WA Delegate (non-executive): The Taco Party Nation of NewTexas (elected )

Founder: The Taco Party Nation of NewTexas

Last WA Update:

Board Poll Activity History Admin Rank

Most Nations: 126th Most World Assembly Endorsements: 154th Most Influential: 173rd+15
Most Valuable International Artwork: 871st Largest Black Market: 904th Highest Economic Output: 1,058th Highest Disposable Incomes: 1,568th Most Devout: 1,691st Highest Wealthy Incomes: 1,730th Most Corrupt Governments: 2,043rd Most Armed: 2,116th Most Cultured: 2,176th Highest Unexpected Death Rate: 2,366th Most Avoided: 2,504th Fattest Citizens: 2,516th Highest Average Incomes: 2,552nd Largest Manufacturing Sector: 2,605th Most Advanced Defense Forces: 2,613th
World Factbook Entry

Howdy, Welcome y Bienvenidos to Texas - a proud member of the Non-Crappy Region Network™!

Texas, founded in 2002, is a large friendly region where freedom is considered one of its greatest resources. Texas is a proud region and home to many diverse nations. We are always welcoming new nations. Texas also has a Government, Constitution, Elections and many inter-regional Sporting Events. Come on down!


Submit diplomacy requests to the Secretary of State. No one-nation regions, no new regions, and no raiders or friends of raiders.
Link Texas Forum
Link Texas Map
Link Texas Newsletters
Link NSDossier Tools



  1. 16

    The Texas Constitution

    BulletinPolicy by NewTexas . 1,594 reads.

  2. 5

    The Texas Defense Forces FAQ

    BulletinPolicy by NewTexas . 353 reads.

  3. 4

    The Texas Ambassador Corps FAQ

    BulletinPolicy by NewTexas . 135 reads.

Embassies: Wysteria, The Heartland, 10000 Islands, Canada, Antarctic Oasis, North Pacific, The Black Market, Kittens Sanctuary, Global Right Alliance, Spiritus, Renegade Islands Alliance, Nasicournia, The Exodus, Gay, Forest, Philosophy 115, and 11 others.the Rejected Realms, Valhalla, belgium, International Democratic Union, New Warsaw Pact, Liberty Alliance, India, Sonindia, Philippines, Force, and Philosophers.

Tags: Commended, Defender, Enormous, Featured, Map, National Sovereigntist, Offsite Forums, Regional Government, and World Assembly.

Regional Power: Very High

Texas contains 166 nations, the 126th most in the world.

Today's World Census Report

The Largest Retail Industry in Texas

The World Census estimated levels of employee ennui to determine which nations have the largest retail industries.

As a region, Texas is ranked 2,711th in the world for Largest Retail Industry.

NationWA CategoryMotto
1.The Barnes-Free Conglomerate of Ewing Oil CoCompulsory Consumerist State“In J.R. We Trust”
2.The Ethereal Spaceship of LtlaliensInoffensive Centrist Democracy“We Will Crush All Who Stand Against Us”
3.The Republic of Polish NomadsAnarchy“Where ever you are, that's where you're at.”
4.The Miraculous Miracle of MiracliaCorporate Police State“We bribed the wrong WA officials... Again!”
5.The Taco Party Nation of NewTexasCivil Rights Lovefest“Taco Party Time!”
6.The Borderlands of Outer TexiaAnarchy“By The People For The People”
7.The Empire of The Promethean FistsCompulsory Consumerist State“Flesh and Iron”
8.The Holy Empire of DogbreathistanCapitalist Paradise“Nation created for the TNP purge 3MAR2010”
9.The Colony of Western KodiaksCapitalizt“All picnic baskets belong to us.”
10.The Weed Whites and Wine of I 14Iron Fist Consumerists“Mood: Pensive”
1234. . .1617»

Regional Poll • Tug of War

The Armed Queendom of Talitha Macer wrote:You're on the Team that's tugging towards the ...

Voting opened 1 day 6 hours ago and will close . Open to residents. You cannot vote as you are not logged in.

