Will Lindsey Halligan's confirmation hearing testimony be a repeat of Pam Bondi's?

[Seymour Flops]

AI Overview

The "Homan tape" refers to recordings of a meeting where former acting ICE Director Tom Homan allegedly accepted $50,000 in cash from undercover FBI agents. The tape is believed to have been made in September 2024 and is part of a federal investigation into bribery. The precise location of the tape is unknown, but it is in the possession of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI, as confirmed by a lawsuit seeking its production.

GFY.

LoL!

So if I sue the next Democratic Administration, if ever there is one, to produce surveilance video on the Tooth Fairy, that confirms that the Tooth Fairy exists?

If I demand the recording of berg80 spying on a Cub Scout troop, my asking for it proves it exists?

 

[berg80]

LoL!

So if I sue the next Democratic Administration, if ever there is one, to produce surveilance video on the Tooth Fairy, that confirms that the Tooth Fairy exists?

If I demand the recording of berg80 spying on a Cub Scout troop, my asking for it proves it exists?

Has any member of the regime denied the existence of the tape?

AI Overview

Yes, a "Homan tape" exists, referring to a recorded FBI sting operation where former Border Czar Tom Homan allegedly accepted a $50,000 cash payment from undercover agents. While the existence of the recording has been acknowledged by government officials, the Department of Justice closed its investigation into Homan and has not released the tape to the public, leading to lawsuits seeking its disclosure.

GFY.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Has any member of the regime denied the existence of the tape?

No, because there are many "tapes." We have never heard, or seen, any tape of Homan taking fifty thousand dollars. There is no way to prove that something does not exist, that's called "proving a negative," which is a logical fallacy.

But you know that.

Homan himself, on camera, using his own name and image, stated "I didn't take fifty thousand dollars from anyone."

What evidence do you have that is more valid than that?

AI Overview

Yes, a "Homan tape" exists, referring to a recorded FBI sting operation where former Border Czar Tom Homan allegedly accepted a $50,000 cash payment from undercover agents. While the existence of the recording has been acknowledged by government officials, the Department of Justice closed its investigation into Homan and has not released the tape to the public, leading to lawsuits seeking its disclosure.

GFY.

Oh.

Government officials? Wow.

Quick, what are their names?!

 

[berg80]

What evidence do you have that is more valid than that?

Why do you keep wording your questions as if I am in possession of any of the evidence? I'm not and have never claimed to be. But the DoJ is.

If you choose to keep moving the goal line by asking for the names of officials who have acknowledged the tape's existence what's next? Asking for the maiden names of their mothers?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Why do you keep wording your questions as if I am in possession of any of the evidence? I'm not and have never claimed to be. But the DoJ is.

If you choose to keep moving the goal line by asking for the names of officials who have acknowledged the tape's existence what's next? Asking for the maiden names of their mothers?

Okay then then the question is why believe it if there is no evidence for it, but there is evidence that it is false?

Us it a religious belief?

 

[berg80]

Okay then then the question is why believe it if there is no evidence for it, but there is evidence that it is false?

Hopefully, the DoJ will cooperate with the requests for info. But I'd be surprised if it did seeing as it stonewalled a subpoena for the Epstein files for months.

In a Freedom of Information Act request filed with the Justice Department’s criminal division, three Democratic senators — Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Adam Schiff of California, each of whom serve on the Senate Judiciary Committee — demanded a variety of details related to the case. Specifically, the lawmakers gave the DOJ a deadline of 20 business days to produce the following information:

1. All close-out memoranda, reports, case memoranda, declination memoranda, FBI closing electronic communications, or other records related to closing this investigation.

2. All communications between White House officials and Department of Justice or FBI employees related to closing this investigation.

3. All records reflecting, and any, video or audio recordings of Tom Homan interacting with undercover FBI agents, including accepting money from such agents.

4. All records reflecting Department of Justice or FBI approval of the disbursement or use of the confidential funds delivered to Homan as part of this investigation.

5. All records reflecting an audit or accounting of the confidential funds delivered to Homan, including records of wires or audits by the FBI’s Commercial Payments and Confidential Services Unit.

6. All records reflecting applications for access to Homan’s tax returns pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6103(i), section 9-13.900 of the Justice Manual, or any other authority.

7. All court orders granting or denying access to Homan’s tax returns.

“The ‘no transparency’ Trump administration has repeatedly thumbed their nose to my many legitimate oversight requests,” Whitehouse said in a statement first made available to MaddowBlog. “For Democrats, there’s plenty of dripping contempt, insults, and stonewalling of Congress’s constitutional oversight authority. But for Republican priorities, there’s a fast-track for document dumps. FOIA requests are my last resort to get answers to questions that are important to the American public.”

