Writes Philip Bump in "Trump wanted Ukraine to impugn Biden. D.C. Republicans finally delivered. Why did Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) choose now to release the unverified allegation against Biden that he’s possessed all along?" (WaPo).
It’s not clear why Grassley decided to make the document public at this point.... [I]t’s not that he just received it.... It’s not as though there is new confirmation of the validity of the allegations. It may be an effort to piggyback on questions about the plea agreement Hunter Biden reached with federal prosecutors.... Or it may be an attempt to spritz the waning embers of the allegation with a last bit of lighter fluid....
It may still be the case that Joe Biden received a $5 million bribe from Burisma.... It may still be the case that the sitting vice president in 2015 — a guy so eager to be elected president that he started making bids for the Democratic nomination in the 1980s — decided to simply cash out on his government experience for a relatively modest sum by committing a federal crime....
Posts
84 comments:
Why did Grassley make the document public? Because America needs to know if the President is a crook.
$5 million is a modest sum only if it is one such "tip" received over the course of a year.
The entire team of the DC swamp critters wants to put Trump in a pen. He is an outsider who cut in line ahead of the lifelong political climbers, and he made fools of many. So, they are milking the evidence against him, pacing their attacks, and toying with him as a cat toys with a mouse. Most of the Republicans don't want Trump in prison, but they do want to castrate or hamstring his political ambitions. Such is life if you play in a predatory swamp without friends and allies.
If your wife tells you that there is a leak in the roof, and shows you where the water is coming in, do you believe her? Or do you make up some really strange rationale to not believe her, and not even investigate whether there is in fact a leak in the roof?
And I'm pretty sure that I have heard for a long time that it is the seriousness of the allegations that is important in these things. Now there is a danger, apparently, that the credibility of the informant might confuse people about whether the allegationa are true.
I dunno. Maybe Grassley needs to find some elderly women with mental health issues who vaguely remember dragons on the roof, bent on sexual assault several decades ago. Believe them. Always.
Compare this point by point with the Steele Dossier.
Then STFU
Joe Biden appears to have the same affliction immunity that the Obama Administration enjoyed: The DC and New York Press refuse to do their duty to afflict the comfortable.
We are sick and tired of watching the Press’s gummy fellatio when it comes to reporting Biden crimes.
Skepticism is a reasonable approach for any set of claims about anything, whether it is climate change or the Biden family's "business."
But when you have an all-out, balls-to-the-wall effort to suppress an investigation into the magic money-making skills of a crack-addled whore-chasing low-life whose father happens to be the President of the US, skepticism is also warranted as to whether our country can deliver equal justice for all. And as to whether the WaPo is not, in fact, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party.
So, yeah, let's have some skepticism, across the board.
Why did Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) choose now to release the unverified allegation against Biden that he’s possessed all along?"
Is it also a misleading pattern to point out that Bump wouldn’t care in the slightest about the timing if the parties were reversed? I’m conflating my lack of interest in his concerns with his own lack of credibility.
Bump gets paid to use words.
But his vocabulary, lacks simple words. Like corroboration.
The snippets posted are an embarrassment for a person, whose lively hood rests on his ability to persuade, using words.
The WaPoo falls into a familiar, misleading pattern, confusing the issue with incredible denials and variants of reportorial avoidance and editorial repackaging.
No one -- well, all right, few -- are taken in by its journolisting.
That charge meshes precisely with the whistle blowers' recent, completely credible, detailed and corroborated testimony. If the Bidens are not on the take then they wasted a lot of time, money and effort to set up 20 or so shell companies to launder the foreign money. Why would they do that other than to actually launder the money? The dems performance at the hearings, including the "Trump, Trump, Trump" diversions did nothing to counter the whistle blower testimony. Why would so many Biden business insiders lie in their own testimony? Why would a foreign company hire the crack head son of the US VP other than for influence? Why did around 10 Biden family members, including those who did nothing to contribute, get money passed to them through the shell companies?
This is such a slam dunk it requires the suspension of disbelief to ignore.
I'm old enough to remember when the Democrat standard for pursuing investigations was "It's not the strength of the evidence, it's the seriousness of the accusation".
Bump is a chump.
Well, Bump certainly didn't read anything about the IRS whistleblowers' testimony in his own newspaper, so it might be possible that he is somewhat ignorant of what goes on in DC.
