Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Democratic Party’

It began with this.

WE STAND WITH DONNA!

Donna Brazile is an amazing woman and strong Democrat who has fought tirelessly to protect our voting rights, provided a voice for the voiceless and championed issues like increasing the min wage and equal pay for women. We stand with Donna, because Donna stands and has always stood with US! Looking forward to her continued service on the DNC as she consistently puts people first!

I received it in Mark Murphy’s name.  Mark is my friend. The message was that elements were trying to push Donna Brazile out of the Democratic Party. That didn’t seem fair, so I signed.

Then came an email request from Donna to donate to the party. So I did. In support.

Today’s breaking news, starting with an excerpt in Politico and followed by stories in several major publications  including The Daily Beast, The New York Post, and Newsweek to name a few, that Donna Brazile has a book out in which she supposedly describes how Hillary Clinton “took over” the Democratic Party (CNN is using the verb “hijacked”) came as a shock.

I will not link to any of the articles. What I can tell you is that DB is trending on Twitter and a good deal of of the comments are calling her out for her lies and her self-promotion. Here are a few examples, but you should go look for yourself. Some retweeting wouldn’t hurt while you’re there.

On Facebook, all my PUMA friends suddenly came roaring through!

After Hillary accepted Secretary of State, I purged most of the PUMA posts here although I have occasionally referred to our angry coalition. I didn’t want to affect opinions of Hillary’s work.

But now the game has changed. We thought, in supporting DB these past few weeks, that we were supporting the traditional Dem Party. Now it appears that Donna has tossed her support toward Bernie, who remains an Independent, and his “revolution” that wants to drive the party far to the left.

It all smells like political treachery, self-promotion, and week-old jambalaya. We are not having it!

Read Full Post »

There’s a small enclave of roughly 1500 on Facebook that routinely refers to Hillary Clinton as “mama,” “mom,” “mother,” and other maternal terms. There is a central entity (also referred to here as ‘the source’ and ‘the account owner/s)¹ that posts using these terms. The friends and followers of that account enable (I use this term in the co-dependence sense), encourage, and repeat this terminology.

My initial reaction to the use of these terms was that it is decidedly not American. I have seen Africans (specifically sub-Saharan Africans) and some West Indians refer to female leaders in that way, but never Americans. Even the littlest Hillary supporters among us, boys who showed up in Hillary gear and girls who sported pantsuits at Hillary’s campaign events last year, called her Hillary. She related to them as citizens, and even though they were too young to vote, they all seemed to understand who she was, who they were, and that the campaign was a battle we all were in together – an exercise in democracy. So this mama meme² rang odd. Non-native. Not simply the words – the idea.

At first I questioned this usage directly on the Facebook timeline. I was met with anger, defensiveness, and misinterpretation of my words. No, I had not said African-Americans. I had said Africans. Some said they thought it was cute. To me it was anything but endearing. There was something antithetical about it that I could not quite put my finger on. It was alien somehow. I started investigating.

It turned out that some undetermined percentage of the followers of that account are not American. A similarly undetermined percentage are. The account itself is run by an eastern European source. The username on the account is also the title of a short story published independently on a blog and is the name of the main character in that story. The source is not American. (I have chatted privately with one or more – it’s unclear –  representatives of that entity.) The source stubbornly impersonates an American on Facebook notwithstanding my having discovered the true location which the source has confirmed as have I, independently. Consequently, I have been blocked, likely an effort to prevent my leaking the location. No location is cited on the Facebook profile which is minimalist in the extreme.

The source regularly begs HRC to run in 2020 when HRC insists she will do nothing of the kind. That little wrinkle will eventually iron itself out, although it is annoying that a foreign entity so easily influences the Americans who follow it and echo its calls in contradiction to Hillary’s own words.

More central to my issues with this account and this little enclave is that niggling mama meme. Something is not right about that, but what?

The Tracy Flick in me kicked in. Eureka! I know! It is the irrefutable Conservative metaphor at the basis. So I defer and bow in respect to George Lakoff³.

Conservatives r eally want to change the basis of American life, to make America run according to the conservative moral worldview in all areas of life.

