BrewGuy61

Q: How will you prove intent when Comey said he didn't associate '86' with doing harm and he took it down promptly, saying it was political speech? BLANCHE: How do you prove intent in any case? With witnesses, documents, with the defendants himself, and that's how we'll do it in this case

AOC: “People are tired of the idea of a Democratic Party’s only position being anti-Trump. We need to have our own vision. For me, that means Medicare for All, unionization rights, antitrust and breaking up monopolies, and taking on big health insurers.”

FBI Director Kash Patel explains how the criminal investigation into James Comey’s seashell post wasn’t a simple one: This has been a case that's been investigated over the past 9, 10, 11 months. These cases take time. Our investigators work methodically

This is the Wachowski brothers who wrote and directed the original 1999 film, The Matrix. Unfortunately, they took the wrong pill and became the whatever the bottom image is.

REP. MARK ALFORD: James Comey is a very intelligent man. I would assume he knows what the term '86' means. I was a waiter for some time. When you 86 the order, you kill the order. When you 8647, that is tantamount to saying 'kill the president' KEILAR: When you 86 an order, you get rid of the order, but you're not killing the food ALFORD: It's the same principle

Former FBI Director James Comey has been indicted over his now-deleted “86 47” social media post. But Comey’s speech is protected by the First Amendment. It is not a “true threat” and cannot justify federal prosecution. Longstanding Supreme Court precedent is directly on point.

The Oval Office has changed a bit since 1970.

Jon Favreau questions DNC Chair Ken Martin on why he won't release the DNC's autopsy on the 2024 election.