Recent polls: “Where were you born?”“Do you live where you were born?”

Regional Happenings

More...

Texas Regional Message Board

Let's take a look at recent history...

Hillary released highly classified email into the wild through the illegal use of a private and unsecured email server in flagrant violation of 18 USC 793-Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, not to mention a half dozen record keeping requirements. Once it became clear someone was going to subpoena that server, she had it professionally wiped, a clear violation of civil and criminal law.

Hillary and the DNC created a fake dossier. They used government connections to give that fake dossier to the FBI. The FBI figures out that it is fake almost immediately. But the FBI still leaks it out into the wild as real. There were FBI agents and Justice Department attorneys conversing in text messages about interfering in the 2016 presidential election. Two of those people talked about an "insurance policy."

Hunter Biden's laptop detailed verifiable corruption of the US VIce President's office with Hunter acting as bag man. We are talking under the table deals with Russia, The Ukraine, and China. Let us not overlook the photographic and textual evidence of interstate transportation of illegal drugs and conspiracy to transport those drugs. Then there is one of IRS's all time favorites: Income without a clear source.

Were there any FBI raids in the wake of any of that? No.

Whose home just got raided? President Trump's home.

Who have the FBI been targeting? People who worked for President Trump.

If you don't think there are two sets of standards for prosecution in the United States, you are not paying attention.

The AMC Terminal here in Norfolk is an interesting conundrum. Air Mobility Command, AMC, is one of the Major Commands of the US Air Force. However, this particular terminal is situated on a Navy Base. It's run and primarily staffed by Civilians with a handful of Navy augmentees. Most of the sailors working at the terminal are there because they're on some sort of profile because of injuries or pregnancy.

While I guess it's technically a joint asset, it sounds like neither branch fully supports it. You would think the Navy in particular would be more keen to support the operation as it benefits them more. Otherwise they'd likely have to send people to Dover, Delaware or McGuire, New Jersey for the next closest Air Terminal.

Trecdom2 wrote:The AMC Terminal here in Norfolk is an interesting conundrum. Air Mobility Command, AMC, is one of the Major Commands of the US Air Force. However, this particular terminal is situated on a Navy Base. It's run and primarily staffed by Civilians with a handful of Navy augmentees. Most of the sailors working at the terminal are there because they're on some sort of profile because of injuries or pregnancy.

While I guess it's technically a joint asset, it sounds like neither branch fully supports it. You would think the Navy in particular would be more keen to support the operation as it benefits them more. Otherwise they'd likely have to send people to Dover, Delaware or McGuire, New Jersey for the next closest Air Terminal.

for a second I thought you were talking about the movie theater chain AMC, they or even Regal would probably be a better choice then what yall have currently.

Trecdom2 wrote:Most of the sailors working at the terminal are there because they're on some sort of profile because of injuries or pregnancy.

The latter was rarely a problem when I was in the Navy.

Hey, what's the best place to live in Texas?

Issues Test Bed wrote:Let's take a look at recent history...

Hillary released highly classified email into the wild through the illegal use of a private and unsecured email server in flagrant violation of 18 USC 793-Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, not to mention a half dozen record keeping requirements. Once it became clear someone was going to subpoena that server, she had it professionally wiped, a clear violation of civil and criminal law.

Hillary and the DNC created a fake dossier. They used government connections to give that fake dossier to the FBI. The FBI figures out that it is fake almost immediately. But the FBI still leaks it out into the wild as real. There were FBI agents and Justice Department attorneys conversing in text messages about interfering in the 2016 presidential election. Two of those people talked about an "insurance policy."

Hunter Biden's laptop detailed verifiable corruption of the US VIce President's office with Hunter acting as bag man. We are talking under the table deals with Russia, The Ukraine, and China. Let us not overlook the photographic and textual evidence of interstate transportation of illegal drugs and conspiracy to transport those drugs. Then there is one of IRS's all time favorites: Income without a clear source.