In the 2008 campaign, candidate Obama accurately described the basis of American democracy: Empathy — citizens caring for each other, both social and personal responsibility—acting on that care, and an ethic of excellence. From these, our freedoms and our way of life follow, as does the role of government: to protect and empower everyone equally. Protection includes safety, health, the environment, pensions and empowerment starts with education and infrastructure. No one can be free without these, and without a commitment to care and act on that care by one’s fellow citizens.

The conservative worldview rejects all of that.

Conservatives believe in individual responsibility alone, not social responsibility. They don’t think government should help its citizens. That is, they don’t think citizens should help each other. The part of government they want to cut is not the military (we have over 800** military bases around the world), not government subsidies to corporations, not the aspect of government that fits their worldview. They want to cut the part that helps people. Why? Because that violates individual responsibility.

But where does that view of individual responsibility alone come from?

The way to understand the conservative moral system is to consider a strict father family. The father is The Decider, the ultimate moral authority in the family. His authority must not be challenged. His job is to protect the family, to support the family (by winning competitions in the marketplace), and to teach his kids right from wrong by disciplining them physically when they do wrong. The use of force is necessary and required. Only then will children develop the internal discipline to become moral beings. And only with such discipline will they be able to prosper. And what of people who are not prosperous? They don’t have discipline, and without discipline they cannot be moral, so they deserve their poverty. The good people are hence the prosperous people. Helping others takes away their discipline, and hence makes them both unable to prosper on their own and function morally. -George Lakoff

Read more >>>>

The mama meme is in direct conflict with progressive values. No matter what sort of “mother of us all” HRC is portrayed to be, the metaphor of HRC as mother is antithetical to the ideals held by progressives, liberals, Democrats. It is an alien concept. That is what bothered me about it.

When I look at those “mama” posts, I see pleas for HRC to come and fix it all. For her somehow to transcend the possibly/probably illegitimate administration and roll back the damage. This message is counter to Hillary’s which is in perfect alignment with big ‘D’ Democratic principles as outlined by Lakoff: We all roll up our sleeves and, in whatever ways we can, move Onward Together.

I believe more fiercely than ever that citizen engagement at every level is central to a strong and vibrant democracy.

To support this wave of grassroots organizing, we’re launching Onward Together, an organization dedicated to advancing the progressive vision that earned nearly 66 million votes in the last election. Onward Together will work to build a brighter future for generations to come by supporting groups that encourage people to organize and run for office. – HRC

Read more >>>>

The mama meme is a contradiction of this grassroots doctrine.

There is much about that odd Facebook enclave that should cause Americans, particularly Democrats, pause. The language irregularities – typical of non-native speakers. The lack of local context. A friend/follower recommended contacting the source’s congressional representative but stopped short of asking who that might be – apparently not suspecting that there is none despite no location identified on Facebook for that source. Recently, the source mistook a broadcast by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation for ABC News  – the American Broadcasting Company. Americans asked which news show on ABC would carry the interview. No one called out this source for the confusion that ensued when the show did not air in the U.S. because it is an Australian show. There’s the lack of familiarity with American culture as it intersects with the language. Could I possibly be the only American who noted the unfortunate use of “mama” by an adult when “yo’ mama” is an insult most Americans would recognize?

Originally, I could not make sense of this Facebook phenomenon – essentially an eastern European Hillary troll. What would be the purpose? What could be the harm? Why collect Hillary supporters as friends? What is the agenda? But now, in the context of Lakoff’s metaphor, I perceive an effort to wrench that demographic away, philosophically, from its grassroots, small ‘d’ democratic foundation in favor of an authoritarian ideal. Not the ‘strict father’ but the ‘benevolent mother’ who heals all hurts.

In this scenario, the ‘benevolent mother’ is one and only one person. No alternatives are tolerated, and it is imperative that HRC fulfill this destiny as seen by the perpetrators of this meme. No solutions beyond restoring HRC to the rank denied her is acceptable. No candidate other than HRC is worthy. No one else can fix everything.

Where have we heard that theme before? Oh, right! From “strict dad,” Donald Trump! It is one-and-the-same dogma, a most deleterious incursion into grassroots democratic thinking and values. One that Hillary Clinton would renounce and condemn if she knew about it.