The problem here is that there has been no investigation inspired by the allegations in the 1023. Remember that Wray denied that the 1023 existed. Then Grassley said that he had it. Then Wray said Comer could see it, but still played hide the ball. Then Comer's committee could see it--heavily redacted in a secure room. The 1023 was not classified information, but it was being withheld. Then Hunter got his plea deal. The DOJ had slow-walked the felony charges until after the statute of limitations had run. The IRS whistleblowers testified, but it wasn't reported in WaPoo. Not in the news pages. Not reported. Now there is a reliable news organization.
Then Grassley released the unclassified 1023 that someone in the FBI had given him. You should read it if you haven't yet. It is unverified information that the FBI apparently has not investigated. It is shocking that this info is there and apparently sparked no action from the Fearless Fosdicks of the FBI, except to cover it up and bury it. That is Grassley's point.
And what about Bump and other chumps in the press? Any one want to get a story? Nope. Not them. They just do what their political masters in the Democrat Party tell them to do. Like Hunter Biden, WaPoo is stupider than Zlochevsky's dog.
As to Bump's question, why does Bump think that Biden just turned crooked? Maybe Smilin' Joe has been a grifter all along. Anyone want to look into that? Maybe Biden decided that when Obama went with Hillary it was time for him to cash in at the teller's window. Anyone want to investigate what Biden was doing in Ukraine? He sure got that prosecutor fired. He bragged about it at the Council on Foreign Relations. In that 1023 the CHS notes that eastern European oligarchs sometimes brag about things they haven't actually done. Maybe Biden does that too. Anyone want to check that out? Anyone at the FBI? Anyone at WaPoo? Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?
Here is the 1023 if you haven't read it yet.
https://www.grassley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/fd_1023_obtained_by_senator_grassley_-_biden.pdf
So the Trump FBI was spying on the Bidens. Interesting.
"So the Trump FBI was spying on the Bidens."
It was more like hovering over the Bidens like guardian angels.
Maybe I'm misreading, but the analogy:
"I trust my wife, but if she tells me that our 6-year-old claims to have seen a dragon on the roof, I don’t suddenly believe that there was a dragon on the roof...."
doesn't really work. The informant is the wife. The allegation is that his kid says there's a dragon on the roof, not that there is a dragon on the roof.
Grassley seems to be one step ahead of the Biden Administration. Wray finally allowed Comer’s committee to see a heavily redacted version of the 1023. Grassley produced a much more lightly redacted version that had some actual information in it. Although one national security secret that he accidentally revealed was that the founder of Burisma thought Hunter Biden was dumber than his dog.
"So the Trump FBI was spying on the Bidens. Interesting."
Would it be wrong for the FBI to spy on political figures? Is that your point here? Because, if so, the FBI has a lot of 'splaining to do re Trump..
"It's hard for your opponent to badmouth you when you've got your fist in his mouth." - Bill Clinton
The more stuff that comes out about Joe Biden, the harder they have to go against Trump, with maybe 1/1,000 of the evidence, and what evidence they do have against Trump counts on assigning motivations to his words and actions that are unlikely, best case, but actually unknowable, short of some mind reading technology that doesn't exist.
What is so hard for Americans is to accept that our country has been taken over by a collection of, well basically mobsters.
Our elections are run on the honor system, with trillions at stake. Our media is unprofitable by itself, and media outlets are only of economic value to those seeking to manage public opinion in service of larger projects which depend on control of the government.
It's sad. We are now like the Soviet Union was, when everybody knows the party line is a lie, but there are still a lot of people who benefit from pretending to believe it. We are experiencing a civil war waged by almost complete control of the legal system, with carefully identified loopholes like "prosecutorial discretion" used as a fig leaf for the raw application of the power of the legal system to political ends.
If anybody can explain to me why "prosecutorial discretion" doesn't simply allow a prosecutor to go after Republicans to the fullest extent that any legal theory even remotely plausible to partisan Democrats will allow, while ignoring crimes by Democrats, I would love to hear it.
"Can you ring your dad?"
https://nypost.com/2023/07/23/hunter-biden-put-then-vp-dad-joe-on-the-phone-with-business-associates-at-least-2-dozen-times-ex-partner-devon-archer-to-testify/
That's a pretty weird definition of "uncorroborated" that this guy is using. I guess he means "uncorroborated by any news stories that I have heard while strictly confining my news intake to NPR, the New York Times, and the Washington Post."