Democratic senators file FOIA request, demand answers about Tom Homan controversy Democratic senators file FOIA request demanding answers about the Tom Homan controversy

The FBI recorded Homan allegedly accepting $50,000 in cash as part of an undercover operation. Three senators are still seeking information about the case.

www.ms.now

To my knowledge, no one in the regime has definitively asserted there is no tape.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Hopefully, the DoJ will cooperate with the requests for info. But I'd be surprised if it did seeing as it stonewalled a subpoena for the Epstein files for months.

You don't remember how often the DOJ/FBI Stonewalled the Republicans in Congress during their lawfare against Trump?

To my knowledge, no one in the regime has definitively asserted there is no tape.

Again, because there are thousands of "tapes" with Tom Homan. I wouldn't be surprised if there are covertly recorded tapes of Homan when the DOJ/FBI were desperately going after people who were Trump allies. Trump said it was a sting operation and the White House has consistently denied any wrongdoing by Homan.

Homan himself said very clearly, "I never took fifty thousand dollars from anyone."

But if there were anything incriminating, Homan would have been prosecuted by that same DOJ or if they did not, they would have leaked the "tape."

The evidence all points to no tape of Homan taking the money, but you cling to your evidence-free belief. Which is fine if you would be adult enough to admit it.

 

[berg80]

You don't remember how often the DOJ/FBI Stonewalled the Republicans in Congress during their lawfare against Trump?

Give me an example.

Homan himself said very clearly, "I never took fifty thousand dollars from anyone."

That's right. He denied it. So what? There's a tape of him accepting it.

But if there were anything incriminating, Homan would have been prosecuted by that same DOJ or if they did not, they would have leaked the "tape."

The explanation for why the DoJ didn't prosecute at the time is a matter of public record. The tape wasn't made public because the DoJ wanted to catch Homan in the act of taking another bribe while he was a WH official.

The evidence all points to no tape of Homan taking the money

All the evidence points to the regime covering for Homan which is why it dropped the investigation and why it is fighting the release of any info.

Time will tell how this turns out. I'm done until then.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Give me an example.

That's right. He denied it. So what? There's a tape of him accepting it.

The explanation for why the DoJ didn't prosecute at the time is a matter of public record. The tape wasn't made public because the DoJ wanted to catch Homan in the act of taking another bribe while he was a WH official.

All the evidence points to the regime covering for Homan which is why it dropped the investigation and why it is fighting the release of any info.

Time will tell how this turns out. I'm done until then.

Good because you have nothing. Zero. Just wishful thinking.

Get back to us when there is the slightest evidence of what you claim as fact.

 

[berg80]

I'll put this in the category of a willful act of defiance to the cause of justice.

Halligan Continues as U.S. Attorney, Prompting Criticism From Judges​

The legal decision that ended the criminal cases against the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey and New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, has left the leadership of a key U.S. attorney’s office in Virginia in limbo, leading to frustration among judges in the state.

A federal judge ruled last week that the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan, a Trump loyalist, had been unlawfully appointed as the U.S. attorney by the Trump administration. As a result, the judge ordered the dismissal of the high-profile indictments against Mr. Comey and Ms. James.

But while that decision, by Judge Cameron McGowan Currie, who was brought in from a district in South Carolina to handle the question, found Ms. Halligan’s appointment invalid, it did not expressly order her removed from the office.

The Justice Department has seized on the lack of explicit instruction to keep Ms. Halligan in place for now, eliciting the judges’ irritation. On Thursday morning, one judge removed Ms. Halligan’s name from a court filing and questioned the administration’s argument that she could still hold the job. Days earlier, a magistrate judge hearing a different case had raised similar concerns, according to people familiar with the exchange.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/05/us/politics/halligan-us-attorney-judiciary.html

 

[berg80]

Trump pushes for top prosecutor nominee Halligan after judge tosses Comey, James cases​

President Donald Trump is pressing to get Lindsey Halligan confirmed as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, weeks after criminal cases against his foes James Comey and Letitia James were dismissed because of Halligan’s involvement in their prosecutions.

But her nomination faces a likely fatal obstacle from the tradition of so-called blue slips, which Republican senators refuse to abandon despite Trump’s demands.

Halligan had no prior prosecutorial experience when Trump tapped her to lead the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Instead, her legal career largely focused on insurance cases.

Trump has repeatedly urged Republicans to abandon the blue slips rule, arguing that it undermines his ability to confirm his preferred candidates for key roles.

On Thursday morning, the president complained that the practice is “making it impossible to get great Republican Judges and U.S. Attorneys approved to serve in any state where there is even a single Democrat Senator.”

“If they say no, then it is OVER for that very well qualified Republican candidate,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/12/11/trump-halligan-comey-james-senate-virginia.html?amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM=

What "great" US Attorneys? Halligan had no prior prosecutorial experience when Trump tapped her to lead the U.S. Attorney’s Office.