274 Comments
User's avatar
Stuart Gotz's avatar

I like how she called Matt Taibbi a “so-called journalist” when she is literally a so-called representative with no voting power.

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

The fake representatives shouldn't be given any time or any committee assignments.

Expand full comment
Taras's avatar

We’re being unfair to her. After all, what is a representative supposed to do, other than serve members of the donor class.

Votes are just votes, but money is money. It’s in the Constitution’s small print, right next to “Four legs good, two legs better.”

Expand full comment
Anne Rudig's avatar

She's on the House Intelligence Committee!

Expand full comment
Turd_Ferguson's avatar

To be fair. Are there really any congress people that are more intelligent? I highly doubt it.

Expand full comment
Annetvenom's avatar

Oh, there’s a few that stand out in my view as intelligent, but that’s because they are exceptions to the norm. Unfortunately, intelligence isn’t a requirement for getting elected.

Expand full comment
John March's avatar

Speaks volumes

Expand full comment
Susan Russell's avatar

I agree.

Expand full comment
Dan Boehm's avatar

I legitimately despise that so many people are making this argument. Why wouldn't we want our territories, which are ultimately under the jurisdiction of the federal government, to have a seat at the table? I'm not saying they should be voting members, but to not allow them a voice in the deliberations might as well be the definition of unamerican.

Expand full comment
PostWoke's avatar

Non-voting representatives of non-states are non-Constitutional entities. To the extent the Constitution defines the USA (which it does) the non-voting representatives are un-American. We have enough elected state representatives to act as mouthpieces of pedophiles and anti-free speech spooks. Why have more representatives from non-states to do that too? Your sentiment is noble but assumes the non-state delegates represent the people of the non-states instead of powerful corrupt interests who do business there.

Expand full comment
Dan Boehm's avatar

You're pretending I made arguments I didn't. I didn't defend that particular delegate. I defended the idea that non-voting territories should be able to send non-voting delegates to represent their interests at the federal government.

Btw, your "represent the people instead of powerful corrupt interests" standard applies to a lot of if not most voting members of Congress too. It's a non-argument, unless you're suggesting we just do away with representative democracy all together.

Expand full comment
PostWoke's avatar

I suggested we already have enough Constitutional members of Congress to represent corrupt interests. There is no need to appoint non-Constitutional ones as well, especially from corrupt Caribbean islands. Your emotional approach to the matter is the source of our current crisis. We need a return to rationality instead of histrionics.

Expand full comment
Dan Boehm's avatar

You're the one who sounds emotional about this.

Expand full comment
Indecisive decider's avatar

She has lots of power. How do you think she got elected? There's an ecosystem in place that is more than happy to turn its back on criminals so long as they pay up. It's just so easy to manipulate voters to believe anything. Ex: Mamdani, Gavin Newsom, Kamala got nearly half the country to vote for her.

Expand full comment
Karen Herrera's avatar

True, apparently unopposed in 2018 and 2022. She has power for sure.

Expand full comment
Working Class Soldier's avatar

All Democrats. Okay, I can see where your sympathies lie.

Expand full comment
Indecisive decider's avatar

I live in CA. The democrats have held serve in the state for 35 years. I definitely have a bias. If it makes you feel any better, I had no doubt deep red states have the same problem. I just don't live there. I live in a place where 25 people were burned alive in January in multiple fires where a reservoir sat empty, preventing firefighters from doing their job.

So yeah, that is where my sympathies are.

Expand full comment
Working Class Soldier's avatar

No problem. My sympathies are against both major parties, as they are both representatives of the wealthy, ruling class. One or the other, they are both against ordinary people. They just sing different tunes to try to seduce us.

Expand full comment
Indecisive decider's avatar

I wish more people would get involved. If they were seeing what you see, things would change.

Expand full comment
webstersmill's avatar

And she has ‘so-called constituents’ . . .

Expand full comment
Indecisive decider's avatar

Benefactors is a better descriptor.

Expand full comment
RioRosie's avatar

I watched the hearing "live." When she said, "so-called journalist," I yelled out loud to the TV, "You're not a real representative! The Virgin Islands are not a STATE!"

I think my outburst startled the cat.

Expand full comment
James Schwartz's avatar

Thank God for that.

Expand full comment
Patrick's avatar

New movie title - “The Constituent”

Expand full comment
Joni Lang's avatar

❤️😂

Expand full comment
Nathan Woodard's avatar

i friggin love the comment section of Racket news. the best of the best. :)

Expand full comment
Chilblain Edward Olmos's avatar

Worst Gene Hackman movie ever.

