Tag Archives: George Soros

George Soros, Open Society Foundations, Reddit

Note from Dr. Eowyn:

Deplorable Patriot was a moderator on a pro-Trump Sub-Reddit thread, “Great Awakening”, which was recently banned by Reddit. Happily, “Great Awakening” relocated the same day to VOAT (here and here) and 8chan, where Deplorable Patriot continues to serve as a moderator.

INTO THE RABBIT HOLE WE GO

We now know that George Soros and the Open Society Foundation have been linked with Reddit employees in a mission to suppress Trump support groups on Reddit.

Current director of policy at Reddit, Jessica Ashooh.

Jessica Ashooh is believed by some to be responsible for the account “arabscarab,” which has been leading the charge to shut down the Q Anon movement on the Reddit platform — The Great Awakening, the second-largest pro-Trump subreddit. Ashooh started working for Reddit after an executive stint at the George Soros-funded Atlantic Council, which is also reportedly funded by the Chinese.

We also have a D list Free Lance reporter, D list rating being a gift on my part.    Click link below tweet to see where he admits to being connected to the Clinton Foundation in the comment section.

Rob Rousseau:

“I don’t always love working at reddit but personally getting to shut down the qanon sub because they were getting too close to exposing the truth was pretty special.”

https://twitter.com/robrousseau/status/1040001793818865664

This is the same guy who said:

“I would rather my daughter dated a member of  MS-13 than a member of the Republican Party”

https://twitter.com/robrousseau/status/997190886009245696?lang=en

Here is additional information that I have discovered

Various techniques to attack Trump support groups have been discovered and made public in the recent past. That is a whole conversation on its own so I will not get into that. I would just like to add one more method to the list. It’s a tool to assist individuals with their effort to take down various subreddits and individuals. This tool is called the Soros Enhancement Suite (SES). Information to what is in SES is limited; access to the information is at a location on Reddit that is private — “Invite only”. I know of its existence because of the following screenshot.

This is what you will find on the page. Here is the link: https://www.reddit.com/r/TopMindsOfReddit/comments/9goxc5/request_for_feedback_ses_upgrades_and_release/

Request for feedback: SES upgrades and release planning from TopMindsOfReddit

Now we know that technology linked to Soros is actually a reality. We also know with absolute certainty that r/TopMindsOfReddit is promoting it. But who is using the technology? We’ve heard rumors that there are people who get paid to disrupt pro-Trump subreddits. These individuals often brag about what they are doing and how they receive payment from Soros. When we confront them, they claim they are “joking and it’s irony.” Whatever. The following screenshot is part of what I have discovered. What you see here is a ledger that dates back 8 months. It’s a pay ledger which shows payments and members who received payments. Notice the Open Society Bot. Bots are portable AI’s that can be programmed to do various tasks.

Here is the link to the ledger: https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenSocietyBot/wiki/ledger

Now we have have proof of transactions being made and some of the individuals paid. I should also tell you that if you read the page, top to bottom including all comments, you’ll see more than enough evidence to support my claims. This applies to all screenshots I’ve provided here.

You might ask, “What are they paid with?”. Let me introduce you to the “Sorosbux”.

This is what you will find on page.  Here is the link:

https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/7s1wyk/introducing_sorosbux_a_centralized_decentralized/

Introducing SorosBux, a centralized decentralized pre-mined fiat cryptocurrency for all your shilling needs. from neoliberal

 Here is the page that links you to everything:

https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/78b7z1/updates_regarding_ctr_payments_and_general/

In the comment section you will  find “If your payment is overdue, write an email to transactions@opensocietyfoundations.org.

Updates regarding CTR payments, and general reminders about getting paid from neoliberal

You will notice that it mentions to get a “waves” account to withdraw your funds. I followed their instructions and set up an online wallet. These are some of the various way to cash out at “Waves”.