It would not be surprising for a foreign source to misunderstand our party’s ethic. But perhaps they understand it all too well and are out to undermine it. What better way than to heap praise and adoring compliments on Hillary and occasionally interject requests that she swoop in like Wonder Woman and right all wrongs? She may be getting that “Wonder Woman Award” but she knows better than anyone – in fact she is the one who keeps reminding us of this – it takes a village.

What is disconcerting is that some percentage of legitimate American Democratic Hillary voters buy into this questionable content. They have come for your hearts and minds, and you have surrendered.

 

For more on George Lakoff’s analysis of Conservative thinking, go here.>>>>


¹ If you have been following my posts about this Facebook entity, you should note that in the past I referred to it as “she” based upon the scanty Facebook profile provided. I have come to doubt that the username” accurately reflects the source since the name also appears as a character and title in a fictional piece. I am not sure this is one person. There may be several people operating this account and one who was my contact in private chats. Therefore I have generalized the identity as “the source.”

² Meme: A meme is “an idea, behavior, or style that spreads from person to person within a culture”. A meme acts as a unit for carrying cultural ideas, symbols, or practices that can be transmitted from one mind to another through writing, speech, gestures, rituals, or other imitable phenomena with a mimicked theme. Meme – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme

³ For more from George Lakoff, go here >>>>

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »


Hillary Clinton is pictured. | Getty Images
The event will be Hillary Clinton’s first for a candidate in 2017.

Hillary Clinton is set to return to the electoral fray next week.

The Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nominee will break from her book tour to raise campaign money for Virginia Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam, the party’s gubernatorial nominee, next Wednesday, multiple Democrats familiar with the plan confirmed to POLITICO.

News of the New York event was first reported by The Associated Press.

The event will be Clinton’s first for a candidate in 2017, though she has stepped back into politics with the launch of her new group, Onward Together, that backs Democratic organizations.

The former secretary of state has also re-emerged in the national political conversation recently with the publication of her latest book, “What Happened,” which recounts her loss to Donald Trump.

Northam is locked in a tight battle with Republican Ed Gillespie, though polls show Northam slightly ahead. The current governor, Terry McAuliffe, is a close friend of Clinton’s. McAuliffe isn’t eligible to run for re-election because of Virginia’s law prohibiting consecutive terms.

Read more >>>>

Read Full Post »

“It’s like that old story; you can’t keep snakes in your backyard and expect them only to bite your neighbors. Eventually, those snakes are going to turn on whoever has them in the backyard.” – HRC

This is an excellent allegorical warning that Hillary Clinton issued in October 2011 during bilateral remarks with then Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar. The reference, at the time, was to Pakistan harboring the Haqqani Network and the Taliban.

Here are those remarks and that statement in context >>>>

Secretary Clinton’s Remarks With Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar

October 21, 2011

“… we both agreed that terrorism coming from any source is a threat to all of us. We expressed very clearly our concerns about safe havens on both sides of the border. We reasserted our commitment to doing more on the Afghan side of the border to try to eliminate safe havens that fuel insurgency and attacks inside Pakistan. And we asked very specifically for greater cooperation from the Pakistani side to squeeze the Haqqani Network and other terrorists, because we know that trying to eliminate terrorists and safe havens on one side of the border is not going to work. It’s like that old story; you can’t keep snakes in your backyard and expect them only to bite your neighbors. Eventually, those snakes are going to turn on whoever has them in the backyard. We know that – on both sides of the border. ”

Read more >>>>

It was only six years ago. We could not have conceived, such a short time ago, that those words could possibly apply to ourselves or to any loyal Americans. Yet here we are.

I watched the marathon of Homeland, Season 4 tonight. The opening credits for that season include a short clip of Hillary delivering those words. Funny how words that only a few years past can have meant one thing then and something new now.

Snakes in the backyard. Yes, Pakistan did and does harbor snakes in their backyard. But now we know that there are snakes in our own backyard: Foreign entities on social media influencing the American electorate. Some of these snakes arrived wearing American skin.

In her memoir, What Happened, Hillary identified the social media landscape as the new battlefield of 21st century warfare.

We have been attacked. Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation is ferreting out snakes. But we, too, must be on the lookout for snakes on our social media pages.

