Davin News Server

From: AlleyCat <katt@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics,alt.politics.trump,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican
Subject: Re: Lying to the committee
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2025 20:15:08 -0500
Organization: AlleyCat Computing, Inc.


On Sun, 12 Oct 2025 20:24:46 -0400,  Governor Swill says...  

> 
> The day before the US Dept of Justice arraigned a former FBI director
> for making untruthful statements to this committee, the United States
> Attorney General sat right there in front of this committee and made
> untruthful statements.
> 
> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/_MwNFtOS8as>

Sounded like an ACCUSATION and then a denial, to me.

If what he said WAS "checkable", why didn't he bring the evidence to bear at 
that moment?

I didn't hear him say WHO she was talking about. MAYBE they're thinking of two 
different "Epstein-close-confidant"? 

Do you want a list of lies Biden's Attorney General has told?

Just a sample or two:

1.) US Attorney General Merrick Garland swears (literally: in sworn testimony) 
that US Attorney David Weiss was in fact the top dog when it came to charging 
ne'er do well First Son Hunter Biden - yet senior feds keep blowing up his 
claims: Two more IRS professionals have now contradicted him.
https://nypost.com/2023/09/22/merrick-garlands-lies-blown-up-yet-again-by-irs-
whistleblowers/


2.) In refusing to appoint a special counsel, Attorney Garland Merrick Garland 
had repeatedly assured the public and Congress that Weiss had total authority 
over his investigation.
"I'm not the deciding official." - Weiss
https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/4065497-who-is-lying-merrick-
garland-or-the-whistleblowers/

3.) Rep. Thomas Massie Rips Merrick Garland Over Jan. 6 Informants: "You May 
Have Just Perjured Yourself"
https://nypost.com/2023/09/20/rep-thomas-massie-accuses-ag-garland-of-lying-
to-congress-about-jan-6/

Senior Biden aides have said privately that Garland was the wrong choice for 
the job and they believe he bent too far backward to show he wasn't protecting 
the Democratic president.

Key Facts

The Judiciary committee voted to recommend the House hold Garland in contempt 
after the Justice Department rejected a February subpoena from the Judiciary 
and Oversight committees for recordings of Biden's interviews with Special 
Counsel Robert Hur.

The interviews were part of a classified documents probe that resulted in no 
criminal charges but ended with Hur saying Biden showed "poor memory" - a 
point many Republicans have focused on.

The DOJ rejected the subpoena, citing concerns the release of the tapes could 
deter future witnesses from cooperating, which led some House Republicans to 
threaten to hold Garland in "contempt of Congress," essentially recommending 
he be criminally prosecuted for not cooperating.

Even if the full House votes to hold Garland in contempt, actual criminal 
charges are highly unlikely: It's up to the DOJ to bring contempt of Congress 
charges, and the agency rarely chooses to move forward with presenting those 
charges to a grand jury-especially when it's a member of the administration.

Since 2008, Congress has held ten individuals in contempt of Congress, and the 
Justice Department has only indicted two: former Trump White House advisers 
Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, who were both convicted for refusing to comply 
with subpoenas from the House Jan. 6 committee in its investigation into the 
Capitol riots.

The Biden administration may have further shielded Garland when it asserted 
executive privilege to prevent the recordings from being released to Congress 
on Thursday, superseding the DOJ's authority over the recordings.

The DOJ has repeatedly concluded officials acting under the president's claim 
of executive privilege are protected from prosecution for contempt of 
Congress, including when Congress held former Attorney Generals Eric Holder 
and William Barr in contempt in 2012 and 2019, respectively.


=============================================================================

"Trump Derangement Syndrome" Is a Real Mental Condition

All you need to know about "Trump Derangement Syndrome," or TDS.

"Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) is a mental condition in which a person has 
been driven effectively insane due to their dislike of Donald Trump, to the 
point at which they will abandon all logic and reason."

Justin Raimondo, the editorial director of Antiwar.com, wrote a piece in the 
Los Angeles Times in 2016 that broke TDS down into three distinct phases or 
stages:

"In the first stage of the disease, victims lose all sense of proportion. The 
president-elect's every tweet provokes a firestorm, as if 140 characters were 
all it took to change the world."

"The mid-level stages of TDS have a profound effect on the victim's 
vocabulary: Sufferers speak a distinctive language consisting solely of 
hyperbole."

"As TDS progresses, the afflicted lose the ability to distinguish fantasy from 
reality."

The Point here is simple: TDS is, in the eyes of its adherents, the knee-jerk 
opposition from liberals to anything and everything Trump does. If Trump 
announced he was donating every dollar he's ever made, TDS sufferers would 
suggest he was up to something nefarious, according to the logic of TDS. 
There's nothing - not. one. thing. - that Trump could do or say that would be 
received positively by TDSers.

The history of Trump Derangement Syndrome actually goes back to the early 
2000s - a time when the idea of Trump as president was a punch line for late-
night comics and nothing more.

Wikipedia traces its roots to "Bush Derangement Syndrome" - a term first 
coined by the late conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer back in 2003. 
The condition, as Krauthammer defined it, was "the acute onset of paranoia in 
otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency - nay - 
the very existence of George W. Bush."