Here is the link to set up a Waves account: https://waveswallet.io/

That about covers it.  There is definitely some there there.  I believe this says just about all you need to know.  This is what I was able to release.  I have a whole lot more information that takes us deeper into the rabbit hole.  Please have a good day.

Please feel free to leave any comments

Respectfully,

Deplorable Patriot

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Who’s behind the tsunami of social media and blog censorship?

From Art Moore, “Memo Reveals Soros-Funded Social-Media Censorship Plan,” WND, August 20, 2018:

The recent wave of censorship of conservative voices on the internet by tech giants Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Apple mirrors a plan concocted by a coalition of George Soros-funded, progressive groups to take back power in Washington from President Trump’s administration.

confidential, 49-page memo for defeating Trump by working with the major social-media platforms to eliminate “right wing propaganda and fake news” was presented in January 2017  by Media Matters founder David Brock at a retreat in Florida with about 100 donors, the Washington Free Beacon reported at the time.

On Monday, the Gateway Pundit blog noted the memo’s relationship with recent moves by Silicon Valley tech giants to “shadow ban” conservative political candidates and pundits and remove content.

The Free Beacon obtained a copy of the memo, “Democracy Matters: Strategic Plan for Action,” by attending the retreat.

The memo spells out a four-year agenda that deployed Media Matters along with American Bridge, Shareblue and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) to attack Trump and Republicans.

The strategies are impeachment, expanding Media Matters’ mission to combat “government misinformation,” ensuring Democratic control of the Senate in the 2018 midterm elections, filing lawsuits against the Trump administration, monetizing political advocacy, using a “digital attacker” to delegitimize Trump’s presidency and damage Republicans, and partnering with Facebook to combat “fake news.”

Quashing ‘fake news’ with ‘mathematical precision’

The Free Beacon in its January 2017 story said Brock sought to raise $40 million in 2017 for his organizations.

The document claims Media Matters and far-left groups have “access to raw data from Facebook, Twitter, and other social media sites” so they can “systemically monitor and analyze this unfiltered data.”

“The earlier we can identify a fake news story, the more effectively we can quash it,” the memo states. “With this new technology at our fingertips, researchers monitoring news in real time will be able to identify the origins of a lie with mathematical precision, creating an early warning system for fake news and disinformation.”

Media Matters met with Facebook, which boasts some 2 billion members worldwide, to discuss how to crack down on fake news, according to the memo.

The social media giant was provided with “a detailed map of the constellation of right-wing Facebook pages that had been the biggest purveyors of fake news.”

Brock’s memo also says Media Matters gave Google “the information necessary to identify 40 of the worst fake new sites” so they could be banned from Google’s advertising network.

The Gateway Pundit pointed out that in 2016, Google carried out that plan on the Gateway Pundit blog and other conservative sites, including Breitbart, the Drudge Report, Infowars, Zero Hedge and Conservative Treehouse.

Facebook, meanwhile has changed its newsfeed algorithm, ostensibly to combat “fake news,” causing a precipitous decline in traffic for many conservative sites.

President Donald Trump himself was affected, with his engagement on Facebook dropping by 45 percent.

A study in June by Gateway Pundit found Facebook had eliminated 93 percent of the traffic of top conservative news outlets.

Western Journal, in its own study, found that while left-wing publishers saw a roughly 2 percent increase in web traffic from Facebook following the algorithm changes, conservative sites saw a loss of traffic averaging around 14 percent.

‘Totalitarian impulse’ of the left

President Trump’s 2020 campaign manager, Brad Parscale, charged last week the giants of Silicon Valley are stifling free speech, particularly conservative speech, manifesting the “inherent totalitarian impulse” of the left….

On Aug. 6,  WND reported, Facebook, YouTube and Apple banned commentator Alex Jones and his Infowars website within hours of each other.

Last month, WND reported moderate Muslims and counter-terrorist activists were increasingly being restricted by Silicon Valley, while terrorist content remains on social-media platforms, according to researchers.

