Tyb
Afternoon everybody
you're fiesty this morning? slow down on the covfefe, kek
i'm waking slowly
any word on BOTUS the bogas?
Exclusive: Koch ads urge Biden to pull Afghan troops
The Koch-backed group Concerned Veterans for America is launching a seven-figure digital ad campaign this week urging President Biden to pull all remaining U.S. troops out of Afghanistan by May, Axios has learned.
Why it matters: The ad blitz comes as Biden's national security team is debating whether to delay the withdrawal, amid fears the wrong decision could lead to a resurgence of terrorism and uptick of violence in the country.
Notably, Biden did not mention Afghanistan during a speech last Thursday at the State Department — an omission foreign policy experts took as a sign of him remaining undecided about how to resolve the troop dilemma.
The move requested by the veterans' group would honor a deal former President Trump's made with the Taliban last year.
Details: Concerned Veterans will initially pump $1.25 million into its new nationwide ad campaign.
One such ad — titled, "20 Years. It's Time." — highlights the length of the war and urges viewers to call on the White House and their elected representatives to bring the troops home.
What they're saying: "What we would like to do is find ways to work with the administration where there's common ground," Will Ruger, vice president of foreign policy for Stand Together, a Koch Network organization, tells Axios.
Nonetheless, "We have to hold them accountable. …The president will talk about ending the war there, but then keep a counterterrorism force — and that's a contradiction. And I think that contradiction needs to be remembered by the public."
The backdrop: Stand Together has spent over $3 million since 2019 on a series of ads about the issue.
In total, the campaign has generated over 700,000 emails to Washington leaders urging them to end the war.
https://www.axios.com/koch-network-biden-pull-troops-afghanistan-ad-campaign-6e1f1953-4ed6-4a13-ab35-ee30a38a4f3e.html
Biden Hints at 'Extreme Competition' With China, Says There's No Need for Conflict
President Joe Biden is aware of the significance of the U.S. relationship with China, but his administration is going to navigate foreign policy on its own terms.
"We need not have a conflict, but there's going to be extreme competition," Biden said to anchor Norah O'Donnell in an interview to air in full Sunday evening on CBS Evening News. Referring to his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, he said, "I'm not going to do it the way that he knows. And that's because he's sending signals as well. I'm not going to do it the way Trump did."
China's relationship with America "is probably one of the most important in the entire world," O'Donnell said. Xi's growing power will be extremely important to Biden's foreign policy agenda. Most Europeans believe China will surpass the U.S. as the most powerful nation in 10 years. Last year, EU-China trade from January to September surpassed $516 billion, far more than that between Europe and the U.S. during the same period.
Pres. Biden tells us that when dealing with Chinese Pres. Xi Jinping, he’s “not going to do it the way Pres. Trump did.”
“We're gonna focus on international rules of the road,” Pres. Biden says of the “extreme competition” with China
More tonight ahead of the Super Bowl on @CBS pic.twitter.com/yM4l6ehxe4
— Norah O'Donnell 🇺🇸 (@NorahODonnell) February 7, 2021
When O'Donnell asked why Biden has not yet spoken with Xi since taking office last month, he told the anchor about his past experiences engaging with China's leader during his visits to China in 2011 and 2013, and later when Xi came to Iowa in 2015.
"We haven't had occasion to talk to him yet," Biden said. "There's no reason not to call him. I probably spent more time with Xi Jinping, I'm told, than any world leader has, becauseI had 24, 25 hours of private meetings with him when I was vice president. Traveled 17,000 miles with him. I know him pretty well."
Biden has said his strategy toward China will be to "focus on international rules of the road," meaning he will rely on global partners to collectively confront China's growing global dominance.
Meanwhile the Biden administration is already receiving signals of growing tensions between the two nations. On Inauguration Day, China issued a list of sanctions against 28 officials who served under former President Donald Trump, including former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
Last week, Yang Jiechi, Xi's senior diplomat, issued a pointed warning to Biden not to cross a "red line" and interfere in "China's core interests."In a similar incident, Secretary of State Antony Blinken received criticism after he commented to NBC News that China has acted "egregiously" to curb freedoms in Hong Kong. China said "foreign interference" into its internal affairs would not be welcome. Taiwan has also called for closer security ties with the U.S., a move that could provoke further escalations with China.
Biden told O'Donnell that he and Xi had "a lot to talk about."
