratic Party means destruction, if not death.
Democrats are experts at creating problems that eventually lead to potential catastrophes that they then position themselves as the only saviors to solve. Case in point is the unaffordable Affordable Care Act and their position that rising and unaffordable ObamaCare premiums could only be prevented with Democrat-supported government largess, money that the federal government does not have and will need to borrow. Most of the public will never understand that the Democrats were really holding out for continued federal money being channeled as premiums to health insurance companies that then would in turn funnel money back to Democrat candidates in order to keep this taxpayer-fleecing scam going. Look at what is going on in Chicago. Why anyone would vote for a Democrat to manage their taxpayer dollars is beyond me. Agreed that some Republicans are not far behind them.