Expand full comment
Joni Lang's avatar

🤣

Expand full comment
Patrick's avatar

How can you top the French Connection? Hoosiers? Or Mississippi Burning?

Expand full comment
Chilblain Edward Olmos's avatar

“The Conversation” tops those IMHO. Which is why I thought that “The Constituent”:sounds like a bad movie.

Expand full comment
JDJAWS's avatar

We all saw what you did there. Nice

Expand full comment
Patrick's avatar

Point well taken. Looks like "The Constituent" is a thing, a play written by someone across the pond last year.

Anyway, here's where I get into trouble sometimes - I appreciate performances, even if I'm not on board with any perceived political messaging or stance in the film, or the actor.

Robert DeNiro is an amazing actor; dozens of terrific roles. The fact that he's become a self-proclaimed political expert, and has end-stage TDS does not lessen my opinion of his craft.

Expand full comment
Chilblain Edward Olmos's avatar

I agree that the art is not the artist and DeNiro’s best work deserves the legendary status it garnered. That said, the last 20-25 years his career has been, shall we say… subpar.

Expand full comment
Working Class Soldier's avatar

Mississippi Burning is a shit-show of lies.

Expand full comment
Patrick's avatar

let's hear it.

Expand full comment
Working Class Soldier's avatar

The idea that the FBI was actually on the side of the movement is an absolute reversal of history.

Expand full comment
BradK (Afuera!)'s avatar

“The Con$tituent”

Expand full comment
Garrett's avatar

Plaskett is like many in Congress-a slinky (almost entirely useless until pushed down the stairs. Quite entertaining at that point)

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Is that "slinky" or "slimy"? I vote for the latter!

Expand full comment
Earl Camembert's avatar

I've never heard the term "slinky" applied in this way, and I am totally stealing it.

Expand full comment
Nathan Woodard's avatar

hey! don't steal peoples Slinkies!! i got a slinky for my birthday when i was five. best toy i ever owned. and it immediately got stolen when i took it to show and tell in kindergarten. more than fifty years later I am still traumatized. still getting over it. :)

Expand full comment
JAE's avatar

Both.

Expand full comment
DMC's avatar

wonder who she was texting with when she threatened to send Matt to jail?

I can imagine one exchange "the IRS agents are arricing at the house now."

Expand full comment
Michelle Enmark, DDS's avatar

I think someone needs to find a reason to seize her phone/ phone records, make her authorize it somehow, and go back a few years.

I really do not think phones should be allowed by these committee members or by Congress people while they’re in session and questioning. Shouldn’t be allowed by those being questioned either. Being fed questions and/or answers by anyone outside the room is not at all the intention of these proceedings.

Expand full comment
An Inconvenient Truth's avatar

JFC, is that really the same person???

Expand full comment
DMC's avatar

yes!! I caught that on the podcast. I usually cannot listen but did catch that one

Expand full comment
An Inconvenient Truth's avatar

"Iiiiit's a small world aaaafter all...!"

Expand full comment
Karen Herrera's avatar

That was an episode that was incredibly outrageous, but the White House and the press couldn't have cared less. Needs to be included in the movie ....

Expand full comment
BeadleBlog's avatar

Number 1 comment, and probably true!

Expand full comment
PostWoke's avatar

Let’s please get rid of these worthless non-voting representatives of former European colonies who are protected and continue to exist because of American support. They are a threat to our Republic waiting to be further weaponized by Democrats who will turn them into full-fledged dysfunctional blue states voting against the interests of the American people.

Expand full comment
Chilblain Edward Olmos's avatar

Hey! We also happen to be a“former European colony”! 🤣

Expand full comment
PostWoke's avatar

It is ironic! The Virgin Islands used to be a colony of Denmark. Maybe the US can trade it back to them in exchange for Greenland? In either case it's a counterproductive non-Constitutional waste of money to have these non-states sending representatives to Congress to be puppets for pedophiles, anti-free speech spooks, and other assorted criminals.

Expand full comment
Liz LaSorte's avatar

And how much in tax dollars have we been paying Stacey Plaskett and staff: https://www.legistorm.com/member/3043/Delegate_Stacey_Plaskett.html

Expand full comment
Art's avatar

Good find. Millions of taxpayer dollars for a non-member of congress to play act as a member of congress. And that list of present and former staff might be a fine list of people for the last remaining journalists to speak with.

Expand full comment
Liz LaSorte's avatar

Thanks - it's crazy stuff.