If his wife tell hims the six-year old kid says there's a dragon on the roof, why wouldn't he believe the kid really did say that?
I bet he also believes that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. These goofballs are a dime-a-dozen, and one of them being a journalist for WaPo is the least extraordinary thing I've heard all month.
Left Bank sees the Bidens drowning in a river of shit and says, “There’s got to be a pony in here somewhere!”
Ha ha ha, shaking my head. First the entire population group that is anything but Hard Left is tarred with being unintelligent, ill-informed, unsophisticated, and having a tendency to buy into any bizarre 'conspiracy-theory' that comes along, instead of slurping up the media's preferred pablum of imaginary logic. And then, these 'conspiracy theories' have an annoying habit of eventually ripening into the obvious, accepted truth. And now, we have this media dunderhead crafting up brand-new conspiracy theories for our delectation, to replace a perfectly-good set of embarrassing hard facts.
It would all work out so very well, if we would just be agreeably stupid for once.
Trump wanted Ukraine to impugn Biden
That’s not quite right. Joe Biden had boasted — on videotape — that he had used the threat to block funds allocated for Ukraine to interfere in the internal legal affairs of that country. Trump simply asked whether it was true.
It may still be the case that Joe Biden received a $5 million bribe from Burisma....
May still be the case??? Thank you, Althouse, for the morning belly laugh.
It may still be the case that the sitting vice president in 2015 — a guy so eager to be elected president that he started making bids for the Democratic nomination in the 1980s — decided to simply cash out on his government experience for a relatively modest sum by committing a federal crime....
Why wouldn’t he? Remember that at the time Hillary Clinton was thought to be the “inevitable” successor to Obama. In which case Biden, born in November 1942, would not have a shot at the nomination until 2024, when he was 81 And they must pay writers pretty well at the Post that Bump regards a sum denominated in millions of dollars as “relatively modest.”
The informant is the wife. The allegation is that his kid says there's a dragon on the roof, not that there is a dragon on the roof.
Yeah, the author is conflating the informant with the allegation in his own allegory. If that was the only flaw, it is embarrassing enough,
Of course this is coming out because of the Hunter Biden plea bargain. It is a sweet heart deal nobody else would get given by a corrupt DOJ that claimed the prosecutor was free to investigate any lead, yet the informants are alleging that they were blocked from investigating the $5 million from Burisma, and if it was a legitimate payment for service rendered by Hunter Biden or a bribe to his father. Considering Biden’s self proclaimed advocacy to protect Burisma from investigation, it seems the latter. Why wasn’t this investigated?
Philip Bump, who went all in on Trump-Russia-collusion-Steele-dossier nonsense that anyone with a decent shit detector knew was bullshit the minute the words "pee tape" were uttered, has no business trying to teach anyone the difference between the credibility of an informant and the credibility of an allegation.
It has been claimed that Biden set up a lot of shell corporations. If the Washington Post wants to make news, they could debunk that rather than talking about dragons on the roof.
iowan2 said...
Compare this point by point with the Steele Dossier.
Then STFU
7/25/23, 6:30 AM
THIS^^^^^
AND
chickelit said...
We are sick and tired of watching the Press’s gummy fellatio when it comes to reporting Biden crimes.
7/25/23, 6:36 AM
THIS^^^^
Democracy dies in assclownery.
https://twitter.com/ClimateAudit/status/1683290201903312899
chickelit,
The press had duties? Where did they garner them? And are you sure about the particular duty to afflict that you cite?
chickelit,
The press had duties? Where did they garner them? And are you sure about the particular duty to afflict that you cite?
Bump ignores, perhaps purposely, the fact that the FBI verified the informant’s whereabouts and that he was in all the named locations at the time he said. The document is also corroborated by testimony from the IRS whistleblowers who were kept ignorant of the affidavit until last week. Tony Bobulinski’s testimony is now confirmed by the FBI documents and the bank records that Congress released.
That’s an awful lot to ignore in the face of Joe’s famous bragging about firing the Ukrainian prosecutor.
"It may still be the case"
That's the tell.
The case that hundreds of intrepid "reporters" have been busy trying to uncover for 8 years, laying bare every move, every corrupt transaction, as doggedly as they ever did with any other scandal, aiming for that next Pulitzer?