Trump campaign chief Parscale said last week the banning of Jones “will inevitably lead to the silencing of those with far less controversial opinions.”

“What we are seeing in Big Tech is the inherent totalitarian impulse of the Left come into full focus,” Parscale said.

Indeed, what followed the censorship of Alex Jones and InfoWars is WordPress’ take-down of blogs, including Fellowship of the Minds.

We are the proverbial “canaries in the coal mines” — early warnings of even worse to come.

First they came for Dr. James Tracy, and I did not speak out because I was not James Tracy.

Then they came for Alex Jones and InfoWars, and I did not speak out because I was not Alex Jones.

Then they came for Fellowship of the Minds, American Everyman, Chemtrails Planet, Cinderella’s Broom, Dutchsinse’s blog, Saboteur365, To Be Free, and others. I did not speak out because I was not one of them.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Time to wake up, Americans, before they come for you.

H/t MCA and Robert R.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Keeping the divide going: AMC developing series based on BLM book, "They Can't Kill Us All"

they can't kill us all

More fiction coming to your TV…

Ferguson was a liberal-funded protest. Baltimore race rioters were given permission by then mayor, Stephanie  Rawlings-Blake, to burn, riot, and loot their own city. Instead of waiting for the facts of police shootings to emerge, race agitators destroyed their communities.
Now a book about the riots from the BLM movement’s perspective is coming to TV. More fiction, no doubt.
Another show I won’t be watching.
From Deadline: AMC has put in development a drama based on Wesley Lowery’s bestselling nonfiction book They Can’t Kill Us All: Ferguson, Baltimore, and a New Era in America’s Racial Justice. It comes from Brad Weston’s Makeready and writer LaToya Morgan (Into the Badlands, Turn: Washington’s Spies).
Published in 2016 by Little, Brown & Company, the book was acquired by Makeready last fall. It examines how decades of racially biased policing in segregated neighborhoods with failing schools, crumbling infrastructure and too few jobs has led to the high-profile cases of police brutality in Ferguson, Cleveland, Baltimore and elsewhere and the birth of Black Lives Matter movement seeking justice for the deaths of Michael Brown (police officer Darren Wilson was cleared by Obama’s DOJ), Tamir Rice (a grand jury declined to indict due to the fact that Rice drew what appeared to be a real firearm) and Freddie Gray (the trial against Officer William Porter ended in mistrial. Officers Nero, Goodson, and Rice were found not guilty at trial. The remaining charges against the officers were dropped on July 27, 2016).
Written by Morgan, who is under an overall deal at AMC, the potential series also will reflect current events and race relations through the stories and voices of fictional characters. Morgan will executive produce with Makeready founder and CEO Weston and creative heads Pam Abdy and Scott Nemes.
Lowery, a reporter at The Washington Post, was a lead on the paper’s “Fatal Force” project, a database that tracked 990 police shootings in 2015. The project won the Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting in 2016.
They Can’t Kill Us All joins the growing development slate of Makeready’s television division, headed by Nemes, which funds development and can deficit finance series, with Entertainment One handling international distribution. The slate also includes a series adaptation of Rocket Men, Robert Kurson’s upcoming book about the Apollo 8 odyssey; the Untitled David James Kelly project, with Leonardo DiCaprio and Jennifer Davisson’s Appian Way; Old City Blues, by screenwriter Arash Amel, based on the Boom graphic novel; Catching Out, from writer/executive producer Amy Harris and executive producer Chloe Grace Moretz; and the Jonás Cuarón-written drama Undocumented America, based on manuscript by journalist and DACA recipient Karla Cornejo Villavicencio about undocumented immigrants illegal aliens across America.
Morgan is repped by Echo Lake Entertainment, CAA, and Rob Szymanski.
DCG

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Everything is Russia's fault! Obama admin warns Russian hacks may fake election fraud!