Expand full comment
Victoria Chandler's avatar

This site will be bookmarked for me. I am sure most 'constituents' of any of our representatives do not realize just how much our government costs us. This is a real eye opener.

Expand full comment
Norma Odiaga's avatar

Thanks for that.

Expand full comment
Liz LaSorte's avatar

Absolutely!

Expand full comment
CynthiaS's avatar

Man, I had a career in the wrong business! As an architect I worked hard and long for peanuts compared to those numbers - a mere tenth of those numbers in a good year. 😵‍💫

Expand full comment
Al Gonzalez's avatar

Sure, just texting with a constituent (I’ll not mention he was a convicted sex offender), because all constituents are on a texting basis with their Congressman! Just try calling your Congressman today. They will never pick up the phone themselves, let alone give you their cell phone number. Plaskett is just another Congressional whore displaying the actual type of access the elite have while playing as a parrot being puppeteered. How many other Congress members do this?

Expand full comment
An Inconvenient Truth's avatar

Let's cease this slur against parrots, they are good and intelligent beings!

Expand full comment
Al Gonzalez's avatar

You are so right! My apologies to the parrots of the world who amuse us daily! Lol

Expand full comment
bestuvall's avatar

100000%

Expand full comment
Kathleen McCook's avatar

### Stacey Plaskett's Top Campaign Donors (2023-2024 Cycle)

According to Federal Election Commission data analyzed by OpenSecrets.org, Rep. Stacey Plaskett (D-VI) raised a total of **$668,164** for her 2023-2024 reelection campaign. This includes $334,670 from PACs (49.43%), $314,268 from large individual contributions (46.42%), and $28,070 from small individual contributions under $200 (4.15%).

Her top 20 contributors are listed below. Note that organizations do not donate directly; contributions come from their employees, members, owners, or affiliated PACs (totals include subsidiaries where applicable).

| Rank | Contributor | Total Amount | Source Breakdown |

|------|------------------------------|--------------|-----------------------------------|

| 1 | Bloomberg LP | $23,100 | Individuals/employees |

| 2 | Joel H Holt Esq | $13,200 | Individual |

| 3 | AbbVie Inc | $10,000 | PAC |

| 4 | Sheet Metal, Air, Rail & Transportation Union | $10,000 | PAC |

| 5 | Wholesale Wine Distributors | $9,900 | Individuals/employees |

| 6 | Rock Holdings | $9,500 | $2,000 individuals; $7,500 PACs |

| 7 | National Multifamily Housing Council | $9,000 | PAC |

| 8 | PricewaterhouseCoopers | $8,500 | PAC |

| 9 | Rocket Companies | $8,000 | Individuals/employees |

| 10 | Ted Lieu for Congress | $8,000 | $4,000 individuals; $4,000 PACs |

| 11 | theGroup DC | $7,600 | Individuals/employees |

| 12 | Home Depot | $7,530 | $30 individuals; $7,500 PACs |

| 13 | American Institute of CPAs | $7,500 | PAC |

| 14 | Law Offices of Frederick H Graefe | $7,000 | Individual |

| 15 | The Collective PAC | $7,000 | $1,000 individuals; $6,000 PACs |

| 16 | Cb Loranger Companies | $6,600 | Individuals/employees |

| 17 | Children's Aid Society | $6,600 | Individuals/employees |

| 18 | Knowledge Investments Lllp | $6,600 | Individuals/employees |

| 19 | Marjorie Roberts PC | $6,600 | Individuals/employees |

| 20 | Tcm Vi LLC | $6,600 | Individuals/employees |

For career totals or other cycles, her largest historical donors include labor unions (e.g., Sheet Metal Workers Union) and real estate interests, but the above reflects the most recent data.

Expand full comment
NYC M&AHole's avatar

Again, the fact that EVERYONE powerful seems to be involved in some way, shape or form is why this wasn’t released under Biden. This is everyone in both parties and Wall Street elites and strange faculties at elite universities. As Christine Pelosi tweeted, it includes “some of [her] faves”

Expand full comment
Casey Wike's avatar

>why this wasn’t released under Biden.