"He's very bright. He's very tough. He doesn't have—and I don't mean it as a criticism, just the reality—he doesn't have a democratic, small D, bone in his body," Biden said of Xi.
https://www.newsweek.com/biden-hints-extreme-competition-china-says-theres-no-need-conflict-1567408
White House says Biden doesn’t have final word on refusing Trump intelligence briefings
President Biden will not be the final word on whether former President Donald Trump continues to receive intelligence briefings, the White House spokeswoman said.
Biden, in a clip from an interview with CBS News released Friday, said Trump should not be privy to US secrets “because of his erratic behavior unrelated to the insurrection,” referring to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.
But White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement on Saturday: “The president was expressing his concern about former president Trump receiving access to sensitive intelligence, but he also has deep trust in his own intelligence team to make a determination about how to provide intelligence information if at any point the former president Trump requests a briefing.”
Asked by anchor Nora O’Donnell on what his worst fear is in allowing Trump continued access to US intelligence, Biden said he’d rather not “speculate out loud.”
”I just think that there is no need for him to have that intelligence briefing. What value is giving him an intelligence briefing? What impact does he have at all, other than the fact he might slip and say something?” Biden said.
Ex-presidents and other former senior officials customarily retain access to classified information.
https://nypost.com/2021/02/07/wh-says-biden-cant-dictate-on-refusing-trump-intelligence-briefings/
Biden Bans Trump From Intelligence Briefings, Fearing His Intellect May Become Too Powerful
WASHINGTON, DC— President Joe Biden has banned Trump from attending any more White House intelligence meetings for fear of Trump gaining any more intelligence. Biden believes that even one more meeting may result in Trump becoming too powerful.
“It’s as we all feared: Trump’s already dangerously high IQ has surpassed all metrics,” said Biden warning his staff. “We have to take action now, or we’ll never be able to stop him!”
Biden continued, “Block him from the intelligence meetings, cancel them if you have to. I’d rather America be in the dark than see him reach an unparalleled intellect.”
Officials were instructed to stop Trump from learning even the smallest amount of information. “Sir, he’s already a super genius. What hope do we have of stopping him by banning him from meetings?” said one of Biden’s cabinet members. “We’ll have to keep him away from the internet, libraries, and even TV.”
Despite their most drastic efforts, Trump’s intelligence reached critical mass and he was able to guess the nature of the meetings without attending.
At publishing time, Biden resigned in disgrace. “We’ve failed. There’s nothing we can do to stop such raw brainpower. We have lost.”
https://babylonbee.com/news/biden-bans-trump-from-intelligence-briefings-fearing-his-intellect-may-become-too-powerful
Notables are not endorsements
#250
>>53922 , >>53923, >>53961, >>53963, >>53968, >>53977, >>53982, >>53984 Planefags' Reports
>>54015 Biden Bans Trump From Intelligence Briefings, Fearing His Intellect May Become Too Powerful, The Babylon Bee
>>54004 White House says Biden doesn’t have final word on refusing Trump intelligence briefings
>>54002 Biden looks at 'Extreme Competition' With China, Xi's senior diplomat, issued a pointed warning not to cross a "red line" and interfere in "China's core interests in the US
>>54000 Koch ads urge Biden to pull Afghan troops
>>53990 China draining liquidity to tame property and asset prices; withdraws $49.5 Billion from financial markets
>>53989 South Africa suspends AstraZeneca vaccine after trial shows limited protection
>>53988 Maxine Waters: I have never glorified or encouraged violence.
>>53981 Liz Cheney on Fox; criminal investigation underway into whether PDJT incited violence in Jan. 6 tweet.
>>53979 Pence joins Heritage Foundation; will be writing monthly newsletter column
>>53975 For the fifth time this year, Chinese vessels have entered Japanese waters; armed with cannons?
>>53973 Renaissance hit with $5 Billion in redemptions since December 1st
>>53962 Bank of Israel buys $6.8 Billion of foreign currency in January; weakens the shekel
>>53950 Poor Ol' Joe; only 34 Million total Twat followers. Only 7 Million on presidential account
>>53949 House Republicans introduce the OMAR act to ban campaigns from hiring/paying spouses
>>53944, >>53946, >>53947, >>53948 Jason Miller and Gab re: PDJT's Gab account. It's a mirror of tweets and statements
#250
Forbes EDITORS' PICK|Feb 7, 2021,10:54am EST|5,112 views
1/2
Sheryl Sandberg Downplayed Facebook’s Role In The Capitol Hill Siege—Justice Department Files Tell A Very Different Story
Thomas Brewster Cybersecurity, Associate editor at Forbes, covering cybercrime, privacy, security and surveillance.
