- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Trump wants the new fbi hq to be in DC, Dems are having a fit about it being in Md
Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:08 pm
Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:08 pm
Must be some payback to Van Hollen
Not sure I understand why it’s important to them that it be in Maryland
Politico
Funding bill in limbo amid FBI headquarters uproar
Senate appropriators are scrambling to figure out whether they can salvage the Commerce-Justice-Science bill.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) speaks with reporters as she boards an elevator at the U.S. Capitol July 8, 2025. (Francis Chung/POLITICO via AP Images)
"I think it’s better we withdraw the bill for now than watch this bill go down," Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins said Thursday. | Francis Chung/POLITICO
By DAVID LIM, CASSANDRA DUMAY and CALEN RAZOR
07/10/2025 02:24 PM EDT
Updated: 07/10/2025 02:55 PM EDT
Senators scrambled Thursday to avoid an impasse that is threatening to scuttle one of the 12 annual funding bills and cast a pall over the whole bipartisan appropriations process.
Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) put the panel into an unusual extended recess amid negotiations over resolving the dispute, which is rooted in President Donald Trump’s decision to override a congressionally approved plan to move FBI headquarters to suburban Maryland and instead keep the agency in downtown Washington.
00:11
Top Stories from POLITICO
Skip Ad
Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, introduced an amendment to the fiscal 2026 Commerce-Justice-Science funding bill barring the Trump administration from using headquarters funding for anything other than the original plan. It was adopted after GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska crossed party lines to support it.
The prospect that the bill might countermand a Trump administration priority subsequently caused several GOP senators to withdraw their support for the underlying bill. Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), who chairs the subcommittee overseeing the bill, said it was “none of our committee’s business” where the FBI headquarters goes: “We don’t get to choose sites, and it’s certainly not the committee’s jurisdiction of Commerce, Justice and Science.”
Attempts at pursuing compromise language on the FBI headquarters matter failed, prompting Collins to call what she said would be a “very long recess.” The panel is not expected to reconvene before next week.
“I think it’s better we withdraw the bill for now than watch this bill go down,” she said.
The blowup exasperated some Democrats on the panel, who questioned why the Republican majority could not accept Van Hollen’s provision. “Because there was a bipartisan amendment adopted we’re going to tank this bill?” asked Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz.
Others expressed confidence the issue would ultimately get settled.
“I honestly think we’ll be able to resolve it,” said Washington Sen. Patty Murray, the panel’s top Democrat. “We’ve always been able to work out issues.”
Not sure I understand why it’s important to them that it be in Maryland
Politico
Funding bill in limbo amid FBI headquarters uproar
Senate appropriators are scrambling to figure out whether they can salvage the Commerce-Justice-Science bill.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) speaks with reporters as she boards an elevator at the U.S. Capitol July 8, 2025. (Francis Chung/POLITICO via AP Images)
"I think it’s better we withdraw the bill for now than watch this bill go down," Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins said Thursday. | Francis Chung/POLITICO
By DAVID LIM, CASSANDRA DUMAY and CALEN RAZOR
07/10/2025 02:24 PM EDT
Updated: 07/10/2025 02:55 PM EDT
Senators scrambled Thursday to avoid an impasse that is threatening to scuttle one of the 12 annual funding bills and cast a pall over the whole bipartisan appropriations process.
Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) put the panel into an unusual extended recess amid negotiations over resolving the dispute, which is rooted in President Donald Trump’s decision to override a congressionally approved plan to move FBI headquarters to suburban Maryland and instead keep the agency in downtown Washington.
00:11
Top Stories from POLITICO
Skip Ad
Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, introduced an amendment to the fiscal 2026 Commerce-Justice-Science funding bill barring the Trump administration from using headquarters funding for anything other than the original plan. It was adopted after GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska crossed party lines to support it.
The prospect that the bill might countermand a Trump administration priority subsequently caused several GOP senators to withdraw their support for the underlying bill. Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), who chairs the subcommittee overseeing the bill, said it was “none of our committee’s business” where the FBI headquarters goes: “We don’t get to choose sites, and it’s certainly not the committee’s jurisdiction of Commerce, Justice and Science.”
Attempts at pursuing compromise language on the FBI headquarters matter failed, prompting Collins to call what she said would be a “very long recess.” The panel is not expected to reconvene before next week.
“I think it’s better we withdraw the bill for now than watch this bill go down,” she said.
The blowup exasperated some Democrats on the panel, who questioned why the Republican majority could not accept Van Hollen’s provision. “Because there was a bipartisan amendment adopted we’re going to tank this bill?” asked Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz.
Others expressed confidence the issue would ultimately get settled.
“I honestly think we’ll be able to resolve it,” said Washington Sen. Patty Murray, the panel’s top Democrat. “We’ve always been able to work out issues.”
This post was edited on 7/10/25 at 10:09 pm
Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:14 pm to Padme
I wish they'd put it somewhere other than either D.C. or Maryland.
Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:16 pm to KCT
Agreed, how about Alabama, or if Louisiana gets rid of Cassidy, maybe La
Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:19 pm to Padme
Not Alabama. We don't want those assholes down here.
Why do they even need a new building?
Why do they even need a new building?
This post was edited on 7/10/25 at 10:20 pm
Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:23 pm to Padme
Didnt kash me outside say he would move it to Kansas

Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:25 pm to Padme
Why can't they renovate the current building?
Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:25 pm to Padme
quote:
Agreed, how about Alabama, or if Louisiana gets rid of Cassidy, maybe La
You can have that den of villains near you in Louisiana but I sure as hell don’t want them near me or AL.
Until that place gets sorted out they can stay in the swamp.
Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:29 pm to Eurocat
Why can’t they renovate any and all buildings? Why would they ever build a new building to house an entity that had an already existing building?
I’d say usually because, generally speaking, the entity simply outgrew the previous building and upgrading in all aspects made the most sense. I for one can certainly understand the need - I believe the current building was built in the 60s and has just immeasurably outgrown the current digs.
I’d say usually because, generally speaking, the entity simply outgrew the previous building and upgrading in all aspects made the most sense. I for one can certainly understand the need - I believe the current building was built in the 60s and has just immeasurably outgrown the current digs.
Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:31 pm to Padme
I honestly cannot imagine caring either way.
All possible options are within like 100 square miles.
No one of any importance should waste time on this.
All possible options are within like 100 square miles.
No one of any importance should waste time on this.
Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:32 pm to Eurocat
quote:
Why can't they renovate the current building?
Because it’s old and they can’t guarantee it isn’t riddled with foreign intelligence bugs.
They want a new facility.
Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:42 pm to Padme
Put it in Dearborne Michigan or where all those Somalians are at in Minnesota. Those are probably future hotspots for terrorism here. It’ll save on travel expenses.
Posted on 7/10/25 at 10:59 pm to Padme
Not only would I tell them to make do with their current building, but I’d slash their budget.
Posted on 7/10/25 at 11:09 pm to Padme
quote:
Not sure I understand why it’s important to them that it be in Maryland
It’d not just that it was going to be in Maryland. It was going to be in PG County, Maryland. Should be obvious why Dems want it there so bad. DC is the best location for the HQ. If not DC, the Springfield option is next best, it’s an easier trip onto the city from there and it’s much closer to Quantico.
Maryland also was recently fricked on an air guard F16 unit that was supposed to transfer from DC to Maryland as part of the deal for the redskins moving back to DC. Losing the new FBI HQ, the Redskins, and F16s is a rough year for Maryland politicians.
Maryland really wanted the F16s because their only fighters were A-10s that have recently been decommissioned so they now don’t have any fighters. The transfer was the last piece of the deal to get Maryland on board the redskins moving back to DC
Posted on 7/10/25 at 11:11 pm to Padme
The federal government needs to be de-centralized. They can have offices in D.C. where the bosses work at. But, were the work is done should be somewhere else. Will cost less and less vulnerable.
Posted on 7/10/25 at 11:12 pm to Padme
The federal government needs to be de-centralized. They can have offices in D.C. where the bosses work at. But, were the work is done should be somewhere else. Will cost less and less vulnerable.
Posted on 7/10/25 at 11:16 pm to JackieTreehorn
I guess the national and international child sex trafficking that so many amongst us are gnashing their teeth about will just have to go on unabated and unfettered. Because contrary to popular belief, as a general matter, the FBI does pretty good and absolutely necessary work to that end. Amongst many other activities and operations from which average Americans derive the benefits of safety, mostly when we don’t have any idea what, when or how. It’s a pretty large organization, it’s extremely irrational for anyone to think that they’re more bad than good.
Not pointing any fingers in any specific direction, just general observation.
Not pointing any fingers in any specific direction, just general observation.
Posted on 7/10/25 at 11:19 pm to BigoBoys
quote:
have offices in D.C. where the bosses work at. But, were the work is done should be somewhere else. Will cost less and less vulnerable.
How is this saving money and why would you separate org leadership from the people they are leading?
Posted on 7/11/25 at 9:44 am to AU86
quote:
Why do they even need a new building?
That's a willfully stupid question.
They have needed out of the Hoover building since at least the Bush II administration. Congress has spent two decades arguing over whose pockets will be lined by the move. There's no way Van Hollen got his move in the final version without spreading some of his contractor bribe money around.
Posted on 7/11/25 at 9:48 am to Padme
Trumps wants (insert anything).
Dems have fit over (insert anything)
Dems have fit over (insert anything)
Posted on 7/11/25 at 9:51 am to Indefatigable
quote:
Because it’s old and they can’t guarantee it isn’t riddled with foreign intelligence bugs.
Probably more infested with mold, asbestos, and lead than "bugs" and the cost to renovate is way more than new construction.
Back to top


15