Something that *should* be part of the conversation but isn't:

Epstein got a "sweet-heart" deal for his first plea bargain:

1) While most convicted sex offenders in Florida are sent to state prison, Epstein was instead housed in a private wing of the Palm Beach County Stockade and, after 3+1⁄2 months, was allowed to leave the jail on "work release" for up to twelve hours a day, six days a week. This contravened the sheriff's own policies requiring a maximum remaining sentence of ten months and making sex offenders ineligible for the privilege. He was allowed to come and go outside of specified release hours

2) Epstein's cell door was left unlocked, and he had access to the attorney room where a television was installed for him, before he was moved to the Stockade's previously unstaffed infirmary. His "work release" consisted of working at the office of a foundation he had created shortly before reporting to jail; he dissolved it after he had served his time. The Sheriff's Office received $128,000 from Epstein's non-profit to pay for the costs of extra services being provided during his work release.

3) His office was monitored by "permit deputies" whose overtime was paid by Epstein. They were required to wear suits, and checked in "welcomed guests" at the "front desk." Later the Sheriff's Office said these guest logs were destroyed per the department's "records retention" rules. Epstein was allowed to use his own driver to drive him between jail and his office and other appointments.

4) While on probation he was allowed numerous trips on his corporate jet to his residences in Manhattan and the US Virgin Islands. He was allowed long shopping trips and walks around Palm Beach "for exercise." The judge confirmed he personally must check in with the New York Police Department every 90 days. Though Epstein had been a level-three registered sex offender in New York since 2010, the New York Police Department never enforced the 90-day regulation, though non-compliance is a felony.

**This is the important part**

when the US Attorney for the Southern District of Florida asked why Epstein received such a sweet-heart deal he was told that Epstein "belonged to intelligence," was "above his pay grade" and to "leave it alone."

(this is all from Epstein's wikipedia article, along with footnotes linking to sources)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein#Non-prosecution_agreement_(NPA)_(2006%E2%80%932008)

Here is my point:

Epstein was working for the CIA (and possibly Mossad as well)

The real reason that no administration has released the full details is because it would be incredibly embarrassing for the oval office to admit that the CIA was trafficking underage girls in order to gain leverage on US citizens and allies (british and saudi royalty, for example)

Ghislaine Maxwell also had ties to Mossad through her father who was known to work for MI6 and Mossad.

This wasn't released during the biden presidency because no sane administration wants to admit that the CIA was sex-trafficking children

Expand full comment
JAE's avatar

The trouble is he worked for a lot more agencies than you can list. His tentacles were far and wide. But some people only want to focus on Mossad. No Jews no news.

Expand full comment
Casey Wike's avatar

my main point is the media narrative fails to discuss *any* agencies.

everyone just wants to score points for their team by digging up dirt on "the other team".

Expand full comment
Indecisive decider's avatar

yup

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

I speculated that Mossad was involved as soon as I discovered who Ghislaine Maxwell's father was. This leads me to further speculate that Epstein may still be alive. It wouldn't be like them to simply abandon him in prison, which might explain why there hasn't been much investigation.

Expand full comment
SimulationCommander's avatar

At this point I wouldn't be shocked to learn he's alive and living in his old mansion on Little St. James.

Expand full comment
Karen Herrera's avatar

Congress needs to investigate recent texts to Plaskett.

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

I was going to say that the FBI should, but given their record, even under Patel, maybe not.

Expand full comment
JAE's avatar

You have a little problem though if you only want to focus on Mossad (one has to wonder why). Epstein was “employed” by many countries and agencies. Why focus on only one?

Expand full comment
Indecisive decider's avatar

You know why. It's just too easy to scapegoat a group if everyone you believe tells you it's true. Kinda like what happened with covid coming from Chinese people eating bats.... that just happened to be down the street from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. That we were funding.

Expand full comment
Chilblain Edward Olmos's avatar

🛎️🔨

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

Because they're the best intel agency in the world.

Expand full comment
JAE's avatar

Maybe this doesn’t apply to you, but today being the “best” at something instantly puts you under suspicion. We must all be nothing but mediocre.

Expand full comment
Chilblain Edward Olmos's avatar

MI6 has entered the chat

Expand full comment
NYC M&AHole's avatar

Yes I know all of the above but see also the Franklin scandal.

Expand full comment
alpinelake's avatar

Yes, the pedofile class protects its own.

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

Interesting DOJ can’t find any lawyer competent to prosecute Comey. Honor among thieves (elites)? It’s a shame to see Comey get away with what he did.

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

Maybe everyone in Washington still fears the "government in exile".

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

The "government in exile" is starting to get pretty dangerous. The latest ad by Democrats to undermine the executive control over the armed forces (and CIA!) is a provocation for Trump to defend his position. When he reacts, that's when the "government in exile" will make its move, apparently.