Sheryl Sandberg faced criticism for downplaying Facebook's role in the Capitol Hill riots. Facebook says it's actively working with law enforcement by providing information it has on rioters.
Just after the Capitol Hill riots on January 6, Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook chief operating officer admitted the company’s ability to enforce its own rules was “never perfect.” About the shocking events of the day, she added: “I think these events were largely organized on platforms that don't have our abilities to stop hate and don't have our standards and don't have our transparency,” said Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook chief operating officer, shortly after the Capitol Hill riots on January 6.
Sandberg was later criticized for downplaying her employer’s role as a platform for the organizers of the siege. But Facebook was far and away the most cited social media site in charging documents the Justice Department filed against members of the Capitol Hill mob, providing further evidence that Sandberg was, perhaps, mistaken in her claim. –Facebook, however, claims that the documents show the social media company has been especially forthcoming in assisting law enforcement in investigating users== who breached the Capitol.
Forbes reviewed data from the Program on Extremism at the George Washington University, which has collated a list of more than 200 charging documents filed in relation to the siege. In total, the charging documents refer to 223 individuals in the Capitol Hill investigation. Of those documents, 73 reference Facebook.That’s far more references than other social networks. YouTube was the second most-referenced on 24. Instagram, a Facebook-owned company, was next on 20. Parler, the app that pledged protection for free speech rights and garnered a large far-right userbase, was mentioned in just eight.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbes-personal-shopper/2021/02/05/best-sales-online-right-now-this-weekend/?sh=58305ab25b09
2/2
The references are a mix of public posts and private messages sent on each platform, discussing plans to go to the Stop the Steal march, some containing threats of violence, as well as images, videos and livestreams from the breach of the Capitol building.
Whilst the data doesn’t show definitively what app was the most popular amongst rioters, it does strongly indicate Facebook was rioters’ the preferred platform. Previously, Forbes had reported on cases where Facebook users had publicly posted their intention to intend the riots. One included the image of a bullet with the caption, “By Bullet or Ballot, Restoration of the Republic is Coming.” The man who posted the image was later arrested after posting images of himself at the Capitol on January 6, according to investigators. In other cases, the FBI found Facebook users had livestreamed their attack on the building. As the Washington Post previously reported, the #StopTheSteal hashtag was seen across Facebook in the days around January 6, with 128,000 users talking about it, according to data provided by Eric Feinberg, a vice president with the Coalition for a Safer Web.
In various cases, the accused used a mix of social media sites to promote their involvement in the riot. For instance, in charges filed on January 27, an alleged member of the Oath Keepers militia, Thomas Caldwell, was found to have posted on Facebook from the riot, noting in one post: “We are surging forward. Doors breached.” Meanwhile, a fellow Oath Keeper, Jessica Watkins, wrote on Parler: “Me before forcing entry into the Capitol Building. #stopthesteal2 #stormthecapitol #oathkeepers #ohiomilitia.” (Caldwell, a Navy veteran, told a court in January that “every single charge is false,” according to Reuters. Watkins told a judge she understood the charges against her, but “I don’t understand how I got them”.)
A Facebook spokesperson told Forbes the company was providing data to law enforcement on those present at the riot and was removing accounts of those who were involved in the storming of the Capitol. The spokesperson also noted that prior to the mob attack, as of November 30, Facebook had removed about 3,200 Pages, 18,800 groups, 100 events, 23,300 Facebook profiles and 7,400 Instagram accounts for violating its policy against militarized social movements. The policy was launched in August.
“We are continuing our ongoing, proactive outreach to law enforcement and have worked to quickly provide responses to valid legal requests. We are removing content, disabling accounts and working with law enforcement to protect against direct threats to public safety."