The Obama administration has a new all-purpose bogeyman: Russia.
On Oct. 7, the U.S. government identified the Russia government as the hacker of those embarrassing Hillary, DNC, and Podesta emails that WikiLeaks has been releasing, and formally accused Russia of a campaign of cyber attacks against Democratic Party organizations to interfere with the election process.

See “WikiLeaks Podesta emails: Clinton Foundation works with Big Pharma to keep AIDS drug prices high

But the Obama administration provided no actual evidence beyond a vague statement that the CIA is “confident” Russia is the hacker.
Now, the Obama administration has gazed into its crystal ball and issued a new warning — that Russian hackers may fake election fraud.
In other words, sheeple, don’t believe it even if you see clear evidence of voter fraud! That’s just fake voter fraud conjured by those nasty Russians! Baaaaa!
sheeple watch TV
Reuters reports, Oct. 20, 2016, that speaking “on condition of anonymity,” U.S. intelligence and law enforcement officials “are warning that hackers with ties to Russia’s intelligence services could try to undermine the credibility of the presidential election by posting documents online purporting to show evidence of voter fraud,” so as “to create public perceptions of widespread voter fraud.”
The unnamed officials said that they don’t actually have specific evidence of such a nefarious plan, but state and local election authorities had been warned to be vigilant for hacking attempts. U.S. elections are run by state and local officials, not the federal government. On Nov. 8, votes will be cast in hundreds of thousands of polling stations in 9,000 different jurisdictions, according to the National Association of Secretaries of State.
The unnamed officials said “evidence indicates that suspected Russian government-backed hackers have so far tried to attack voter registration databases operated by more than 20 states. Tracing the attacks can be difficult but breaches of only two such databases have been confirmed.”
At the same time, the unnamed officials also said there is no evidence that any hackers have succeeded in accessing equipment or databases used to record votes, and insisted that many states use systems that would be difficult to hack or defraud, including paper ballots which initially are tallied by machines. The officials said that the U.S. election system is so large, diffuse and antiquated that hackers would not be able to change the outcome of the Nov. 8 election.
The U.S. officials declined to comment on Republican candidate Donald Trump’s contention that the election is being “rigged.” Trump had said in the third and final presidential debate last Wednesday night that he would not say until the election results were known whether or not he would accept the outcome. A day after the debate, Trump said he would accept the results of the election “if I win” and that he reserved the “right to contest or file a legal challenge in the case of a questionable result.”
Michael Morell, a former acting CIA director who declared his endorsement of  Hillary Clinton in a New York Times op-ed, accused Trump of being “an unwitting agent of Putin” and that Trump “does not even know he is being manipulated.” On August 8, 2016, Morell told PBS/CBS interviewer Charlie Rose that the U.S. should kill Russians and Iranians to teach them a lesson for supporting the Syrian government against the so-called “rebels” who include radical jihadists.
michael-morell
Rose asked Morell: “We make them pay the price by killing Russians?” Morell answered, “Yeah.” Rose then asked, “And killing Iranians?,” to which Morell said, “Yes … You don’t tell the world about it. … But you make sure they know it in Moscow and Tehran.”
Meanwhile, ZeroHedge reports that Smartmatic, a company associated with George Soros, has secured major contracts to supply electronnic voting machines for 16 states in the U.S., including key battleground states like Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Virginia.
According to Gateway Pundit, Smartmatic’s board includes Lord Mark Malloch-Brown, a man who had served on the board of George Soros’s Open Society Foundations and who was formerly the vice-chairman of Soros’s Investment Funds.
lord-mark-malloch-brown
According to a cable released by WikiLeaks, in 2000 Smartmatic came out of nowhere and suddenly snatched up major contracts to supply voting machines around the world, including in Venezuela where its board included a Hugo Chavez campaign adviser. In 2004, with Smartmatic voting machines in place, Hugo Chavez won a “landslide victory” that all but destroyed his political opposition.
Here’s the cable:
smartmactic-corporation
While the Obama administration is busy accusing Russia of hacking, it turns out the real cyber threat is China.
According to Bloomberg, Internet-connected CCTV cameras made by a Chinese firm, Hangzhou Xiongmai Technology Co., were infected with malware that allowed hackers to takeover “tens of millions” of devices to launch the distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks across the U.S. last Friday, Oct. 21.
In fact, the Pentagon’s Joint Staff recently warned the U.S. military against using equipment made by China’s Lenovo computer manufacturer amid concerns about cyber spying against Pentagon networks. A Sept. 28 internal report from the Pentagon’s J-2 intelligence directorate warned that use of Lenovo products could facilitate cyber intelligence-gathering against both classified and unclassified—but still sensitive—U.S. military networks. One official said Lenovo equipment in the past was detected “beaconing”—covertly communicating with remote users in the course of cyber intelligence-gathering.
See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