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

Rep. Crockett's response on CNN last night after accusing prominent Republicans of taking large campaign contributions from Jeffrey Epstein and then learning it was a "Dr. Jeffrey Epstein" and a totally different person:

"I never said that it was that Jeffrey Epstein."

Expand full comment
SimulationCommander's avatar

Technically true, she said "From people named Jeffrey Epstein" -- meaning she knew she was misleading people from the start.

Expand full comment
Michelle Enmark, DDS's avatar

Oh my! She’s such a loser! Let’s hope she doesn’t get reelected, Jeff K. Sometimes I think that some of these representatives are in Congress to provide ridiculous sound bites to get clicks, and say outlandish things so people will pay attention to them. They’re generally idiots, and I wonder who’s pulling the strings behind the scenes to get them elected and keep them in the spotlight?

Expand full comment
Andy's avatar

This was such a gift to Matt, who was raked over the coals by this bullshit artist!

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

Matt’s schadenfreude, for sure!

Expand full comment
michael Griffin's avatar

Tell me how 6 republicans could not support this lady being censured ??

Let alone every single democrat voting no

These people as disgusting

Expand full comment
MDM 2.0's avatar

it was a "slinky" political trade off, the Dems wanted to censure a Republican rep from Florida...don't know the details on him however.

Expand full comment
michael Griffin's avatar

So I heard, let that censure come up for a vote as well....there is no excuse for this lady to now be saying " see, there was nothing there " because she won the vote

Expand full comment
MDM 2.0's avatar

I don't know the specific details of the other potential censure, but for me I would be willing to let the chips fall where they may. The only potential downside is it escalates to each side is trying to censure loddydoddyandeverybody on either side.

Expand full comment
michael Griffin's avatar

We agree, let the chips fall where they may. The facts are very clear with Plaskett and she should be censured no matter what the political cost

Expand full comment
MDM 2.0's avatar

I would prefer she be tarred and feathered, but if censure is the best that can be done, so be it.

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

Self-immolation of Congress would’ve been fun to watch.

Expand full comment
MDM 2.0's avatar

I'm relatively sure that if every member of the House and the Senate had to resign in disgrace I would probably be able to sleep at night.

In between uncontrollable fits of laughter

Expand full comment
Michelle Enmark, DDS's avatar

Exactly! So be it! If you have rules that you’re supposed to abide by and you don’t, then you’d better face consequences!

Expand full comment
Michelle Enmark, DDS's avatar

Totally agree, Michael and MDM2.0. So censure them both! Geez! I hate to ponder about our representatives’ parenting skills, but come on! Enact the punishment or nothing will ever change and you’ll lose control. Follow through on a threat or don’t even bother to make it. This is one of my pet peeves. Do what you say you’re going to do! If you have rules with consequences, follow through on the consequences or why have them at all? Maybe that’s the goal…?

Expand full comment
DarkSkyBest's avatar

This. Intelligence Committee? Rep. Bacon from Nebraska is basically a Dem.

Expand full comment
Tim's avatar

Most likely because they are on someone’s video doing the same with one of their big donors.

Expand full comment
Bill Astore's avatar

So-called member of Congress ...

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

Ranking member…. Yep, she certainly is rank!

Expand full comment
John Duffner's avatar

"The peasants are revolting!"

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

“They sure are!”

Expand full comment
Elmore's avatar

Democrats permit virtually no criticism of Black female Democrats, no matter how well deserved. This is a great example.

Expand full comment
trembo slice's avatar

Claudine Gay is still employed at Harvard - making nearly a million dollars a year - not bad for a prolific plagiarist at one of the former top academic institutions in the world… what a shameless whore.

Expand full comment
Tim's avatar

Even Larry Summers had to quit.

Expand full comment
trembo slice's avatar

Even the Jews are held accountable occasionally! But how could anyone expect a completely disenfranchised person: gay, black, woman… to know the difference between right and wrong? Are you a racist? Are you a homophobe? Or are you simply a misogynist?

All I know for sure - it couldn’t be that you believe all individuals are created equal, are inheritors to a legacy of dignity and worth, and are equal under the law and in this case governing policies of academic institutions.

My ass would have been thrown out of university with prejudice if I was caught doing what the former President of Harvard did - but the antiracists think so lowly of her they defend her from the consequences of her actions.

Expand full comment
Matt's avatar

This is also why she had all black women sitting behind her as props.

Expand full comment
William Hunter Duncan's avatar

Couldn't happen to a more repulsive creature

Expand full comment
Chuck750ss's avatar

And the Democrats have nothing to say about this? Other than she is a shining star? Really?

Expand full comment