As Forbes reported in January, Facebook has been preserving rioters’ data, including their private messages, so that it can be handed to law enforcement when they make a legal request. Facebook isn’t alone in helping law enforcement in gathering information on suspects. Other platforms and technology companies, from Apple and Google to Parler, have been furnishing the feds with data on users who were at the riots.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbes-personal-shopper/2021/02/05/best-sales-online-right-now-this-weekend/?sh=58305ab25b09
Glenn Greenwald@ggreenwald
Facebook played by far the biggest role for those charged thus far in the Capitol riot. YouTube was a distant second. Parler was way, way, way behind.
Yet it was Parler which Dem poilticians demanded be removed from the internet.
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1358487115605106691
Tom they have also reduced the letter count to post, used to be about 5000 keystrokes
Now when I post, it is shortened by about 25% to 30%
i think he meant FAKE account, so imma changing it, ty
yeah, these are the only little short links that are current, the missing ones were taken out because they linked to older breads
International Q Research Threads
Australia #13 >>>/qresearch/12772779
Balkan #5 >>>/qresearch/12731367
Brazil #1 >>>/qresearch/11581748
Canada #14 >>>/qresearch/12841735
France #2 >>>/qresearch/8331823 – >>16
Germany #75 >>>/qresearch/12850476
Italia #2 >>>/qresearch/10838222 – >>15
Mexico #2 >>>/qresearch/9133907 – >>11
Nederland #6 >>>/qresearch/10497699 – >>12
New Zealand #6 >>>/qresearch/10524823 – >>17
Nihon [Japan] #1 >>>/qresearch/12219245
Nordic #2 >>>/qresearch/12173250 – >>19
Portugal #1 >>>/qresearch/12228207
Russia #1 >>>/qresearch/12276230
Scotland #2 >>>/qresearch/11937308 – >>6
South Africa #2 >>>/qresearch/11550704 – >>18
UK #31 >>>/qresearch/12815420
Jason Miller @JasonMillerinDC Jonathan Turley: Impeaching Trump – House threatens to trash this core principle to ensure conviction https://foxnews.com/opinion/impeaching-trump-house-threatens-core-principle-jonathan-turley #FoxNews
https://twitter.com/JasonMillerinDC/status/1358543575802331136
Jonathan Turley: Impeaching Trump – House threatens to trash this core principle to ensure conviction
1/2
Over the last four years, we have seen an alarming trend of law professors and legal experts discarding constitutional and due process commitments to support theories for the prosecution or impeachment of Donald Trump or his family.
Legal experts who long defended criminal defense rights have suddenly become advocates of the most sweeping interpretations of criminal or constitutional provisions while discarding basic due process and fairness concerns. Even theories that have been clearly rejected by the Supreme Court have been claimed to be valid in columns. No principle seems inviolate when it stands in the way of a Trump prosecution.
Yet, the statement of House manager Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., last week was breathtaking. A former law professor, Raskin declared that the decision of Trump not to testify in the Senate could be cited or used by House managers as an inference of his guilt – a statement that contradicts not just our constitutional principles but centuries of legal writing.
Yet, it appears a signature of this team of House managers. Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., insisted in the last impeachment that the failure of then-President Trump to turn over documents by citing privilege or other defenses should be cited as evidence of guilt on any underlying claims.
Presidents have historically not testified at impeachment trials. One reason is that, until now, only sitting presidents have been impeached and presidents balked at the prospect of being examined as head of the executive branch by the legislative branch. Moreover, it was likely viewed as undignified and frankly too risky. Indeed, most defense attorneys routinely discourage their clients from testifying in actual criminal cases because the risks outweigh any benefits. Finally, Trump is arguing that this trial is unconstitutional and thus he would be even less likely to depart from tradition and appear as a witness.
Despite the historical precedent for presidents not testifying, Raskin made an extraordinary and chilling declaration on behalf of the House of Representatives. He wrote in a letter to Trump that "If you decline this invitation, we reserve any and all rights, including the right to establish at trial that your refusal to testify supports a strong adverse inference regarding your actions (and inaction) on Jan. 6, 2021."
Raskin justified his position by noting that Trump "denied many factual allegations set forth in the article of impeachment." Thus, he insisted Trump needed to testify or his silence is evidence of guilt. Under this theory, any response other than conceding the allegations would trigger this response and allow the House to use the silence of the accused as an inference of guilt.
The statement conflicts with one of the most precious and revered principles in American law that a refusal to testify should not be used against an accused party.
The statement also highlighted the fact that the House has done nothing to lock in testimony of those who could shed light on Trump’s intent. After using a "snap impeachment," the House let weeks pass without any effort to call any of the roughly dozen witnesses who could testify on Trump’s statements and conduct in the White House. Many of those witnesses have already given public interviews.
Of course, the relative passivity of the House simply shows a lack of effort to actually win this case. The Raskin statement is far more disturbing.
The Fifth Amendment embodies this touchstone of American law in declaring that "[n]o person … shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." It was a rejection of the type of abuses associated with the infamous Star Chamber in Great Britain. As the Supreme Court declared in 1964, it is the embodiment of "many of our fundamental values and most noble aspirations."
2/2
Central to this right is the added protection that the silence of an accused cannot be used against him in the way suggested by Raskin. There was a time when members of Congress not only respected this rule but fought to amplify it. For example, in 1878, Congress was enacting a law that addressed testimonial rights but expressly stated that the failure of an accused to request to testify "shall not create any presumption against him."
This is not a political exercise. It is a constitutional exercise.
The Supreme Court has been adamant that the type of inference sought by Raskin is abhorrent and abusive in courts of law. In Griffin v. California, the Court reviewed a California rule of evidence which permitted adverse comment on a defendant’s failure to testify. The California rule sounded strikingly like Raskin’s position and mandated that a defendant’s "failure to explain or to deny by his testimony any evidence or facts in the case against him may be commented upon by the court and by counsel, and may be considered by the court or the jury." The Supreme Court rejected such references or reliance by prosecutors as unconstitutional.
Later in Carter v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court held that "the privilege to remain silent is of a very different order of importance … from the ‘mere etiquette of trials and … the formalities and minutiae of procedure.'" It goes to the most fundamental principles of justice in our legal system.
In the past, when such concerns have been raised, members and pundits have reached for the "anything goes" theory of impeachment. Such principles are dismissed as relevant in the purely "political" process of impeachment. I have long rejected this view.
Legal case for Trump’s impeachment is ‘relatively weak’: constitutional attorneyVideo
This is not a political exercise. It is a constitutional exercise. These senators are undeniably politicians but they are also constitutional actors bound by oath to the standards and procedures laid out for impeachments. It would make this process a mockery if, in claiming to uphold constitutional values, members like Raskin destroy the very foundations of constitutional rights.
It is true that this is not a criminal trial. It is a constitutional trial. As such, the Senate should try an accused according to our highest traditions and values. That includes respecting the right to remain silent and not to have "inferences" drawn from the fact that (like prior presidents) Trump will not be present at the trial or give testimony.
This is not the first time that reason has been left a stranger in our age of rage. There appears no price too great to pay to impeach or prosecute Trump. Now, the House is arguing against one of the very touchstones of our constitutional system and legal experts are silent.
If everything is now politics, this trial is little more than a raw partisanship cloaked in constitutional pretense.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/impeaching-trump-house-threatens-core-principle-jonathan-turley
its talked about all the time, link to the beginning of another conversation about it >>53656
Looking forward to the solution.
International Q Research Threads
Australia #13 >>>/qresearch/12772779 – >>13
Balkan #5 >>>/qresearch/12731367 – >>
Brazil #1 >>>/qresearch/11581748 – >>
Canada #14 >>>/qresearch/12841735 – >>14
France #2 >>>/qresearch/8331823 – >>16
Germany #74 >>>/qresearch/12514711 – >>4
Italia #2 >>>/qresearch/10838222 – >>15
Mexico #2 >>>/qresearch/9133907 – >>11
Nederland #6 >>>/qresearch/10497699 – >>12
New Zealand #6 >>>/qresearch/10524823 – >>17
Nihon [Japan] #1 >>>/qresearch/12219245 - >>
Nordic #2 >>>/qresearch/12173250 – >>19
Portugal #1 >>>/qresearch/12228207 - >>
Russia #1 >>>/qresearch/12276230 - >>
Scotland #2 >>>/qresearch/11937308 – >>6
South Africa #2 >>>/qresearch/11550704 – >>18
UK #31 >>>/qresearch/12815420 – >>3
this take you to Canada number 14
>>>/qresearch/12841735
Notables are not endorsements
Dough >>53914 @177
#250
>>53922 , >>53923, >>53961, >>53963, >>53968, >>53977, >>53982, >>53984, >>54086, >>54092, Planefags' Reports
>>54078 PDJT defense team will show videos of Democrats urging violence in 2020 during the Senate impeachment trial this week -The Washington Times
>>54062 , >>54065, >>54066, @JasonMillerinDC Jonathan Turley: Impeaching Trump – House threatens to trash this core principle to ensure conviction
>>54048 , >>54045, >>54046, Facebook and youtube played by far the biggest role for those charged thus far in the Capitol riot
>>54015 Biden Bans Trump From Intelligence Briefings, Fearing His Intellect May Become Too Powerful, The Babylon Bee
>>54004 White House says Biden doesn’t have final word on refusing Trump intelligence briefings
>>54002 Biden looks at 'Extreme Competition' With China, Xi's senior diplomat, issued a pointed warning not to cross a "red line" and interfere in "China's core interests in the US
>>54000 Koch ads urge Biden to pull Afghan troops
>>53990 China draining liquidity to tame property and asset prices; withdraws $49.5 Billion from financial markets
>>53989 South Africa suspends AstraZeneca vaccine after trial shows limited protection
>>53988 Maxine Waters: I have never glorified or encouraged violence.
