HomeUncategorized8/26 News Roundup & Open Thread – Bernie Takes on McConnell in Kentucky, Sanders Touts ‘Campaign of Energy and Excitement’ & More

Leave a Reply

Photo and Image Files
Audio and Video Files
Other File Types
48 Comment threads
50 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
polarbear4humphreyhumphreyjcityboneEyeRound Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Louisiana isn’t the only place where energy companies use eminent domain to take property for oil and gas infrastructure. Several states — most of them in the South — have long granted oil and gas companies this right, a process also known as expropriation. Seizures used to happen infrequently and quietly, typically in rural or impoverished areas where political support for the oil industry is strong.

Now, pipeline companies are asserting eminent domain rights more boldly as they try to keep pace with the recent boom in domestic oil and gas production. Construction is expected to speed up as President Donald Trump removes barriers to new pipelines and streamlines review processes. As a result, more landowners in Louisiana and across the South could lose property rights with little compensation.

The authors of the Constitution knew the power of eminent domain was ripe for abuse. In the 5th Amendment, which addresses criminal and civil legal procedure, they inserted “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

The amendment made clear that owners should be paid when their land is taken, but the term “public use” has fueled decades of legal debate. Once considered a clear reference to amenities the public owns or has a right to access, the definition was loosened by a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that allowed New London, Connecticut to bulldoze a low-income neighborhood and replace it with an industrial park. The court said that eminent domain was justified because the park would spur economic growth.

In her dissent, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor warned the decision handed the power of eminent domain to private companies that would use it at the expense of the poor and politically weak.

“Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random,” O’Connor wrote. “The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms.”

“The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result,” she added.

Eminent domain has long been used by governments to build things that serve the public, such as highways, schools, dams, or sewer plants. But after the decision, oil companies began justifying it as economic development in the public’s interest. They seized strips of land in Kentucky, West Virginia, North Carolina, Texas, and Louisiana.

Pam Spees, a lawyer with the Center for Constitutional Rights, said that essentially, all an oil company has to do to claim eminent domain rights is prove that they are an oil company. “In short,” she said, “they do not need Louisiana’s permission before running their pipeline through the state.”

Louisiana is currently reviewing permits for at least 530 miles of new pipeline, including interstate pipelines like Tallgrass Energy’s Seahorse Pipeline, a 700-miler that would start in Oklahoma and cross much of Louisiana, ending near the mouth of the Mississippi River.

Perrin, the landowner who fought Chevron, has little confidence that protests or court battles will stem the tide. Pipeline opponents tried to enlist him in the fight against Bayou Bridge, but he told them they can’t win as long as eminent domain remains in the oil companies’ arsenal.

“It’ll never change until we change the law,” he said. “But the laws won’t change as long as the Texaco flag flies over our capital. End of story.”







I guess he deleted it. Will check to see if I grabbed it at home. IIRC it was Warren talking up Hickenlooper.


“If people want a candidate who can beat Donald Trump, I think you’re looking at him.”

So said Bernie Sanders on Sunday in an interview with CNN’s “State of the Union.”

The democratic presidential hopeful’s comment came after host Brianna Keilar played a video clip of Dr. Jill Biden recently saying people should vote for her husband, former Vice President Joe Biden, even if they prefer proposals put forth by other candidates more, suggesting he’s more electable
Sanders pointed to polling showing himself beating Trump and said, “If we are to defeat Donald Trump, what you need is a campaign of energy and excitement—a campaign that brings millions of young people and working class people into the political processes in a way that we have not seen before. I think, frankly, that I am the candidate” to do so.

That would also “lay the groundwork for transforming our economy and our government to meet the needs of working people, who’ve been ignored for so very long,” Sanders added.



I got this text too, but haven’t yet replied:


Ack! Has anyone seen this?


I watched part of it and it’s a short segment of Krystal and Bernie in a longer show with mr conservative and what sounds like conservative lite.

they get to frame the snippet. Bernie is like me as far as a filibuster goes—make ‘em take the floor and do a real filibuster—so talked about that. that’s why i didn’t grab the link.

Krystal will prolly have her clip up soon.