Were there any FBI raids in the wake of any of that? No.

Whose home just got raided? President Trump's home.

Who have the FBI been targeting? People who worked for President Trump.

If you don't think there are two sets of standards for prosecution in the United States, you are not paying attention.

Let's talk about the FBI for a minute. The FBI director back in 2016 was James Comey, right? Historically speaking he was a Republican who worked with Bush's administration and was the deputy AG of Bush's cabinet. He's a Republican for all intents and purposes. So we must ask the question: If he is a Republican, and what you've stated is true, then wouldn't he have done more to prosecute Clinton? Well, maybe he's a never-Trumper who turned independent because of Trump, like Evan McMullin. Right? I don't think that explains things either. A friend of mine interned for the FBI around that time period (and I've had the opportunity to speak to him about his experience). The FBI is a workplace, so of course they discussed politics. From my friend's experience, Comey and the other people in the FBI were generally supportive of Trump because they felt they were treated badly by Hillary Clinton in the 90's. I would postulate, therefore, that if the FBI influenced the election that they actually did so in Trump's favor by actively drawing attention to the reopening of the email investigation two weeks before the election. Obviously, that was for a valid reason (new evidence from an unrelated investigation into Anthony Weiner) but one could argue, through this logic, not necessarily that Comey was biased- but that Comey was instrumental to Trump's win in 2016.

"Well", you might think "maybe there was undue interference. The Attorney General was a Democrat, maybe they stopped Comey from looking further." Probably not true either. During a 2017 probe by the GOP Congress (and the Senate judiciary committee) Comey said that Loretta Lynch, the AG then, instructed him to call it a "matter" instead of an "investigation". Comey testified under oath that this and a meeting between Loretta Lynch and the Clinton's made him decide to make decisions about the investigation independently and away from Lynch's guidance and to just make his investigation decisions public. Mind you, Comey was under oath for this. And congress was controlled by Republicans. If Comey was lying about that I imagine he would've been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, given Trump's dislike for him. As for Loretta Lynch herself, she was also investigated by this committee and by the Inspector General, Michael Horowitz. Horowitz is an Obama appointee, so take what you will from that, but his investigation essentially found that Comey broke FBI protocal but wasn't biased, and that Loretta Lynch's meeting was "bad for public perception" but not biased either.

Let's look at Trump's perspective here. Trump dismissed Comey specifically because he wanted Clinton's emails looked at again and Comey refused. He put Christopher Wray in his place (who is still FBI director. Yep, a Trump appointee raided Mar-a-Lago!). So then we have an important question. Jeff Sessions and later Bill Barr were attorney general (also both Trump appointees). Why didn't they reopen an investigation? They had full power to and could've dug up as much dirt as they wanted. Either three investigations, ran by various sides of the aisle, and both James Comey and Christopher Wray are completely incompetent, or they genuinely didn't find anything.

We can ask the same question about Hunter Biden's laptop. Under the precedent Comey set, Wray has full ability to investigate that, without Garland if he so desires. Why hasn't he? He could, theoretically, make knowledge of that investigation public similar to Comey. We must wonder why someone with full authority to do these things, with every ability in the world to investigate Hunter Biden or Hillary's emails. Is there nothing in there that holds Joe Biden in contempt? The "explanation" must be that either Wray, a Trump appointee with full ability to search warrant these individuals in a court of law or through Garland, is incompetent, or there is simply nothing there that holds either the Clintons or Joe Biden in a negative light.