Even the snakes you nurture and consider pets are still snakes. Hillary’s words should resound deafeningly!

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

In her book, What Happened, Hillary Clinton discusses Russian interference in our election. She speaks of the the Wikileaks release of Democratic National Committee (DNC) emails and her campaign chair, John Podesta’s, emails. Some of these emails were altered in the Wikileaks version of the document dump. The objective was to make it appear that the DNC conspired with Hillary’s campaign to defeat Bernie Sanders.

Portions of these emails were then posted on social media platforms targeted to reach Bernie Sanders supporters after Hillary Clinton’s nomination was secured. The objective here, now that we were out of the primary season and into the general, was to sway Bernie voters and Indies away from “unscrupulous” Hillary and the Dems and toward Trump.

Congressional committees are pursuing investigations into the Russia question bilaterally. Several top Republicans have said that this is necessary since the next time it could be their party that is targeted. Hillary quotes James Comey as testifying that this is not a Democrat or Republican thing. That it is an American thing. That they are “coming after America,” and they will do it again.

I wonder if the Republicans are thinking deeply enough. I wonder if they are asking themselves how they ended up with Trump in the first place.

It can’t possibly be that Hillary Clinton and we, her team, were the only people who suffered a late night shock. There were 16 Republican candidates. Some of them, surely, had a primary night they thought they would win handily and did not. How did that happen?

Is it possible that the same forces that manipulated voters in the general election also manipulated Republican primary voters? What do Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and John Kasich think of this possibility? Does Cary Fiorina really believe she was shoved aside only because she was a woman? Do the Bushes believe Jeb lost because, as Barb said, “Enough Bushes?”

If the Russians managed to manipulate the general election, should we not, down the line, also discover what role they might have played in Trump’s nomination?

It’s an important question. I believe Hillary Clinton had an excellent chance to win against all of those candidates. Each of them thought he/she was the most formidable to face the Democratic nominee. They would not have run to begin with if they did not.

With Mueller’s inquiry evidently reaching into the past well beyond the 2015-2016 election season, you have to wonder. Have the Russians been grooming Trump for many years? If so, was their only target over a two-year period Hillary Clinton? Or were Trump’s Republican opponents also targets of Russian interference?

The inquiries and investigations are only beginning with the Russian effect on the general election. The other question is whether they picked the Republican nominee. If the Republicans are not thinking about this, they should. How else is it possible that Donald Trump, known wheeler-dealer, dead-beat boss, shell game realtor, and political flip-flopper managed to beat out that field of 16?

I hope the Republicans are not focusing only on the forest and missing the foreign entities disguised as trees. (Same goes for the Dems, but I hope they are two or three steps ahead of me here).

 

Read Full Post »

This article is not new. It dates back to the end of March. In light of this past weekend in Charlottesville, it merits another look. A pro-Bernie faction continues its attempts to muscle into leadership roles in the Democratic party while Sanders himself remains stubbornly an Independent (which is fine with us since we do not want him in the party). They disparage true Democrats like Hillary Clinton, Kamala Harris, and Jon Ossoff  and parrot Bernie’s inflammatory and untrue words, believe propaganda generated abroad, and threaten the very breadth of the party with extreme policy demands. (Bold emphasis below is mine.)

Sanders defends Trump voters: I don’t think they’re racists, sexists or homophobes

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) on Friday defended voters of President Trump, saying that the election was Democrats’ to lose and that the party needs to better represent the working-class voters who supported Trump and other GOP lawmakers

“Some people think that the people who voted for Trump are racists and sexists and homophobes and deplorable folks. I don’t agree, because I’ve been there. Let me tell you something else some of you might not agree with, it wasn’t that Donald Trump won the election, it was that the Democratic Party lost the election,” Sanders said while speaking at an Our Revolution rally in Boston with fellow Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).

Sanders went on to say that a “fundamental restructuring of the Democratic party” was needed to win future elections and that problems with party’s current setup is why many were quick to support Trump in the election, not because of some of the rhetoric on the campaign trail.

Please do keep reading >>>>

On the trail, Hillary Clinton was fond of quoting Maya Angelou: “When someone tells you who they are, believe them.” Then, she was applying that maxim to Trump.

In March, Bernie told us who he is. I missed this article the first time around, but we should look at it now and understand who Bernie is.

