One of the Left's top donors commits massive fraud

LMAO. Since it’s a busy day, I’ll just leave this for you to chew on (and wash down with Kool Aid) until later.

https://apnews.com/article/donald-tr...42dcdde9f50df5 Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...hurch-photo-op

General Mark Milley was a ghast at the clearing of Lafayette Square for a photo opportunity of Trump holding a Bible. (Probably because Trump didn't burst into flames holding it)..

What’s a ghast, and how did Miley become one? Sorry, couldn’t resist.

Miley is an idiot then, since people were moved out because contractors were trying to work there. Maybe the leftist savages shouldn’t have tried to burn down a 200 year old church and things would’ve went differently. Just a thought.

Gentlemen it’s time to get back on the threads original topic

BREAKING: House Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D) does not plan to subpoena Sam Bankman-Fried to testify at hearing on FTX's collapse

SBF gave tens of millions of dollars to Democrats and was their second biggest donor this last election cycle

BREAKING: House Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D) does not plan to subpoena Sam Bankman-Fried to testify at hearing on FTX's collapse

SBF gave tens of millions of dollars to Democrats and was their second biggest donor this last election cycle Originally Posted by berryberry

Why subpoena someone who has indicated they will willingly testify? Optics?

Maxine did state that if SBF balks that she will reconsider.

Why subpoena someone who has indicated they will willingly testify? Optics?
Originally Posted by String Nutts

JUST IN: Sam Bankman-Fried of FTX has ignored the Senate’s request, missing tonight's deadline and setting up the possibility of a subpoena, per Axios.

JUST IN: Sam Bankman-Fried of FTX has ignored the Senate’s request, missing tonight's deadline and setting up the possibility of a subpoena, per Axios. Originally Posted by berryberry

Not surprising, SBF said that he will testify - when he has what he needs. Now will he ever voluntarily testify? I have my doubts. If he does testify, it will probably do what he's been doing, babble and point fingers.



So far Pat Toomey (R) and Sherrod Brown(D) haven't issued a subpoena, but have threatened to, I think it time to do so.


Will be interesting to see what Maxine Walters (D) and Patrick McHenry (R) (House committee) do. I'll assume we all know Maxine's statement, that she didn't have plans to. Now if she meant never ever plans to, then I disagree. Lets see what everyone's next step is.


`````````````


Now back to my question: Why subpoena someone who has indicated they will willingly testify? Optics?

Is your response answering that question? I don't see where you are. If so you seem to be saying that people shouldn't be asked to show up voluntary first. I disagree. That would give any opposition a chance to throw shade because the person was forced to show up, throwing doubt on their sincerity.

Here are the "optics"

SBF gave tens of millions of dollars to Democrats and was their second biggest donor this last election cycle

For Mad Maxine to NOT subpoena him shows how she is cratering to the Dem's 2nd biggest donor, especially since SBF has proven not to be sincere and committed a bigger crime than Madoff

Here are the "optics"

SBF gave tens of millions of dollars to Democrats and was their second biggest donor this last election cycle

For Mad Maxine to NOT subpoena him shows how she is cratering to the Dem's 2nd biggest donor, especially since SBF has proven not to be sincere and committed ta bigger crime than Madoff Originally Posted by berryberry

FYI, this post is for anyone who wants an current update, not to change anyone's mind.

Her latest Tweet:

Lies are circulating @CNBC
that I am not willing to subpoena @SBF_FTX
. He has been requested to testify at the December 13th hearing. A subpoena is definitely on the table. Stay tuned.


From the article below:


One Dec 3rd she requested that SBF testify, and she says that it's imperative that he testifies, etc.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/sbf-s...ine-waters/amp


`````````````


Since I don't like to look foolish, I'm not hanging my hat on unknowns, that being her final choice on to subpoena or not. But her peers, both D and R have choose not to. Let's not ignore that. I've already stated that I think she should, lets give her a chance.

FYI, this post is for anyone who wants an current update, not to change anyone's mind.

Her latest Tweet:

Lies are circulating @CNBC
that I am not willing to subpoena @SBF_FTX
. He has been requested to testify at the December 13th hearing. A subpoena is definitely on the table. Stay tuned.


From the article below:


One Dec 3rd she requested that SBF testify, and she says that it's imperative that he testifies, etc.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/sbf-s...ine-waters/amp


`````````````


Since I don't like to look foolish, I'm not hanging my hat on unknowns, that being her final choice on to subpoena or not. But her peers, both D and R have choose not to. Let's not ignore that. I've already stated that I think she should, lets give her a chance. Originally Posted by String Nutts

You do realize her latest tweet was ONLY AFTER she was called out by CNBC and others for planning not to subpoena him. She is in CYA mode with that tweet and you notice she still did not say she would definitely subpoena him.

No, I think she's doing the slow play and said that she never, never, double ever pinkie swear that she wouldn't subpoena him because she needs to send the right signal to other donors. But the truth is knows that he's broke and can't funnel her wads of cash to help fund her and those other Libtard's communist agenda.



Now do I fit in?

Sam Bankman-Fried to skip testifying in person before Congress because he's 'quite overbooked'

https://nypost.com/2022/12/12/sam-ba...e-overbooked/?

*BANKMAN-FRIED'S COUNSEL UNWILLING TO ACCEPT SUBPOENA: SENATORS

This is officially the dumbest banana republic timeline

He's testify virtually in front of the Finance Committee tomorrow. He's balking at testifying at all in front of the Banking Committee.

Sam Bankman-Fried to skip testifying in person before Congress because he's 'quite overbooked'

https://nypost.com/2022/12/12/sam-ba...e-overbooked/? Originally Posted by berryberry

Hey - if the GOP can use any excuse to not testify - why would this guy be any different? Apparently all anyone has to do to get out of testifying, is to question the "legitimacy" of those doing the requesting.

It's a fucking god-damn shame is what it is. Anyone getting a subpoena should show up and testify. And I mean anybody.

You can always plead the fifth, but not showing up, should be illegal and result in locking you up in the pokey till you change your mind. The GOP is going to be requesting a lot of testimony in the next 2 yrs...would not showing up be ok?

Tell me I'm wrong