The Trump raid is fairly recent so we don't have many details on that. Merrick Garland has gone through the motions to release the search warrant and Trump's team has until tomorrow (Friday) to file any objection to that. I presume that provided they don't do that, we'll probably see the warrant next week. Internal sources from Washington Post and other outlets indicate that Trump was holding on to some classified nuclear documents. Given the justice system does seem to have two tiers (we agree on this), one for the rich and one for the poor, it's honestly amazing it even got to this point. Especially since this sort of thing could have probably been settled in a different way. The word right now has it that a secret service agent testified for the warrant, so if that's the case then it would be fairly obvious and they've probably known for a while. Which would probably mean there were other recourses before the raid itself- ie you could provide Trump the evidence and testimony of these documents and ask him to hand it over. My current theory is probably that Trump wanted the raid himself as it would be strongly framed to his supporters as "ha look the neoliberal elite hate me!", when in reality he probably had many opportunities to comply on this matter before he was raided. Let's not fall for Trump's framing trap and understand that the DOJ would not take this sort of action if there was cooperation on Trump's part here. It is richly unprecedented that the DOJ would raid a rich person's house, because usually said rich person would either cooperate enough to get to the frame of innocence (essentially like what you believe happened with HRC) or fully cooperate and expect them to gloss it over for money reasons.

There's essentially two possible explanations in these instances:

a) the FBI, which has existed for nearly 100 years in some form and has never been ran by an appointed Democrat in its entire history, is simply completely incompetent at investigating and addressing criminal acts from politicians.
b) the FBI has appropriately doled out justice when necessary, even to those who are "allies" of it

and B seems a more likely given that A the FBI would have been reformed a long time ago if a was true, and b there are instances (including Comey himself) of the FBI bucking the DOJ in an attempt to run an independent investigation into corruption and criminal acts from public officials

Issues Test Bed wrote:About the poll: During my time on the ambulances I've delivered 27 and a half children. Those locations have been:
- In someone's home.
- On the floor of a high brow, high dollar conference room.
- In a gas station restroom. (Ewww...)
- In the back of a taxi.
- In he back of a van the couple was living in.
- In a 737 on the tarmac at Stapleton Airport.
- In jail.

I feel sorry for the "slippery little tyke" who came into this world in jail and the "Frank Breech" mother and daughter :(

~Tessa

Indian Empire wrote:The FBI director back in 2016 was James Comey, right? Historically speaking he was a Republican who worked with Bush's administration and was the deputy AG of Bush's cabinet. He's a Republican for all intents and purposes. So we must ask the question: If he is a Republican, and what you've stated is true, then wouldn't he have done more to prosecute Clinton?

Orders from above and that part about being a never trumper you mentioned below. The FBI is part of The Department of Justice. As you state below, at that time was headed up by Loretta Lynch.

However, it was under Comey and other rogue agents, who so convincingly demonstrated their corruption in text messages that made it out into the public. Do these messages sound familiar?
“[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page texted Strzok in August 2016.

“No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok responded.
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/392284-fbi-agent-in-texts-well-stop-trump-from-becoming-president/

The fake spy dossier was "leaked" to the press with the FBI's stamp of "this is real on it" even after the FBI had determined it was false. Even knowing the dossier was faked, Comey's FBI took it to the FISA Court and used it to obtain warrants to tap Trump campaign officials and then went so far as to plant moles inside the Trump campaign.

It was the FBI who railroaded Gen. Flynn into a perjury trap while breaking protocols to question a man who just did what he was supposed to do. That's the same Gen Flynn who was exonerated of all charges.

You can put all lipstick and makeup on that pig you want. The fact is that Comey and people under him went out of their way to effect the outcome of the 2016 election, and then continued to try to undermine the man once he was elected. Those actions are all blatant violations of the Hatch Act.

Indian Empire wrote:A friend of mine interned for the FBI around that time period (and I've had the opportunity to speak to him about his experience). The FBI is a workplace, so of course they discussed politics. From my friend's experience, Comey and the other people in the FBI were generally supportive of Trump because they felt they were treated badly by Hillary Clinton in the 90's. I would postulate, therefore, that if the FBI influenced the election that they actually did so in Trump's favor by actively drawing attention to the reopening of the email investigation two weeks before the election. Obviously, that was for a valid reason (new evidence from an unrelated investigation into Anthony Weiner) but one could argue, through this logic, not necessarily that Comey was biased- but that Comey was instrumental to Trump's win in 2016.