Over the past several days, Trump supporters have claimed on social media as well as IRL face to face with Trump protestors that they support Trump but are not racists or Nazis. The reply from the Resistance has been “Yes, you are.”

In March, Bernie said: “Some people think that the people who voted for Trump are racists and sexists and homophobes and deplorable folks. I don’t agree, because I’ve been there.” Been where? He neglected to clarify that. We can agree that there are probably people who voted for Trump who are not among those supporting him at his recent rallies and who would not participate in Nazi/KKK marches, but by not condemning those folks, their support is implicit. Bernie prefers to cut them slack rather than hold their feet to the fire.

As you see, he then went on to blame us for losing an election that was phenomenally well-supported, well-run, and ran the best-prepared, most thoroughly experienced candidate any of us had ever seen in our lives. I take exception to Bernie’s words! Not true!

A “perfect storm,” as Hillary has termed it, of influences and actions robbed the party of a victory and the country of the president we deserved.

Discord is a loaded term with a negative valence. We feel uncomfortable when it intrudes upon what we consider the normal flow of life. On the other hand, we live in a democracy and are accustomed to dealing with the messiness of it – including the inevitable discord and necessary compromise.

Accord, on the other hand has a positive valence. By trying to cozy up to the “populist” Trump supporters, Bernie has told us who he is. His “accord” with the Trump folks, however, is less than comforting or comfortable. He has told us who he is. We should believe him. He and his ilk have no place in our diverse party. Period.

Here’s Hillary. We are #StillWithHer.

Here is the text of her speech connecting Donald Trump to the alt-right.

Hillary Clinton in Reno

Here is her “deplorables” remark in context.

Statement from Hillary Clinton

I cannot suppress this addition.

Bernie Sanders Deletes Numerous Tweets That Blamed Trump for Charlottesville Violence

I come from a blue collar family – not elitist by any standard. My parents worked together in an aircraft plant until I was born. They scraped to send my sister and me to Catholic schools so, not by choice, I did study Latin.

“Alea jacta est.”

Loose translation: “If you are prominent in some way, your first tweet has been screen-saved by somebody.”

Latin is so succinct!

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Those watching “The Handmaid’s Tale” on Hulu cannot be faulted for thinking they might be living a cyncial version of the old 1940s “Road” pictures with Bing Crosby, Bob Hope, and Dorothy Lamour. (Who gave her that name?!) A movie called “The Road to Gilead.” Emily Peck has other ideas, but there are portents that cannot be denied.

Women In The U.S. Don’t Live In A Dystopian Hellscape. Yet.

“The Handmaid’s Tale” resonates, but there’s reason for hope.

Peck is pretty optimistic positing that the road to Gilead is fraught with lots of potholes and obstructions, but we do well not to focus too narrowly on the falling rock on one side of the highway thereby missing the sheer cliff on the other side.

I am not watching “The Handmaid’s Tale,” much as I would like to. I simply refuse to pay another dollar beyond my already expensive FiOS service, so Hulu and Netflix are out for me.  I have, however, read the book. The coincidence of the airing of the mini-series with the Democratic “Unity Tour” should set off some bells and whistles.

This is the axiom Peck offers that Bernie supporters continue to reject.

“Progress does not happen in a straight line. Setbacks are inevitable. What’s critical is what comes next.”

They rejected it during the 2016 primaries renouncing any and all incremental policies proposed by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and stubbornly continued their opposition during the general election.  They persist in their unwillingness to allow the Democratic Party to evolve naturally and have set out to take it over and overturn the common sense principles that have been its warp and woof since the groundbreaking days of FDR.  Rather than empowering women, the party is rolling back its liberating positions on women under the influence of a man who refuses to join the party.  No, this is not a relitigation or extension of the 2016 primaries.  It is a fight for the future.

The parallels between the dystopia Atwood projected and perceived potential effects of the new administration are not limited to Trump’s positions and those of his cronies. The BernieBros continue to have a hand in suppressing female issues, concerns, and voices within the only party likely to continue to highlight them.