George Soros gives John Kasich $700,000 to stay in race

Ohio governor John Kasich has won only one GOP primary, that of his home state, and yet international currency-manipulator and political mischief-maker George Soros just injected $700,000 into Kasich’s campaign to keep him in the race.
George Soros evil
Gualberto Garcia Jones, JD, reports for LifeSiteNews, March 16, 2016, that although it is now a mathematical impossibility for Kasich to reach the necessary 1,237 votes to win the GOP primary nomination outright, he has vowed to stay in the race, betting on a brokered convention along with a suspension of the convention’s rules to clinch the nomination. In fact, Kasich can’t even qualify for the convention’s ballots because a candidate must win at least 8 states before he can be considered.
However, there may be a different reason for Kasich to remain in the race, and that can be discovered by a search of his 2016 Presidential campaign donations lists. Those lists reveal that George Soros, personally and through surrogates, has donated over $700,000 to Kasich’s campaign, including:

  • The Soros Fund Management as the 6th highest individual donor with $202,700.
  • The Duquesne Family Office as the 7th largest donor with $150,000.
  • Stanley Drukenmiller, who operates the Duquesne Family Office and who manages $2 billion of Soros’ hedge funds, donated $150,000 to Kasich’s New Day for America Super PAC.
  • Scott Beset, who is employed by the Soros Fund Management and was Soros’ chief investment manager until late 2015, donated $200,000 to the same Kasich Super PAC.

George Soros, Scott Bessent, and Stanley Drukenmiller represent George Soros just as New Day for America and Kasich for America represent John Kasich.
So what could motivate Soros’ donations to the all but moribund Kasich presidential campaign?
In a recent op/ed in The Guardian, Soros piously wrote that “we must reaffirm our commitment to the principles of open society and resist the siren song of the likes of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, however hard that may be.” Soros has already funded Hillary Clinton’s campaign to the tune of $8 million. In other words, Soros is funding the Kasich campaign to help  elect Hillary Clinton by sabotaging the GOP primary process.
George Soros has tirelessly used his billions to promote the culture of death in the U.S. and across the world:

  • Soros is the third largest donor to Planned Parenthood, donating $20 million in 2011 alone to build abortion mills in the “south and southeast regions” of the United States.
  • Soros is one of the largest donors to the campaign to legalize abortion in the Republic of Ireland.
  • Soros is accused by Peru’s Cardinal Cipriani of imposing his own agenda in support of homosexuality and abortion by the coercive force of his donations to the country’s radical organizations.
  • Soros has funded efforts to legalize assisted suicide in the United States.
  • Soros’ groups have directly attacked pro-family organizations like Mass Resistance, funded the sex-trafficking ACORN organization, and the radical activist MoveOn.org organizations.