I don't think you are paying attention. The idea that the FBI would have done anything to help Trump out would have been laughable if it wasn't so outrageously false. See the above, and keep always in your heart, this is just what we found out about.

Your friend was an intern. He probably talked to rank and file FBI personnel, many of which are blowing the whistle on the shenanigan's going on in that agency. However, I have to kind of chuckle at the premise anyone in that agency believed Comey ever, in any way supported President Trump. We are not talking state secrets here. The animosity Comey felt for President Trump was evident from early 2016 and it was all out there in the public public through statements, speeches, and pressers. Comey was an anyone but Trump man from the word go.

So much so that he publicly humiliated and disgraced the FBI by giving a statement that unquestionably indicted Hillary for flagrant violations of numerous federal laws ranging from securing classified information to record keeping requirements, and then ended that statement by letting her off the hook. Comey said, "All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here."
https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

He made that statement even though the law, "U.S. Code § 793.Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information" is one of a small number of federal laws that do not require intent to charge. It is intentionally written that way and that little bit of trivia is explained in great detail when you get your security briefing and sign your 312. Call it a motivational tool to be very careful with the information you are entrusted with.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

Is there any chance your friend is trying to soft peddle some of these things? Maybe he is a Bernie Bro or something? It is hard to fathom how someone working inside the FBI building could get that so wrong.

Indian Empire wrote:"Well", you might think "maybe there was undue interference. The Attorney General was a Democrat, maybe they stopped Comey from looking further." Probably not true either. During a 2017 probe by the GOP Congress (and the Senate judiciary committee) Comey said that Loretta Lynch, the AG then, instructed him to call it a "matter" instead of an "investigation". Comey testified under oath that this and a meeting between Loretta Lynch and the Clinton's made him decide to make decisions about the investigation independently and away from Lynch's guidance and to just make his investigation decisions public.

Comey didn't need any prompting from above. He was so adamantly anti Trump that he stepped over more than a couple legal lines trying to take him down. Why is hard to say, but there is no question where his mind was at.

Indian Empire wrote:Mind you, Comey was under oath for this.

And congress was controlled by Republicans. If Comey was lying about that I imagine he would've been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, given Trump's dislike for him.

Comey was not shy about lying under oath. In fact he did it frequently.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/comey-lied-under-oath-multiple-131000948.html
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/bombshell-transcripts-obama-ag-loretta-lynch-claims-james-comey-lied-under-oath/

Why he was not prosecuted for those lies is beyond me.

Indian Empire wrote:As for Loretta Lynch herself, she was also investigated by this committee and by the Inspector General, Michael Horowitz. Horowitz is an Obama appointee, so take what you will from that, but his investigation essentially found that Comey broke FBI protocal but wasn't biased, and that Loretta Lynch's meeting was "bad for public perception" but not biased either.

And yet, as we've already seen above, Comey was not just biased, but obsessed with keeping President Trump out of office, and failing that, finding some way to bring him down. Horowitz chose to not look at all the facts.

Indian Empire wrote:Let's look at Trump's perspective here. Trump dismissed Comey specifically because he wanted Clinton's emails looked at again and Comey refused.

Let's get real here. Comey was fired for repeatedly trying to undermine his ultimate boss: The President of the United States. You cannot continually and repeatedly be a vexation to your boss and expect to keep your job. When that vexatious behavior involves flagrant violations of policy and law, your firing is inevitable.

Indian Empire wrote:He put Christopher Wray in his place (who is still FBI director. Yep, a Trump appointee raided Mar-a-Lago!). So then we have an important question. Jeff Sessions and later Bill Barr were attorney general (also both Trump appointees). Why didn't they reopen an investigation? They had full power to and could've dug up as much dirt as they wanted. Either three investigations, ran by various sides of the aisle, and both James Comey and Christopher Wray are completely incompetent, or they genuinely didn't find anything.

No way to know that without being on the inside. But it sure is fishy, isn't it?

Indian Empire wrote:We can ask the same question about Hunter Biden's laptop. Under the precedent Comey set, Wray has full ability to investigate that, without Garland if he so desires. Why hasn't he? He could, theoretically, make knowledge of that investigation public similar to Comey. We must wonder why someone with full authority to do these things, with every ability in the world to investigate Hunter Biden or Hillary's emails. Is there nothing in there that holds Joe Biden in contempt? The "explanation" must be that either Wray, a Trump appointee with full ability to search warrant these individuals in a court of law or through Garland, is incompetent, or there is simply nothing there that holds either the Clintons or Joe Biden in a negative light.

The only reason Hunter and Joe are not swinging in the wind for influence peddling and treason is because their last names are Biden. Got a question for you, do you have time for book? If so I will get you a copy "Lap Top From Hell" by Miranda Devine. It makes for very interesting reading. The book also creates more questions than it answers. Like the one you just presented. How is it the FBI isn't all over this like ugly on an ape?

Indian Empire wrote:Internal sources from Washington Post and other outlets indicate that Trump was holding on to some classified nuclear documents.

The Washington Post and an unnamed source? Right... That's never gone wrong before.

But let us think about this logically. What would the White House be doing with "nuclear documents?" What kind of documents might these be? If we are talking about the launch codes to order a nuclear strike, I think it is a safe bet President Trump didn't take the "football" with him when he left. Anything else would have been in the situation room, if anywhere. Those are not the kind of things you find in the Oval Office.

Indian Empire wrote:Given the justice system does seem to have two tiers (we agree on this), one for the rich and one for the poor, it's honestly amazing it even got to this point.

You're right about the two standards for prosecution. But wrong on the standard. Right now, if you are politically connected, who you are connected to determines how gently or harshly you are treated by the system.

Look at the Treatment of General Flynn for one example. Once it become crystal clear the General's words were twisted into a political political hack job, the feds tried to drop the case. In a heretofore unheard of act by any judge, anywhere, that left wing activist judge tried to force the feds to proceed. That never, ever happens.

Even the small fry are getting toasted in the political justice system. People who protested the presidential election in the Capital on Jan. 6th are still being held without bail. The people police bothered to arrest during Antifa Anti Trump and BLM protests were out of jail before the arrest reports were finished. Arsonists, people assaulting police officers, didn't matter, they were all free by the next day at the latest.

But yet an unarmed election protester was murdered in cold blood by a Capital Police officer. That officer was not charged and has returned to duty in good standing. Yet the Louisville police officers who inadvertently killed Brianna Taylor, when they returned fire after Taylor's boyfriend shot at them, wounding one officer, are all out of a job. One of them (so far) is on the way to jail because the feds came wading into that crap storm and charged him with violating her civil rights. (Also a load of crap.)

Indian Empire wrote:The word right now has it that a secret service agent testified for the warrant,

Bull fertilizer. No one testifies before a judge to get a warrant. It is a sworn affidavit by the LEO requesting the warrant.

Indian Empire wrote:My current theory is probably that Trump wanted the raid himself as it would be strongly framed to his supporters as "ha look the neoliberal elite hate me!", when in reality he probably had many opportunities to comply on this matter before he was raided.

ROFL!!! Yeah, I'm sure the President was willing to give the feds a chance to plant whatever they want just to make a political point. I know you do not care for President Trump, but do you really think he is that dim?

Indian Empire wrote:Let's not fall for Trump's framing trap and understand that the DOJ would not take this sort of action if there was cooperation on Trump's part here.

I have a better idea. Let us not fall for the left wing talking point trap by failing to look at what has actually taken place (detailed above). I'm sure the useful idiots are soaking up all this crap and more from Morning Joe, Chicken Noodle News, Rachel Maddow, MsNBC, and the rest of the left wing propaganda mills. But that is kind of sad when a simple search of the web will reveal so much.

Indian Empire wrote:It is richly unprecedented that the DOJ would raid a rich person's house, because usually said rich person would either cooperate enough to get to the frame of innocence (essentially like what you believe happened with HRC) or fully cooperate and expect them to gloss it over for money reasons.