“conservative” and “conservative light.” Agree. Supposed evaluation of Bernie’s skill and knowledge in the Senate was insipid. This show needs more Krystal. Bernie segment is split into two parts on two consecutive days (why??) while the show’s next segment today is 11 minutes with Delany. OMG!

Happy Monday to all TPWer’s!


Yeah and then the sly—he’s copying Beto! and because he still likes a real filibuster, people might take him seriously! gtfoh





in PA today i think



The United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America endorsed Bernie Sanders on Monday, offering one of the few endorsements by a national union as Democratic presidential candidates continue to court labor’s support.

The union, which represents some 35,000 workers, voted to back Mr. Sanders directly after he spoke at its national convention in Pittsburgh, making a boisterous appeal for their help in the race.

“The UE is about what our campaign is about,” said Mr. Sanders, who was greeted onstage with raucous cheers and peppered his comments with the phrase “brothers and sisters.’’

“Having traveled this country, there is growing disgust on the part of ordinary Americans at the corporate greed that we see,” he said. “That greed is an illness — it is an addiction. And if the corporate CEOs don’t get the treatment that they need, we will provide the treatment for them.”

Mr. Sanders and UE, which is known for its progressive positions and has long backed the kind of single-payer health care system Mr. Sanders champions, have supported each other. for years. In February, just days after entering the 2020 race, the Vermont senator backed striking workers represented by UE at a locomotive plant in Erie, Pa. A local leader for the union spoke at Mr. Sanders’s campaign kickoff rally in Brooklyn in March, and chants of “Bernie, Bernie!” filled the hotel ballroom during Mr. Sanders’s address on Monday, leaving little doubt as to where the union members’ support lay.



A positive WaPo piece on Bernie’s climate plan


Sorry, but as fellow panelist and Democracy for America chief executive Yvette Simpson said: “Where we are now with the environment, people need extreme aggressive action on it.” Sanders’s plan isn’t perfect. (Its proposed phaseout of nuclear power would make hitting urgent emissions targets more difficult, given that nuclear provides more than half of America’s low- and no-carbon electricity.) But the sheer size of his vision, as author Bill McKibben puts it, “shows what simply must be done to meet the challenge physics has laid out.” Yes, “reaching 100 percent renewable energy for electricity and transportation by no later than 2030” may be incredibly ambitious, but as laid out earlier, we desperately need drastic emissions cuts by that year, and the deadline won’t wait for us.

Furthermore, Sanders recognizes most frequently among the current candidates that climate change threatens poor and minority communities the most, and that large-scale infrastructure and jobs projects, as well as expansion of public transit, are the best routes toward the emissions reductions we need. Oh, and as for spending concerns, the Sanders plan actually aims to pay for itself over 15 years.

Regardless, when it comes to climate change, Democratic leaders shouldn’t just blanch at a price tag. For decades now, liberals have been offering half-measures on climate and other issues out of fears of political backlash. Too often those compromises have neither helped them politically nor fully solved the policy problem. Saving the planet won’t be cheap or easy; decades of dawdling by past leaders mean that we need radical remedies. Sanders gets this. Too many in power don’t.



Sen. Elizabeth Warren faces an uphill climb in winning support from African American voters, say Democratic strategists and other political observers.

While Warren (D-Mass.) has been moving up in recent polls, she has struggled to lure black voters to her campaign.

A Fox News survey released last week showed Warren receiving 8 percent among black voters, a grim statistic if she is looking to win the nomination.

A separate poll by the Pew Research Center found that while former Vice President Joe Biden received 29 percent of support among African Americans, only 4 percent were throwing their support behind Warren. More black voters also named Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) as their pick.

“We definitely need to do better there,” one Warren ally acknowledged. “We can’t win without support from the black community. Period.”


3-Way Lead as Dem 2020 Picture Shifts

Sanders and Warren rise; Biden drops

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and former Vice President Joe Biden are currently bunched together in the national Democratic presidential preference contest. Movement in the latest Monmouth University Poll – positive for Warren and Sanders, negative for Biden – suggests the 2020 presidential nomination process may be entering a volatile stage. The poll results also suggest that liberal voters are starting to take a closer look at a wider range of candidates, while moderates are focusing on those with the highest name recognition. Another key finding that could contribute to growing volatility in the race is confusion over “Medicare for All.” Most say support for this policy is an important factor in choosing a Democratic nominee, but voters actually prefer a pubic option over a single payer plan.

The poll finds a virtual three-way tie among Sanders (20%), Warren (20%), and Biden (19%) in the presidential nomination preferences of registered Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters across the country. Compared to Monmouth’s June poll, these results represent an increase in support for both Sanders (up from 14%) and Warren (up from 15%), and a significant drop for Biden (down from 32%).
Results for the rest of the field are fairly stable compared to two months ago. These candidates include California Sen. Kamala Harris at 8% support (identical to 8% in June), New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker at 4% (2% in June), South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 4% (5% in June), entrepreneur Andrew Yang at 3% (2% in June), former cabinet secretary Julián Castro at 2% (<1% in June), former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke at 2% (3% in June), and author Marianne Williamson at 2% (1% in June). Support for the remaining 13 candidates included in the preference poll registered only 1% or less.

Biden has suffered an across the board decline in his support since June. He lost ground with white Democrats (from 32% to 18%) and voters of color (from 33% to 19%), among voters without a college degree (from 35% to 18%) and college graduates (from 28% to 20%), with both men (from 38% to 24%) and women (from 29% to 16%), and among voters under 50 years old (from 21% to 6%) as well as voters aged 50 and over (from 42% to 33%). Most of Biden’s lost support in these groups shifted almost equally toward Sanders and Warren.

“The main takeaway from this poll is that the Democratic race has become volatile. Liberal voters are starting to cast about for a candidate they can identify with. Moderate voters, who have been paying less attention, seem to be expressing doubts about Biden. But they are swinging more toward one of the left-leaning contenders with high name recognition rather than toward a lesser known candidate who might be more in line with them politically,” said Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute. He added, “It’s important to keep in mind this is just one snapshot from one poll. But it does raise warning signs of increased churning in the Democratic nomination contest now that voters are starting to pay closer attention.”

Biden lost support over the past two months among Democrats who call themselves moderate or conservative (from 40% to 22%) with the shift among these voters accruing to both Sanders (from 10% to 20%) and Warren (from 6% to 16%). Biden also lost support among liberals (from 24% to 15%), but this group’s backing has scattered to a variety of other candidates. Sanders has picked up a few points among liberal voters (from 17% to 21%) while Warren has held fairly steady (from 25% to 24%). Also, Harris has not budged with this group (from 10% to 11%) and Buttigieg has slipped slightly (from 8% to 5%). However, the aggregate support for four other candidates – namely Booker, Castro, Williamson and Yang – has gone up a total of 8 points among liberal Democrats (from 8% to 16% for the four combined).


BwaHAHAHA! How did this turn out Jill?


MY! MY! Nate Silver (the real one) sure is losing his credibility.



This is likely how the MSM will try to spin it. LOL





The poll comes as both Sanders and Warren are drawing large and enthusiastic crowds across the nation as they make the case for their progressive platforms.

On Sunday, Bloomberg reported, Warren attracted the largest audience of her presidential campaign as an estimated 15,000 attended her rally in Seattle. During the event, the Massachusetts senator touted her call for a two percent wealth tax on Americans with more than $50 million in assets.

Sanders, meanwhile, drew a large crowd in the deep red state of Kentucky, where he rallied with striking AT&T workers and called out Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) for obstructing minimum wage legislation.

The Vermont senator’s campaign was quick to tout the Monmouth survey as evidence of a Sanders surge.

In the campaign’s BERN Notice newsletter, Sanders speechwriter David Sirota noted, in addition to the senator’s overall gains, his growing support among people of color in the new survey.

“The poll shows Bernie is now the candidate with the largest amount of support from people of color,” said Sirota. “Compared to Monmouth’s June poll, Biden has dropped 14 points among people of color, while Bernie has gained seven points among people of color—the biggest gain of any candidate.”


if this continues into the not too distant future….





This is for my fellow animal lovers.

I’m sad to read this news, because I imagine that it will require cutting down a lot of rainforest, bad for the orangutans and the sloths and the environment, not to mention that many of the locals over in the new location will probably be pushed out?

Indonesia will build its new capital city in Borneo as Jakarta sinks into the Java Sea

A jungle-draped area on the east of Borneo island is set to be transformed into Indonesia’s new capital city, President Joko Widodo announced Monday, amid concerns over the sustainability of its congested and rapidly sinking political center Jakarta.

The proposed location, near the relatively underdeveloped cities of Balikpapan and Samarinda, is a far cry from the crowded powerhouse which has served as Indonesia’s financial heart since 1949 — and Widodo acknowledged that moving the country’s capital to the island will be a mammoth and expensive undertaking.

(Jakarta is) also one of the fastest-sinking cities on earth, according to the World Economic Forum, dropping into the Java Sea at an alarming rate due to over-extraction of groundwater.

Indonesia owns the majority of Borneo, the world’s third-largest island, with Malaysia and Brunei each holding parts of its northern region. The island is covered in vast rainforests, but has been hit by rampant deforestation in recent years.


More than three-quarters of the world’s orangutans live in the forests of Indonesian Borneo.


Not sure what they mean by ‘rehabilitating’ the existing forest.

The government says its wants to build a smart, green city on state land near the existing urban centres of Balikpapan and Samarinda and has promised the environmental impact will be positive.

We will not disturb any existing protected forest, instead we will rehabilitate it,” the planning minister Bambang Brodjonegoro, was reported as saying in the South China Morning Post.

But conservationists fear the plan – and the surge in the number of newcomers – may put further pressure on the rainforest habit species, such as the orangutan.
“The government must make sure that the new capital is not built in a conservation or protected area,” the Greenpeace Indonesia campaigner Jasmine Putri told AFP.

Known as Kalimantan, Indonesia’s section of Borneo – the island it shares with Malaysia and Brunei – is home to major mining activities as well as rainforests, and is one of the few places on Earth with orangutans in their natural habitat.




BEFORE DISTANCING HERSELF from Sen. Bernie Sanders’s Medicare for All campaign, Kamala Harris repeatedly boasted her support for the legislation in Facebook ads, in an effort to grow her list of supporters. Earlier this month, Harris backed away from Medicare for All during a private event in the Hamptons, telling a crowd of large-dollar donors that she had “not been comfortable with Bernie’s plan,” Bloomberg reported.

“I was proud to be the first Senate Democrat to come out in support of Bernie Sanders’ Medicare for All bill,” the ad, which ran from August 2 to August 7, 2018, and prompted Facebook users to share their email addresses with the campaign, read. “It is absurd that we are the only major industrialized nation in the world not to guarantee health care to all people. Add your name if you agree it’s time for Medicare for All.”

Harris told attendees at the fundraiser that her plan would preserve private insurance, distancing herself from Sanders’s plan, which she was the first senator to co-sponsor in 2017.

In April 2019, her campaign ran a flurry of ads saying she was “proud to be an original co-sponsor of the Medicare for All bill in the Senate.”

In January, she ran a sponsored campaign via Daily Kos asking the site’s readers to sign a petition — one that would have them join her own email list — calling for Medicare for All. “Every single person living in our country should have access to high-quality, meaningful, affordable health care, from birth on up. That’s why I’m proud to co-sponsor the Medicare for All Act in the Senate,” she wrote in an email to the site’s users, linking to a petition that has since been removed and putting her support of Sanders’s bill in bold. “Not only is it smart for taxpayers — it’s morally the right thing to do. We have the power to make Medicare for All a reality in our country, but only if we come together and make our voices heard.”


in the playbook


The trouble with Harris’s talent of sensing the political mood and adjusting her standpoint accordingly is that, over time, this can have a detrimental effect on a politicians’ perceived trustworthiness. While navigating her many policy pivots, Harris has missed the fact that the biggest question mark lingering over her is her character. What does she actually believe? Can she be trusted?




Many pieces have been and remain to be written about the differences between Sanders and Warren. I wrote one a while back arguing that while Elizabeth Warren may have smart policy, Bernie Sanders has mass politics. Since then, Sanders has released multiple detailed plans — on education, criminal justice, labor, and climate change — rendering Warren’s slogan “She has a plan for that” less useful in distinguishing between the two. But another point I made, that Sanders is trying to build a mass working-class movement that can challenge the power of the capitalist class itself and Warren isn’t, remains as true as ever.

One more place to look for evidence of this distinction is in their relationship to the Democratic Party. An article appeared today in the New York Times headlined “What Elizabeth Warren Is Quietly Telling Democratic Insiders.” What she’s telling them is that they have nothing to fear. Sure, her ideas are to the left of standard Democratic Party fare, but she wants establishment Democrats to know that she intends to cause no major upset. She’s “seeking to lead the party — not stage a hostile takeover of it.”

This is Warren’s attempt to differentiate herself from Sanders, who is indeed trying to stage a hostile takeover — that is, he’s trying to engineer a situation in which ordinary working-class people take over the government from powerful corporations and their allies, what he calls a “political revolution.” This scares the devil out of the Democratic Party elite, whose entire operation is bankrolled and sustained by massive corporations. And it should.

The Atlantic also published an article today, headlined “Elizabeth Warren Manages to Woo the Democratic Establishment.” In that article, Dan Fowler, a former DNC chair and “longtime Clinton-family loyalist” is quoted as saying that Warren “stretches across a broad spectrum of Democrats,” in large part because “she does not include in her presentation the implication of being against things, except the current president.”

Bernie Sanders is against a lot of things. He’s against health insurance and pharmaceutical profiteers. He’s against the military-industrial complex, and the prison-industrial complex. He’s against corporations that don’t pay their workers a living wage, that obstruct their employees from forming a union, and that plunder the earth for profit.

And, yes, he’s against the stratum of the Democratic Party officialdom that carries water for capitalists at the expense of working people, whom it induces to vote for them solely on the basis that they aren’t as bad as Republicans, without offering a positive political and engaging political vision of their own. He’s against people like Dan Fowler, who prefer a non-agitational politics that elides the fundamental real class conflict in society — and in the Democratic Party — in favor of platitudes about coming together to beat Trump.


we know she has many hill staff. wonder if hill is also advising. honestly im Starting to really dislike this, and by extension, Warren. I am very sad because I think she may be the next president and I could’ve been really excited at one point.

Not giving up on the man, though!


LOL! No idea what this is about but the CNN correspondent tweeted it.


LOL. Too bad my ice is gone but maybe my dancer will bring you on
Board with a GND!


😐Typos mess up what little rhythm it had. LOL


I think LGM stands for Let’s Go Mets?
LFGM stands for, well, the same thing with a F___ in there too.

Mets: LFGM has taken over as the 2019 version of Ya Gotta Believe

LFGM may be a little NSFW when compared to New York Mets slogans of the past. In case you G2G and don’t have the time to figure out what it stands for on your own, the TL;DR version of it is simple.

Not long ago, a new hashtag entered the Mets social media vocabulary. Instead of the simple LGM which is officially the slogan of the team, an F appeared in the middle.

LGM, which stands for Let’s Go Mets, has been a staple of the franchise long before the internet began to dominate our lives. The new version, LFGM, is the same with one more word added to the mix. If you have to ask what the word is, you probably should never know. Perhaps a parent or guardian can assist.

LFGM fits in perfectly with 2019. It’s quick, to the point, and can make a few people blush. It’s edgy enough without pushing any boundaries.






In his quest to become the Democratic Party’s nominee for president, former Vice-President Joe Biden is betting on labor. The candidate held his first official campaign event at a Teamsters hall, and quickly racked up an endorsement from the International Association of Firefighters. But Biden’s tenure as the only Democratic candidate to boast a union endorsement has come to an end — an early sign, perhaps, that his bid to win union votes might be more troubled than he’d imagined.

On Monday morning, members of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America voted to endorse Senator Bernie Sanders at their annual convention. As quoted by the Sanders campaign in a press release, the resolution adopted by UE members credits the senator for “consistently” attending the union’s “strike lines and workplace actions.”

Throughout the primary race, Sanders has employed a strategy defined by direct engagement with labor. Last week, he became one of a handful of Democratic candidates to release a formal labor policy plan. (One of those candidates, Jay Inslee, subsequently dropped out of the race.) And he’s developed a particularly strong relationship with the UE, which represents around 35,000 workers in the private and public sectors. The UE is smaller than IAFF, which boasts over 300,000 members in the U.S. and Canada, but it’s still a major force. During a strike earlier this year nearly 2,000 UE members walked the picket line in Erie, Pennsylvania for nine days. It was the largest manufacturing strike to occur during the Trump administration, as Labor Notes reported in June, and Sanders joined UE members on the picket line.

The UE is independent, meaning that it doesn’t belong to the AFL-CIO, and is governed by a version of direct democracy, so it wasn’t bound by a specific process. Other unions, including the Service Employees International Union and the American Federation of Teachers, have already released detailed endorsement processes, so they won’t follow the UE’s lead anytime soon. But Monday’s endorsement does lend some support to the conclusion that Biden isn’t going to be able to count on union votes unless he begins to work for them. He’ll need more than the myth of his own electability to win them over — especially now, as his lead is beginning to shrink.


I posted a new thread to deal specifically with the latest polls. Continue with other information in the Open Thread.


Op-Ed: Bernie Sanders on his plan for journalism

By Bernie Sanders

August 26, 2019

When we have had real journalism, we have seen crimes like Watergate exposed and confronted, leading to anti-corruption reforms. When we have lacked real journalism, we have seen crimes like mortgage fraud go unnoticed and unpunished, leading to a devastating financial crisis that destroyed millions of Americans’ lives.

Real journalism requires significant resources. One reason we do not have enough real journalism in America right now is because many outlets are being gutted by the same forces of greed that are pillaging our economy.

When I am president, my administration will put in place policies that will reform the media industry and better protect independent journalism at both the local and national levels.

For example, we will reverse the Trump administration’s attempts to make corporate media mergers even more likely in the future. We are not going to rubber stamp proposals like the new plan to merge CBS and Viacom into a $30 billion colossus.

I have long opposed media consolidation, and was one of only 16 members of the US House to oppose the disastrous 1996 Telecommunications Act, which accelerated consolidation. In my administration, we are going to institute an immediate moratorium on approving mergers of major media corporations until we can better understand the true effect these transactions have on our democracy.

And we will prevent media-related merger and deregulation decisions at federal agencies that adversely affect people of color and women. As the non-profit watchdog group Free Press has noted, “Women and people of color are woefully underrepresented among broadcast-license holders.” The group points out that this is because when the Federal Communications Commission has approved mergers it has failed “to consider how such concentration affects ownership opportunities for women and people of color.”

When our administration appoints new, progressive leadership at the FCC, we will reverse the Trump administration’s moves, which have gutted longstanding media ownership rules.

Additionally, we will pass my Workplace Democracy Plan, which will boost media workers’ laudable efforts to form unions and collectively bargain with their employers. I have publicly supported journalists’ efforts to unionize. Unions not only fight for media workers’ wages and benefits, they can also better protect reporters from corporate policies that aim to prevent journalists from scrutinizing media owners and their advertisers.

Finally, when it comes to Silicon Valley, I will appoint an Attorney General as well as Federal Trade Commission officials who more stringently enforce antitrust laws against tech giants like Facebook and Google, to prevent them from using their enormous market power to cannibalize, bilk, and defund news organizations. Their monopoly power has particularly harmed small, independent news outlets that do not have the corporate infrastructure to fight back.




In Monday’s op-ed, Sanders again referenced the Post as well as Disney properties like ABC saying, “news outlets owned by Disney and Jeff Bezos may happily tout Disney films and Bezos’s plans for space exploration, but we cannot count on them to consistently and aggressively cover workers’ fight for better wages at Disney- or Bezos-controlled companies. ”

CNBC reached out to Facebook Google, Amazon, Disney and the Washington Post for comment. None have yet responded.

“More than two centuries after the constitution was signed, we cannot sit by and allow corporations, billionaires and demagogues to destroy the Fourth Estate,” Sanders wrote. “Nor can we allow them to replace serious reporting with infotainment and propaganda.”


Duplicate. You beat me Mags!


Hahaha, by five seconds I think!! 👊 ❤️

But I think your post may have included the entire op-ed?

Please go to the link and read it all birdies!!






and is there it is.


Skip to toolbar