Or wait--the case they've been covering with a pillow, aided by "intelligence" officials, squashed as much as possible by law enforcement, all curiously incurious about what "may still be the case"?
The Vice-President's son takes millions of dollars from a Ukrainian energy company and then when the Vice-President becomes President he orders the destruction of a Russian gas pipeline and then lies about it. Hmmmm... Let's not ask any questions ever.
What verification of the Biden corruption the Washington Post would accept?
They'd call a confession "unverified".
Philip Bump has “all the classic earmarks of FBI disinformation.”
Dave Begley said...
Because America needs to know if the President is a crook.
Liberals KNOW Biden is a crook. They don't care.
They're hatred for Trump voters and middle America outweighs any concern they might have about corruption. Even if it means supporting a proxy war with Russia to cover Biden family crimes and other corrupt American activities in Ukraine.
Plus, Bump and Trump rhyme so well. God is in the details.
The phrase "Unverified" is a weird one. Verified by who? And don't remember "Unverifed" being attached to the "Steele Doisser" or any document that made Trump look bad.
Crazy Ol' E. Jean Carroll couldn't even remember what year she was "raped" by Trump, yet I don't see "Unverifed" being attached to her allegations.
Business Insider reports today:
In April, Fox News Digital reported that at least four business partners, a vice president and two assistants at Rosemont Seneca Partners visited the White House more than 80 times when Biden was vice president.
And per Bump Joe never even spoke to all his visitors who ran Rosemont Seneca with Hunter.
"My son has not made money in terms of this thing about, what are you talking about, China," Biden declared during the October 2020 debate against then-President Trump. "The only guy who made money from China is this guy. He’s the only one. Nobody else has made money from China."
The secret translation: when Biden closes a statement with "Period," everything that came before it was a lie.
"... unverified allegation...." A redundancy?
What does this even mean in real life? An allegation not investigated by the FBI? We know that sworn affidavits from election workers about irregularities in 2020 are considered "unverified" by the leftmedia. Hunter's laptop was "Russian disinformation". Now an allegation by a Ukrainian in a position to know surrounded by a plethora of circumstantial evidence is not just an "allegation", but an "unverified allegation."
These mediaswine and their Democrat masters have neither integrity nor shame. But never mind. "Democrat grifting is a feature not a bug." What about the country, assholes?
Bump might have made the argument, just because my wife buys one of Hunter's painting for $500,000 just before Joe appoints her to a diplomatic seat doesn't mean I believe this painting on our living room wall is worth $500,000.
"gummy fellatio"
@chickelit, you have my horrified admiration for that bon mot.
Some claims are worth verification,
Others not so much.
Blogger Sebastian said...
...the case they've been covering with a pillow...
The full quote from David Burge (Iowahawk) is:
"Journalism is about covering important stories. With a pillow, until they stop moving."
I have never in my 60+ years witnessed the corporate media collectively ignore a major political scandal as much as they have in regards to the Biden family bribery scandal. My goodness! We are talking about a President who has been in politics since the 70s, as a Senator, a Vice-President, and now the President of the United States. Should it be anyone else (will except maybe Hillary), journalists would be crawling over each other to get the latest scoop. Now, it is not just "crickets" but also the media actively working to cover up or deflect from bribery evidence presented by the whistle-blowers, Hunter's business partners, and the emails on his laptop.
It makes one wonder how much of the "Big Guy's" ten percent ended up in the banking accounts of the corporate board members at all the major media outlets. Even the WSJ is ignoring the story. Out-right ignoring! There has been a couple of opinion pieces at that site that lightly cover the story, but nothing by the front-page news journalists? And nothing in the "Political" section. Why not? There is simply no reasonable excuse other than some type of financial or other type benefit to those that make the publishing decisions. You have a news-site that for decades has been the premier financial and political news organ of the nation.
WSJ had done investigative reports on company maleficence, political crimes, and such for decades. Every allegation regarding Trump, whether based upon reliable evidence or not, was reported upon from every angle (except possible innocence). But, on this issue the journalists have no interest. This is block-buster Pulitzer prize-winning material that has more evidence revealed each day. Our current President accused of bribery involving millions of dollars from foreign countries. Bribery is one crime specifically set out as grounds for impeachment and conviction. Yet they show no interest. Why not?
Does anyone have a reasonable explanation?
Goddammit, Meade. That is perfect.
Doing all they can to kill the story.Regardless of the cost.
The NYT had an article that WaPo is on track to lose 100 million dollars this year, after losing 500,000 subscribers since 2020.
Propaganda pleases the ruling class, but people don't seem to be buying it anymore.
I take Bump's essay a bit differently- I think it reveals that Bump knows the allegations are true, and the only defense now is a modified limited hangout, to which Bump's essay amounts. Bump has set it up so that months from now when it can longer be denied even half-heartedly, he can point to this essay say, "Look, I suspected the allegations were true all along- I wasn't denying that they were." The media are starting to go into CYA mode.
"... unverified allegation...." A redundancy?
What does this even mean in real life? An allegation not investigated by the FBI? We know that sworn affidavits from election workers about irregularities in 2020 are considered "unverified" by the leftmedia. Hunter's laptop was "Russian disinformation". Now an allegation by a Ukrainian in a position to know surrounded by a plethora of circumstantial evidence is not just an "allegation", but an "unverified allegation."
These mediaswine and their Democrat masters have neither integrity nor shame. But never mind. "Democrat grifting is a feature not a bug." What about the country, assholes?
And, Left Bank- the informant wasn't spying on Biden, he was spying on Burisma and other Ukrainian entities, and had been doing so since before Trump became President. He simply relayed the conversation to his handlers, and those handlers' bosses in the FBI apparently buried it without even a cursory investigation.
Had this been Eric Trump doing the Ukrainian dealing, this document would have been leaked immediately to the NYTimes years ago, and the FBI would have launched an immediate investigation while leaking relentless to the press and doing so anonymously.
Saw it was Bump and stopped reading.
Didn't Bump and the WaPo have to settle defamation suits not too long ago from Nick Sandmann...
Anyone writing this way about "unverified allegations" after the Russian collusion hoax should have their typing fingers superglued to their backsides. That might be the only way they could find their asses using both hands.
I can't break through to the article but the most-liked comments lead me to believe that Bump may have intentionally clouded the fact that the document Grassley released was generated by the FBI, as many of them appear to believe that it is entirely a creation of Grassley, Trump, Giuliani, the RNC and, of course, Putin.
If he was clear about the origin of the document then those commenters make the worst left-wingers here look like comparatively sane and fair-minded seekers of truth.
Maybe they didn't read past the first word of the headline. That's pretty common. But, just damn, we are never "coming together" as a nation if those people represent a sizeable portion of the left.
And I'm afraid they do.
Takes a lot of mental twists, turns and gyrations to come up with the codswallop published in the WaPoot on a daily basis. This is just one more sample.
Bump+Biden-Trump=chump.
Anyone who reads the WaPoo needs therapy. Stupidity can be a choice.
And I'm pretty sure that I have heard for a long time that it is the seriousness of the allegations that is important in these things.
To be fair, the FBI had already discredited its own source and had no actual proof to back up the allegations.
The success of their fishing expedition was predicted on "the seriousness of the allegations" they could put before the FISA court.
Philip Bump has “all the classic earmarks of FBI disinformation.”
Bump and dump.
Hey, Phil. Suppose your wife tells you that her lover has seen her have an orgasm. Is that credible? Or would you still insist she's "frigid"?
"It may still be the case that Joe Biden received a $5 million bribe from Burisma ..."
Guess we'll never know, right Phil? I admire the equanimity with which PhilBump accepts his own ignorance. A man has to know his limitations.
There's no such thing as dragons. Believing there are is stupid.
There is such things as bribery and corruption by politicians. Accusations of that type of behavior should be taken seriously.
Of course, if you're a hack Democrat media mouthpiece who isn't intelligent enough to do more than act as a stenographer for the Party's talking points, the difference is probably lost on you.
Good synopsis of this case so far.
"If the accusation is true, what do you say? What do you want done?"
I am only willing to listen to doubts about the truth of an accusation, if the truth of the accusation is the issue.
"We are now like the Soviet Union was, when everybody knows the party line is a lie, but there are still a lot of people who benefit from pretending to believe it."
Interesting story. I rented a room for a while, in 2015, from a guy who grew up in the Soviet Union and East Germany. Very smart guy, computer geek. His Dad was a fairly senior officer in the Soviet Army, stationed in Germany, so they had a nice apartment, by East German standards. But he got out while the getting was good, before the wheels came off. He had a lot of interesting stories.
Anyway, one evening we were talking over dinner, and I made some remark about what a monster Beria was. Alex was shocked and appalled. I mean, really, shocked. No one had ever suggested to him that Lavrenti Beria was anything but a fine, upstanding public servant, an officer and a gentleman. I told him that Beria used to send his agents out to kidnap pretty girls off the street for him to rape in his office in the Lubyanka. Then he'd send them flowers the next morning. Alex was having none of it. Beria? Nonsense! Never!
Hunter Biden got kicked out of the Navy Reserve for cocaine. He’s a known drug addict.
A few months later he’s on the board of a Ukrainian company getting $1 million a year. Hunter has no experience in Ukraine or energy. He’s a coke head. His dad, however, is Vice President and Obama have Joe Ukraine as part of his “portfolio.”
This is enough to launch an investigation. It was possible that Hunter just traded on his name and relied on the mistaken belief by his Ukrainian benefactors that Hunter would enlist Joe to help them as needed.
Then Hunters laptop shows up with a trove of information. All the foreign money flowing into the shell companies Hunter set up and money flowing into the bank accounts of Biden’s grandchildren.
Also, the text saying Biden takes half of Hunter’s earning. Then the statements from a former Hunter business partner about meeting Joe Biden and discussing the business and Hunter saying 10% for the Big Guy.
Biden flat out said he never discussed business with Hunter and never talked to those Hunter did business with. Those are now proven lies.
Grassley released the document last (he had it for awhile) because it’s more devastating now. What makes the Sources allegations credible is everything that we knew. Now it’s the payers who are saying they talked to Biden and Biden himself helped with their problems.
And by the way, there is no fucking way Obama didn’t know what the Bidens were up to in Ukraine. It was in Joe’s Grift Portfolio that Obama gave him.
Dave Begley said...
Why did Grassley make the document public? Because America needs to know if the President is a crook.
Your political lean is showing through, Dave. The document contains unexplained errors, so it proves nothing.
Grassley was also advised by security folks not to release the FD-1023 because it identifies and endangers the writer, but what's another foreign businessman among many conspirators?
Blogger gadfly said..."The document contains unexplained errors, so it proves nothing."
Fine. What are these unexplained errors?
I've identified a new level of stupidity previously unencountered here.
The document contains unexplained errors, so it proves nothing.
Not one fucking thing in the Steele Dossier was true, none of it could be proven because it was false, and yet the whole of the Democrat party still insist it is a meaningful document. And yet you find a report that the FBI says bore "indicia of credibility" and it "merited further investigation;" but you Gadfly have determined that "unexplained errors" disprove the whole thing.
Okay then what is just one error, and how exactly does that one "error" counterindicate that the informant was in fact co-located with the president of Burisma during every instance reported? In short, please explain how an error changes a verified fact.
Sounds like a neat trick.
Grassley was also advised by security folks not to release the FD-1023 because it identifies and endangers the writer, but what's another foreign businessman among many conspirators? [lies bolded for effect]
Speaking of "errors" you may want to check your facts. The "writer" of the FD1023 is an FBI agent because it is an FBI report (check it out, and it IS redacted by the way). And should you try to wriggle sideways by shifting the meaning to the "informant" instead of writer, well he is NOT identified either, only vouched for in strong terms by the Bureau. Even when source docs are widely available leftists will always lie about the content, this time and every time for all time.
Thank you for your generous contribution to the discussion Gaddy.
I keep coming back to the "20 shell companies" that Biden supposedly set up, because I can't see an innocent explanation. I want to know if it's true or not.
‘Philip Bump has “all the classic earmarks of FBI disinformation.” ‘
Bump’s a hump, Meade.
What Mike wrote @2:23pm!
The leftwing media are spreaders of lies and misinformation. Any lie will do when protecting crook Biden family.
Mike Wolf 2:13 -
that.
Mike (MJB Wolf): "Even when source docs are widely available leftists will always lie about the content, this time and every time for all time."
Leftists and LLR-leftists.
I think I know the deal on all the corruption but for the life of me I cannot get my head around gummy fellatio.
MOfarmer said...
"I think I know the deal on all the corruption but for the life of me I cannot get my head around gummy fellatio."
It conjures up quite a disturbing image.
Post a Comment