Women have a stake in resisting efforts on either side to curtail our rights and freedoms. Resisters must do it for ourselves.  But we must be careful not to lose the party.  That is where the strength is.  The reason the BernieBots are fighting to usurp that power is because they know that a third party will have no muscle except to do what they have done in 2000 and 2016 – split the progressive vote.

We must remember that there was a reason why, at the end of her senior thesis, Hillary Clinton spurned Saul Alinsky’s methods (i.e. change from without the system rather than within) as well as the job he offered her and opted for the discipline of law school instead.  We have to be in it to win it.

Leaving the party  is no solution.  Think hard before you do that because it is not only the Trump crowd that would happily see us in shades of red, blue, green, and stripes according to their designations of how we serve.  We cannot determine our fate from the outside.  The Bernie crowd knows this, and that is why they fight to take over the party.  Let’s not just abandon it to them.

Crossposted at The Department of Homegirl Security.

Read Full Post »

Hillary Clinton was super active today on the subject of the now withdrawn AHCA, an attempt by Republicans to repeal President Obama’s ACA and replace it.

Today was a victory for all Americans.

Read Full Post »

ser·en·dip·i·ty

[ˌserənˈdipədē]

the occurrence and development of events by chance in a happy or beneficial way:

“a fortunate stroke of serendipity” ·

[more]synonyms: (happy) chance · (happy) accident · fluke · luck · good luck · good fortune · fortuity · providence · happy coincidence
Oxford Dictionaries · © Oxford University Press

 

The FBI has a way of stumbling upon things. 11 days before Election Day, FBI Director James Comey released a letter to eight Republican committee chairs stating that, while investigating an unrelated case, the FBI had discovered emails that might be connected to the bureau’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails and that he was extending, therefore, that investigation. Hillary’s campaign hit back with a one two punch.

Fast-forward to this week.

US officials: Info suggests Trump associates may have coordinated with Russians

Comey was clear in stating that this evidence did not surface via the investigation of possible Trump campaign collusion with Russian operatives, but, rather, arose from  a different investigation, apparently involving surveillance of foreign operatives.

In other words,  the FBI came upon this information much the way they discovered emails related to Hillary Clinton on Anthony Weiner’s laptop – emails, it turned out, that the bureau had already seen. They were investigating Weiner, and some of Hillary’s emails appeared.

For the record, the fact that these “foreign” communications turned up in a bureau investigation and Comey announced it does not absolve Comey of releasing that October 28 letter and probably influencing the vote.

In this case, they were surveilling foreign operatives, and  – whoops! Trump campaign staff were talking to them!

Everything is a big, fat mess. As Leonard Cohen said, “There’s a crack in everything. That’s how the light gets in.”

Comey violated bureau policy when he released that letter 11 days before the election. The emails in question would have been a huge nothing-burger had the letter not been released so close to Election Day. As it turned out, the letter was likely a factor in turning the election against Hillary Clinton and electing the guy whose campaign, transition team, and administration are riddled with Russian ties.

How ironic and how fitting! Karma can really suck when it’s bad. Unfortunately, this bad karma for the Trump regime is unlikely to change anything. Confirmation hearings continue for appointees and a SCOTUS justice nominated by what could possibly be proven an illegitimate administration.

This is the kind of malarkey being spouted by a Democrat!

“It’s only natural for us to want to go back and relive the elections,” said Rep. Joe Crowley (D-N.Y.). “But that’s not going to happen. It’s about moving forward in the future. I think my Republican colleagues said it best when they said it happened to Democrats this time, it may very well happen to Republicans in the future, and that’s why it’s important to seek the truth.”

Read more at HuffPo >>>>

What? We should just keep on truckin’ like all of this is normal because  …  what? Because it may happen to Republicans at some unspecified point in the future? Sorry, but that should not be allowed to wash. This should never happen in any U.S. election. Period. That is the whole reason people are upset about it.

If this administration is found to have committed high crimes and misdemeanors and /or treason, the office of POTUS should not simply pass to the Veep of the same administration. I know we have no provision in the Constitution for this possibility, but that does not mean that we should just ignore a festering wound to our democracy. The situation is unprecedented. Whether collusion is eventually proven or not, steps should be taken to ensure the security of future elections.

Retweeted
 The intelligence community concluded the Russians will interfere again. This is why full investigation is important to country. Please stop.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: