%20(1)%20(4)%20(1).jpg)
If Biden Intended To Destroy America, What Would He Be Doing Differently?
Liberals and radical Democrats would have you believe their narrative that it is only White Supremacists who are a threat to our nation.
+++
Armed California Man Seeking to Kill Justice Kavanaugh Arrested Near Justice's Home
By Spencer Brown
An armed California man was arrested near Justice Brett Kavanaugh's home between 1:00 and 2:00 am Wednesday and allegedly told law enforcement he wanted to kill the Supreme Court justice, according to reporting from multiple sources that was confirmed by the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
According to SCOTUSblog, a spokesperson for the Court confirmed that "At approximately 1:50 a.m. today, a man was arrested near Justice Kavanaugh's residence. The man was armed and made threats against Justice Kavanaugh."
Sources who spoke with The Washington Post provided additional details:
The man was reportedly carrying "at least one weapon" when he was confronted by authorities. WaPo's report was sparse on specific details, but what was reported is damning in light of the White House's refusal to condemn protests targeting justices private homes:
The individual, described as a man in his mid-20s, was found to be carrying at least one weapon and burglary tools, these people said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation. Police were apparently notified that the person might pose a threat to the justice, but it was not immediately clear who provided the initial tip, these people said. The man apparently did not make it on to Kavanaugh’s property in Montgomery County, but he was stopped on a nearby street, these people said.
Two people familiar with the investigation said the initial evidence indicates the man was angry about the leaked draft of an opinion by the Supreme Court signaling the court is preparing to overturn Roe. v. Wade, the 49-year-old decision that guaranteed a person’s constitutional right to have an abortion. He was also angry over a recent spate of mass shootings, those people said.
Before she left for her MSNBC gig, then-White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki tried to brush off leftists targeting originalist Supreme Court Justices' homes as just a result of "women across the country [who] are worried about their fundamental rights."
After several justices' homes were subsequently targeted and violent threats escalated, the White House's Karine Jean-Pierre tweeted a too-little, too-late clarification that President Biden only supports peaceful protests.
The arrest of a man with at least one weapon who proclaimed his desire to kill Justice Kavanaugh over the leaked SCOTUS opinion that showed Roe v. Wade being overturned follows violent attacks against pro-life organizations as the left's rhetoric — and actions — against conservatives continue to escalate.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
| More Than "One Damn Thing," With Bill Barr |
| interview with William P. Barr via Uncommon Knowledge In William P. Barr's new book, One Damn Thing after Another: Memoirs of an Attorney General, Barr goes into great detail about the chaos, the troubles, and the triumph that occurred during the time of his service under President Trump. This wide-ranging interview covers Russiagate, the COVID outbreak, civil unrest, the impeachment, and the 2020 election fallout. +++++++++++++++++++++++ As you will learn if you listen to a Zoom Conference meeting I just heard (see comments below.). I will be posting the replay when available. The Biden Administration is actually on the side of Iran when it comes to allowing them to use Hezbollah as a conduit for shipping dangerous weaponry to Lebanon where it is being stored for eventual attacks on Israel. The Biden Administration apparently accepts Iran's promise terrorists in this country, under their control, will not assassinate American officials. Finally, the Biden Administration is actively following the same path Obama laid out which allowed Iran to become nuclear in it's pursuit of dominating the Middle East and destroying Israel. +++ What's Iran up to? We aren't 100% sure, but we know it's not playing by the rules. The Iranian government has turned off two surveillance cameras owned by the United Nations nuclear watchdog program that was monitoring one of the rogue nation's atomic development sites. The two cameras that have been disabled were monitoring the "OLEM enrichment levels and flowmeters" but details are still sketchy about which atomic site cut the feeds. This latest move is seen to be more posturing on the part of the Iranian government to pressure Western nations at an upcoming meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency. ++++++++++++++ Richard,
Hoover Institution scholars study and apply the lessons of history in order to point the road to peace, to personal freedom, and to the safeguards of the American system. A great example of this is found in Senior Fellow Barry Weingast's new PolicyEd feature "Why Do Some Democracies Survive While Others Fail?". PolicyEd is a platform where Hoover scholars give a brief introduction to an important topic or question. After the introduction, readers have access to a wealth of additional resources, discussion questions, and quizzes for those who want to dive deeper on a topic. I hope you'll take some time to explore the breadth of resources offered on PolicyEd. While this platform is geared toward educating young people, the content is really good for everyone. Greg Greg Stamps | Online Development Hoover Institution | Stanford University +++++++++++++++++++++++ Good morning. We preview the five biggest rulings expected from the Supreme Court in the next few weeks. By David Leonhardt Five for five? The month of June at the Supreme Court — when the justices tend to announce their biggest decisions — has had a similar rhythm over the past few decades. There is usually an ideologically complicated mix of decisions, with some pleasing the political right (on voting rights and business regulation, for example) and others pleasing the left (on health care and L.G.B.T. rights). This month, however, looks as if it might be different. “The right may well run the table on the big cases,” Adam Liptak, a former lawyer who covers the court for The Times, told me. The five most closely watched cases include one each on abortion, gun control and climate regulation and two on religion. All five decisions are likely to be announced this month (unless the court extends its term into early July). Based on the justices’ questions during the oral arguments in each case, conservative rulings appear likely. Individual surprises are always possible, Adam emphasizes. But the court does seem to be shifting to the right. In the past four years, Anthony Kennedy — a conservative justice who nonetheless joined liberals on some major decisions — has been replaced by the more conservative Brett Kavanaugh. And Ruth Bader Ginsburg — a liberal icon — has been replaced by Amy Coney Barrett, who may be even more conservative than Kavanaugh. The result seems to be a new era for the court. It now has six Republican appointees, and only one of them — Chief Justice John Roberts — evidently prefers a cautious approach. The remaining five form what Adam calls “an impatient, ambitious majority,” eager to shape American law as they believe it should be shaped, even when it means overturning longstanding court precedent or rejecting policies passed by Congress or state legislatures. Today’s newsletter offers a preview of the term’s end, with Adam’s help. Abortion The case dominating public attention involves Mississippi’s ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Last month, Politico reported that five justices — all the Republican appointees save Roberts — had tentatively voted not only to allow Mississippi’s ban but to go even further and overturn Roe v. Wade, allowing full abortion bans. Adam said he thought that outcome remained the most likely one. But it’s also plausible that Roberts will join the ruling as a sixth vote even though he did not sign onto the earlier draft. Given the intense reaction that’s sure to follow, Roberts may prefer that the case not be decided by a single vote. Alternately, one of the other five conservatives could defect and join Roberts in a narrower ruling that allowed Mississippi’s ban without overturning Roe. Such a decision would leave many conservatives feeling disappointed about this term, regardless of the result in other cases, given the expectations that Politico’s story created. (Here is The Morning’s recent guide to what a post-Roe America might look like.) Guns Fourteen years ago, the Supreme Court threw out a Washington, D.C., law that heavily regulated how people could keep guns in their homes. Now, the court is considering whether to throw out a New York State law that restricts people’s ability to carry guns in public. New York requires people to demonstrate that they have a specific need to carry a handgun in public. During the recent oral arguments in a case challenging that law, the conservative justices’ questions suggested they were likely to overturn the law and rule that it violated the Second Amendment. If they do, the ruling could also invalidate similar laws in a handful of other states, including California, Maryland and Massachusetts. Law enforcement officials in New York are concerned that the end of the law could lead to an increase in crime, my colleague Jonah Bromwich explains. “There is also the atmospheric oddity of the court weighing in on guns rights at a time when the country is traumatized by gun violence,” Adam says, referring to recent mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Texas. The climate A central question about the newly conservative Supreme Court is how aggressively it will restrict federal agencies from regulating greenhouse gas emissions. A case this term — West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency — suggests that the justices may choose to be aggressive. The details are complex, but the result could be a ruling that limits the E.P.A.’s ability to enact regulations that apply to multiple power plants, rather than individually regulating each one. The broader area of law here is known as administrative law, and it has been a top priority of the Federalist Society, an influential conservative group that has helped mentor and vet judges. Federalist Society members often argue that government agencies should not be permitted to impose regulations that Congress has not specifically enacted. “The view is that Congress should be making the laws and not unelected bureaucrats,” as Adam says. Opponents counter that Congress cannot envision every scenario when passing laws and that regulators need the flexibility to protect citizens from harms — like pollution. Religion The court’s new majority has already shown a strong desire to protect religious freedom. That position seems likely to manifest itself in two new decisions this month. One deals with a challenge to a Maine law that allows rural residents who live from far any public school to attend a private school — but not a religious private school — using taxpayer dollars. The other deals with a former high school football coach near Seattle who lost his job after praying on the 50-yard line at the end of his team’s games; he argued that doing so was a matter of religious freedom, while the school district contended that he was effectively pressuring team members into participating. When the interests of governments and religious groups conflict, this court tends to side with the religious groups. And the rest The court is also expected to issue rulings in about 25 other cases in coming weeks. Many of those are less ideological or lower profile, and some will likely not result in major conservative victories. But the term after this one — starting in the fall — seems to be shaping up as another conservative term, with the court already having agreed to hear cases on affirmative action, voting rights and a clash between religious freedom and L.G.B.T. rights. The justices may also choose to add to its docket the “800-pound gorilla” of election oversight cases, as Adam recently explained. ++++++++++++++ And the fight goes on: +++ The Parental School-Board Revolt Continues Ballotpedia finds voters delivered a message to incumbents in April. The Editorial Board The political fallout from school closings and curriculum battles continues, as school board incumbents are losing at an unusual rate. That’s the news from Ballotpedia, which analyzed recent school board elections in three states. “Incumbents lost at nearly twice the historical average,” the website that tracks election results reported last week. Parents are revolting over how districts handled Covid and how schools teach race and gender. School board candidates campaigned on at least one of these issues in 141 school district elections in Missouri, Oklahoma and Wisconsin. A third of incumbents lost re-election, compared to an average of 18% in the races Ballotpedia tracked from 2018 to 2021. Candidates who opposed woke instruction or Covid policies such as the shutdowns or mask mandates won 36% of the 334 seats in these districts. Those with unclear positions won 19%, Ballotpedia says. Candidates taking a more progressive stance won 45%. Voter recall efforts have also soared. Not all are successful, but Ballotpedia tracked attempts to boot 126 board members in 2021, up from 28 in 2019. Recalls have already been mounted against 77 current board members. This surge in successful challenges is welcome because the root problem with public schools has long been traceable to failed monopoly governance. School boards are dominated by teacher’s unions, which have an intense interest in the outcome. Parents who have day jobs and lack the time to monitor school instruction are at a disadvantage, and school board elections typically take place on primary or other days when turnout is low. “Union-endorsed candidates win roughly 70 percent of all competitive school board elections,” Boston College’s Michael Hartney discovered after examining school board races in California and Florida over an extended duration. His findings were published in January in the journal Interest Groups & Advocacy. The pandemic shutdowns gave parents more incentive and opportunity to pay attention and, when they did, many school boards dismissed their concerns. Teachers union leaders these days, even at the local level, aren’t focused on student performance as they once were. They’re part of an increasingly ideological vanguard that follows progressive national dictates no matter what parents might prefer. Recall the recent investigation of three students in rural Kiel, Wis. of all places, for not using politically correct woke pronouns. It isn’t clear how long this parental interest will persist once memories of the lockdowns fade, and the unions and incumbents will try to ride out the revolt. School choice is the best long-run antidote to the progressive union monopoly. But parents who are taking on the burden and risk of challenging entrenched boards are acting in the best tradition of American self-government. ++++++++ Vestiges of Americana fading before our eyesBy Salena ZitoLast week was more than just the end of Howard Johnson’s. It marked one more place in our culture that lost touch with its customers because the owners had little in common with them. In short, they lived in the super ZIP codes of this country and ate and shopped in a universe far different than their customers. They still made money whether anyone came to shop or eat. And unlike many of us did not mourn when someone turned the lights off for the last time in Lake George. Click for the full story here please (and let me know what you think!) https://www. +++++++++++++++++++++ It is likely BIBI will return and if so could not come at a more essential/propitious time. +++ https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-and-the-right-are-about-to-regain-power-theyll-hold-it-for-a-long-time/ Netanyahu and the right are about to regain power; they’ll hold it for a long time The final blow to the coalition could come from many directions, but come it will. And Israel will get a gov’t of the ideological hue most of the electorate voted for a year ago By David Horovitz ++++++++++++++++ Serious discussions taking place: +++ After censure of Iran, Bennett to meet UAE president, discuss concerns Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed will discuss regional concerns following the IAEA's vote yesterday to censure Iran for nuclear violations. ++++++++++++++++++++++++ Victor David Hanson is a historian and he is also clear headed and consistently points out inconsistencies, hypocricy and untruths. Biden gives him plenty of ammunition. Big Government is generally ineffective but progressives and radical Democrats have weaponized it to the point that it is now sadistic and dangerous. This trend accelerated with Obama and now has become a threat +++ The subordinate citizen By Victor David Hanson I recently led a group of about 100 citizens to tour Israel for nearly two weeks. Before returning to the United States, all participants had to indicate their vaccination status and take a COVID-19 test for reentry. Anxieties swept the group as Israeli testers swabbed them. Anyone testing positive would have to delay his or her return. That quarantine would entail spending thousands of dollars in finding scarce hotel accommodations, additional living expenses, and rebooked airline tickets – depending upon the length of the mandatory sequestration. Contrast the tens of thousands of foreign nationals now mustering to cross illegally into the United States again this summer. They follow the already 2 million who have entered the country unlawfully since Joe Biden became president. Does any foreign national worry about being tested for COVID-19, much less fear being turned away if he tests positive or for lack of proof of vaccination? Or do we scrutinize far more carefully U.S. citizens entering legally their own country than we do noncitizens crossing our borders unlawfully? For that matter, the government is still determined to fire thousands of federal workers and U.S. military personnel who refused the new mRNA vaccinations. Most citizens who were not vaccinated feared that the inoculations were either possibly dangerous to their health or ineffective in preventing COVID-19 infections or would not necessarily lead to herd immunity. Are 2 million non-vaccinated foreigners arriving unaudited from impoverished countries less of a threat during the pandemic than fully audited American citizens employed by the federal government? Why would we fire unvaccinated Americans but welcome equally unvaccinated noncitizens? The Biden Administration blasted the Trump southern border wall and canceled all further funding. Yet it just appropriated $40 billion to Ukraine to ensure that it does not lose its border war against Russian aggression. That is a tiny percentage of the federal budget. But the aid is full of symbolic irony, nonetheless. The multibillion-dollar appropriation would have more than covered the completion of the entire wall along our own southern border. An outside observer might conclude that the U.S. government intends to uphold the universal idea of national sovereignty, internationally recognized borders, and the security of citizens inside their own country – as long as they are not American citizens. There are currently over 550 "sanctuary" jurisdictions established by state and local governments. They aim to prevent federal immigration authorities from deporting illegal aliens, including tens of thousands detained by law enforcement for committing additional crimes. The nation has not experienced such blatant nullifications of federal laws since the efforts of pre-Civil War Southern states – or the 1960s southern governors who defied federal efforts to enforce U.S. civil rights legislation. So, can any citizens now simply vote to declare their hometown or local county immune from federal legislation? That is, can a city or county nullify as it pleases the IRS tax code, endangered species laws, or federal gun registration legislation? Or is nullification only permissible in the interest of non-citizens and lawbreakers? These asymmetries also transcend noncitizens. We have developed entire classes of American elite citizens who are not subject to the enforcement of the law – at least as it is applied to others either less influential or ideologically incorrect Federal prosecutors sought to jail Lt. General Michael Flynn for six months for not telling the truth to federal agents. They put another Trump subordinate, George Papadopoulos, in jail for two weeks for lying to federal prosecutors. Recently the FBI stormed into an airport to arrest former Trump advisor Peter Navarro for contempt of a congressional subpoena. OK, defying federal law has consequences. Or does it? Former Obama Administration Attorney General Eric Holder brazenly defied congressional subpoenas and was found in contempt – an historic first. Did the FBI ever arrest Holder, much less as he boarded an airplane? James Clapper, former director of national intelligence, confessed he flat-out lied under oath to a congressional committee. So did former Central Intelligence Agency chief John Brennan – twice! Andrew McCabe repeatedly lied to federal investigators as acting director of the FBI. Were any of them arrested or tried in the manner of Flynn, Papadopoulos, or Navarro? If not, what then is left of the foundation of U.S. citizenship – universal equal treatment under the law? There are lots of reasons why the looming November midterms will likely see historic levels of pushback against the Biden Administration, Democratic candidates, and the entire progressive agenda. Take your pick of the many self-induced Biden disasters, among them hyperinflation, unaffordable gasoline, out-of-control crime, and foreign-policy humiliations. But one reason why voters are furious is rarely expressed. Americans feel that ordinary citizens like themselves who follow the rules are treated more harshly by their own government than are both non-citizens and our own progressive elites. And they are right, and they are angry, and we will hear from them very soon. ( Hanson's latest book is "The Dying Citizen" from Basic Books. Buy it in hardcover at a 31% discount! by clicking here or order in KINDLE edition at a 40% discount by clicking here. Sales help fund JWR.) Victor Davis Hanson is the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow in Residence in Classics and Military History at the Hoover Institution, a professor of classics emeritus at California State University at Fresno, and a nationally syndicated columnist for Tribune Media Services. ++++++++++ Another Soros financed district attorney is doing a superb job of allowing the City of Brotherly Love to turn into into a cesspool of murder and hate. Don't defund the police, defund the cities. +++ Violence and Drug-Related Gang Killings in Philadelphia By Thom Nickels How long before the entire city becomes a "bad neighborhood"? Philadelphia’s South Street used to be the place where all the "hippies met." It was largely a conglomerate of French-themed restaurants, New Age bookstores, art theaters, cafes and boutique leather and craft shops. That has changed over time. The street’s bohemian accents slowly died out, replaced by a crass commercialism—the news media now calls South Street “an entertainment zone”-- that began to attract wilder groups of people. "Real" Philadelphians learned to avoid the area, leaving it to “Let’s Party Like it’s 1776” T-shirt wearing tourists, and to rough crowds who saw it as the place “to be” on the weekends. But South Street was not the place to be on Saturday, June 5th at around 11:30 PM. That’s when a trio of young hooligans got into a fight not far from a Rita’s Water ice stand. According to (the liberal publication) Billy Penn, a person sitting at a nearby outdoor restaurant screamed, “They about to shoot!” Shoot they did. Three people were shot to death -- two men and a woman -- and nearly 14 injured, some of them bleeding in the streets. At this writing, police have yet to identify the victims but they believe that one of the shooters may be among the dead. The city declared the South Street shooting to be the deadliest in 2022 and the largest recorded in the city for nearly a decade. When I first heard about the shooting, I was sure it was not like those creepy loner, mentally ill mass murders in other parts of the country, but that it fit right in with Philadelphia’s street crime drug culture and drug turf wars and everything that goes along with that. Mayor Jim Kenney, who has been conspicuously silent on the issue of gun violence in the city for quite some time, called the South Street incident “beyond devastating” and “yet another horrendous, brazen and despicable act of gun violence” that “has shaken many people in our community.” D.A. Larry Krasner, the culprit responsible for letting huge numbers of violent criminals out of prison on early parole, tweeted: The terrible crimes last night on South Street tell our Pennsylvania legislators it’s time for real action. Boycott NRA lobbyists, boycott NRA donations, and bring real common sense gun regulation to Pennsylvania. Now Krasner’s tweet was met with a counter proposal: “May I also recommend that your office start prosecuting unlicensed firearm possession and felons in possession as serious crimes." A few days before the June 5th incident, the big talk in Philadelphia was about the violence that happened over the Memorial Day weekend. Krasner stated that the violence that the city experienced over Memorial Day typified what the city has seen since the start of the pandemic in March 2020 – about one-and-a-half homicides a day. “So sadly it is about average for that terrible period of time in this gun violence crisis,” Krasner said, while arguing that making arrests for gun possession without a permit “will not dramatically lower gun violence.” "The notion that the way you're going to solve shootings is arresting people for guns is missing the point,” he went on. “The way you solve shootings is arrest people for shootings. The way you solve homicides by gun is by solving homicides by gun.” If our George Soros-knighted D.A. really believes what he is saying, then why is he talking about the National Rifle Association? “The way you solve shootings is arrest people for shootings,” not stopping donations to the NRA, et cetera, et cetera. The City of Philadelphia experienced record-breaking gun violence deaths in 2021. During that year alone 562 people were killed and 2,000 injured. The fatalities were not due to assault weapons or to invasions of schools by mentally ill adolescents but by crazed criminals with (mostly) illegal handguns seeking revenge for drug deals gone wrong, drug thefts or drug turf war issues that tend to occur and reoccur in the same Philadelphia neighborhoods. When the average tourist visits Philadelphia he or she is advised to keep out of certain neighborhoods. Online sites like Trip Advisor will tout the loveliness of Old City, Society Hill and the Rittenhouse Square area, where most of the city’s historic sites are located, while warning against areas like Tioga-Nicetown, North Central, Strawberry Mansion, Harrowgate and Frankford. South Street was never included in the mix of neighborhoods to stay away from, although mention has been made over the years of the boisterous weekend crowds there who aren’t there for the crystals in the New Age bookstores. Even on a good night, there’s something about these South Street crowds that teeters on the edge of violence. Then there’s the neighborhood of Kensington, known throughout the world as the largest drug market in the United States. Kensington attracts drug addicts from every part of the country. They come alone or in small groups, camp out in the streets under canvas or cardboard tents, or sleep alone alongside dumpsters or in store entrances along Kensington Avenue. They come for the cheap fentanyl, which sells for $3-5 a dose. Or they come for the new meth, P2P, which turns users into sociopaths prone to hallucinations and irrational, violent behavior. Memorial Day weekend in Philadelphia saw 12 fatalities, including a 4-year-old child and a nine-year-old. A 30-year-old man was shot multiple times in West Philadelphia while another fatality occurred in Germantown. Some of these deaths and injuries were the result of crossfire; all of them--with the exception of the 4-year-old’s death (the boy shot himself with his father’s handgun while the latter visited a barbershop)—are drug- and/or gang-related. Not only are these "gripe killings" becoming more common, they are counting among their victims more innocent bystanders, as the heretofore boundaries between safe and unsafe neighborhoods slowly become blurred. Some Philadelphians wonder how long will it be before the entire city falls under the "bad neighborhood" category? While Krasner has banned so-called "ghost guns" (the weapon of choice for criminals because they lack serial numbers and can be purchased without a background check), his reasoning for not arresting people who have handguns without permits seems to contradict President Biden’s tendency to blame The Gun rather than the criminal who commits an act of violence. “Once in office, progressives don’t seem to know how to run anything more serious than a street protest,” an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal declared recently. This is certainly true in Philadelphia, where blaming criminals doesn’t seem to carry as much weight as blaming The Gun. The problem in Philadelphia and elsewhere goes much deeper than guns. Chicago’s lefty mayor, Lori Lightfoot, blames inner-city violence and shootings in her city on “racism.” “Racism is a public health crisis that continues to rob residents of the opportunity to live and lead full, healthy and happy lives,” Lightfoot has stated, while neglecting the very sensitive (and potentially “racist”) subject of fatherlessness and the dissolution of the family structure that continues to “rob residents of the opportunity to live and lead full, healthy and happy lives.” In 2020, Philadelphia saw 449 homicides, up 40% from 1990 when there were 500 homicides, according to the Philadelphia Police Department database. Children accounted for 195 of the shooting victims in 2020, with women numbering 229. 2020, of course, was a year plagued with lockdowns and fears related to COVID. The COVID scare was merely the beginning of a citywide downward spiral that saw the freezing of programs created to help thwart gun violence. It also became an excuse to close courts and release many criminals Conservative pundit Ann Coulter got it right when she wrote that while America “has more privately owned guns than most other countries, we also make it a lot more difficult than any other country to involuntarily commit crazy people." “The result of our laissez-faire approach to dangerous psychotics,” she added, “is visible in the swarms of homeless people on our streets, crazy people in our prison populations and the prevalence of mass shootings.” For the longest time Philadelphia fit Coulter’s first two categories, but after June 5th it can claim all three. Thom Nickels is a Philadelphia-based journalist/columnist and the 2005 recipient of the AIA Lewis Mumford Award for Architectural Journalism. He writes for City Journal, New York, Frontpage Magazine and the Philadelphia Irish Edition. He is the author of fifteen books, including ”Literary Philadelphia” and ”From Mother Divine to the Corner Swami: Religious Cults in Philadelphia.” “Death at Dawn: The Murder of Kimberly Ernest” will be published later this year. +++++++++++++ The more idiot, out of touch Democrats blast De Santis the more popular he becomes because Florida is a living of example of common sense government and a courageous governor. I would love to see a De Santis/Pompeo ticket. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ |
No comments:
Post a Comment