>>53981 Liz Cheney on Fox; criminal investigation underway into whether PDJT incited violence in Jan. 6 tweet.
>>53979 Pence joins Heritage Foundation; will be writing monthly newsletter column
>>53975 For the fifth time this year, Chinese vessels have entered Japanese waters; armed with cannons?
>>53973 Renaissance hit with $5 Billion in redemptions since December 1st
>>53962 Bank of Israel buys $6.8 Billion of foreign currency in January; weakens the shekel
>>53950 Poor Ol' Joe; only 34 Million total Twat followers. Only 7 Million on presidential account
>>53949 House Republicans introduce the OMAR act to ban campaigns from hiring/paying spouses
>>53944, >>53946, >>53947, >>53948 Jason Miller confirms @RealDonaldTrump on GAB is a fake account. 'Gab claims, its a mirror operated by gab'
#250
Notables are not endorsements
#250
>>53922 , >>53923, >>53961, >>53963, >>53968, >>53977, >>53982, >>53984, >>54086, >>54092, Planefags' Reports
>>54078 PDJT defense team will show videos of Democrats urging violence in 2020 during the Senate impeachment trial this week -The Washington Times
>>54062 , >>54065, >>54066, @JasonMillerinDC Jonathan Turley: Impeaching Trump – House threatens to trash this core principle to ensure conviction
>>54048 , >>54045, >>54046, Facebook and youtube played by far the biggest role for those charged thus far in the Capitol riot
>>54015 Biden Bans Trump From Intelligence Briefings, Fearing His Intellect May Become Too Powerful, The Babylon Bee
>>54004 White House says Biden doesn’t have final word on refusing Trump intelligence briefings
>>54002 Biden looks at 'Extreme Competition' With China, Xi's senior diplomat, issued a pointed warning not to cross a "red line" and interfere in "China's core interests in the US
>>54000 Koch ads urge Biden to pull Afghan troops
>>53990 China draining liquidity to tame property and asset prices; withdraws $49.5 Billion from financial markets
>>53989 South Africa suspends AstraZeneca vaccine after trial shows limited protection
>>53988 Maxine Waters: I have never glorified or encouraged violence.
>>53981 Liz Cheney on Fox; criminal investigation underway into whether PDJT incited violence in Jan. 6 tweet.
>>53979 Pence joins Heritage Foundation; will be writing monthly newsletter column
>>53975 For the fifth time this year, Chinese vessels have entered Japanese waters; armed with cannons?
>>53973 Renaissance hit with $5 Billion in redemptions since December 1st
>>53962 Bank of Israel buys $6.8 Billion of foreign currency in January; weakens the shekel
>>53950 Poor Ol' Joe; only 34 Million total Twat followers. Only 7 Million on presidential account
>>53949 House Republicans introduce the OMAR act to ban campaigns from hiring/paying spouses
>>53944, >>53946, >>53947, >>53948 Jason Miller confirms @RealDonaldTrump on GAB is a fake account. 'Gab claims, its a mirror operated by gab'
#250
I got you Freebes, Dont worry about it, we are all working towards the same thing. It takes him longer 'to see how' it is an issue for anons, you did good, we all are doing good.
It just needs to be sorted with common sense.
I'll be here when you get back.
yes french is very helpful
je suis desole jai ne parle en anglais