ROFL!! Again! Some has been shoveling the "rich are evil and privileged" crap down your throat by the bucket full. You should also see the reality of the pass Hillary got. And the pass Comey got.

As for the rich people getting a pass, let's see now... Right off the top of my head...
Mayor Rudy Giuliani - One of Trump's Lawyers
Martha Stewart - Insider Trading
Bernie Ebbers (sp?) Worldcomm CEO
Lori Loughlin and Husband - College admission bribery (Actually, there were a whole hat full of rich folk getting the predawn knock at the door in that one. Every defendant in that case was rolling in cash.
Ghislaine Maxwell - Flight from prosecution
Paul Manafort - Radied, jailed and charged with a bunch of things that didn't stick. Spent years in solitary while Justice slow walked his case, leaning on him to cooperate in the Russia Collusion hoax.

The idea that rich people don't get raided is obviously absurd. To that list it seems to me some CEO over a payroll company got his multimillion dollar estate trampled over some scam he was running. I think the pharmaceutical CEO who was blamed for raising insulin or epi-pen prices got the front door of his mansion kicked in as well.

The idea the rich don't get raided because they are rich is pure fantasy. That's just your indoctrination talking.

Indian Empire wrote:There's essentially two possible explanations in these instances:

a) the FBI, which has existed for nearly 100 years in some form and has never been ran by an appointed Democrat in its entire history, is simply completely incompetent at investigating and addressing criminal acts from politicians.
b) the FBI has appropriately doled out justice when necessary, even to those who are "allies" of it

and B seems a more likely given that A the FBI would have been reformed a long time ago if a was true, and b there are instances (including Comey himself) of the FBI bucking the DOJ in an attempt to run an independent investigation into corruption and criminal acts from public officials

Nope, you are leaving out possibility number three.

The New American Marxist Democrats currently bankrupting this nation made this happen in an attempt to keep President Trump from running in 2024. They are afraid of him because they know they are pissing off the right, even some of the left, and most importantly the people who actually decide elections in this nation (when that election is not tampered with). Those are the the people in the middle who will vote either way depending on how they feel that day.

My guess is, reading between the lines in all the coverage, as they always do, those idiots in charge overplayed their hand. Even the talking heads at CNN are wondering if raiding Trump's home was a step too far.

But you are right about one thing. It sure as heck pissed off a bunch of people on the right, and a bunch more in the middle. Only the well and truly brainwashed indoctrinates cannot see that there are two standards for prosecution. Don't think so? Go look up the number of people who worked for and around President Trump who were dragged in for questioning, arrested, and even charged. Then look at what they actually went to court on and plead out to.

Calebs Haven wrote:Hey, what's the best place to live in Texas?

Depends if you want to not worry about owning a car then cities like Houston, DFW, Austin, or San Antonio are the place you want to be same goes for being close to shops and restaurants or not wanting a long commute. if you like hot weather and nature El Paso, Lubbock, Midland/Odessa, Abilene or West Texas in general is your place. But for me personally I like Bryan/College Station not only because i was born here but were two hours from DFW & Austin, and 1-1.5 hours from Houston but in reality it's only up to you and your tastes.

Yesterday after work we wandered down to the pier where the Navy boats are parked. The H.W. Bush had left a few days ago, but the Ford is still docked there along with several other ships. All but one I could at least ID the type of ship, if not also the actual name. The parking placards were a big help in figuring out which ship was which. I think the unidentified ship is some sort of supply vessel, don't know for sure. I asked one of the guards, but they didn't have an answer.

Today we went into downtown Norfolk and toured the USS Wisconsin. If a WW2 battleship is any indication, Navy ships are not designed for taller people. I didn't have to duck in the corridors, but only had a few inches of clearance. I would not have had any extra room in the bunks.

Not sure if anybody is doing anything exciting this weekend, other than sleeping in. Guess we'll find out tomorrow.

Forum View

Advertisement