John Kasich is against abortion, but makes exceptions for rape and incest; he said he favors Ohio defunding Planned Parenthood. Given Soros’ evil track record, one must ask why John Kasich would accept his blood-tainted money.
Meanwhile, Soros’ tentacles extended to last Tuesday’s Utah caucuses.
According to Breitbart, one of Soros’ associates, Lord Mark Malloch-Brown, is the chairman of Smartmatic Group, the electronic voting firm that ran the online balloting process in the Utah Republican Open Caucuses. Malloch-Brown is also on the board of George Soros’s Open Society Foundation and has close ties to the billionaire.
See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Soros aids invasion of Christian Europe by Muslim refugees, says Hungary prime minister

The international currency manipulator and profiteer George Soros is the puppeteer behind countless nefarious schemes.

That's George Soros in the chair on the right. Soros hosted Obama's first presidential campaign fund-raising soiree.

That’s George Soros in the chair on the right. Soros hosted Obama’s first presidential campaign fund-raising soiree.


In 2008, Soros was the first to host a fundraiser in his New York penthouse for then-presidential candidate Barack Obama. Through his foundations, Soros funds countless leftwing causes. We know Soros funded black protests and riots in Ferguson and Selma. See:

Now, the prime minister of Hungary Viktor Orban is accusing Soros of being a prominent member of a circle of “activists” trying to undermine European nations by supporting so-called “refugees” and “migrants” inundating Europe from the Middle East and beyond.
As reported by Andras Gergely for Bloomberg on Oct. 30, 2015, Orban said in an interview on public radio Kossuth that Soros “is perhaps the strongest example of those who support anything that weakens nation states, they support everything that changes the traditional European lifestyle. These activists who support immigrants inadvertently become part of this international human-smuggling network.”
Viktor Orban
Soros admitted as much. In an e-mailed statement, he maintains that his foundation’s six-point plan helps “uphold European values” while Orban’s actions “undermine those values” because Orban’s “plan treats the protection of national borders as the objective and the refugees as an obstacle. Our plan treats the protection of refugees as the objective and national borders as the obstacle.
Hungary and Orban are being criticized by “human rights activists” for building a 100-mi razor-wire border to keep out the tidal wave of “migrants”, some of whom tried to break through the border, throwing bottles and rocks at riot police, who responded with tear gas.
Orban appears to be the sole European politician alert to the dangers posed by the “migrants” to Europe and its Christian identity.
As reported by Reuters, Orban said in an opinion piece for Germany’s Frankfurt Allgemeine Zeitung that his country was being “overrun” with refugees, most of whom were not Christians, but Muslims. He points out that “Europe and European culture have Christian roots” and asks “is it not already and in itself alarming that Europe’s Christian culture is barely in a position to uphold Europe’s own Christian values?”
Orban also says another truth — that the people of Europe are at odds with the majority of governments on the refugee crisis: “The people want us to master the situation and protect our borders. Only when we have protected our borders can questions be asked about the numbers of people we can take in, or whether there should be quotas.”
As reported by Nick Hallett for Breitbart, Sept. 17, 2015, in a wide-ranging interview with German daily Die Welt, Orban said it was “simple mathematics” that Muslims will overtake Christians by sheer demographics because Muslims place greater emphasis on “family, children, [and] community cohesion”, things that Christians no longer seem to value.
Orban said “multiculturalism is dead” and that Hungary does “want to follow the multicultural approach.” At the same time, he denied wanting to keep Hungary ethnically pure, saying his concerns hinge on culture: “We look back on a very long history and want to carry on as before.”
Orban accused NGOs and human rights groups of training the migrants in how to look good on Western media: “NGOs, human rights defenders, and activists agree with the cause of migrants and help them with suggestions. The migrants also learn from the behaviour of the Western media.”
He denied his country is in breach of the Geneva Convention, saying: “The Geneva Conventions provide for a right to security, but not a right to choose the country where you get protection. Refugees also have responsibilities and must respect the laws of the country.”
Orban also criticized European leaders for trying to impose mandatory quotas of migrants on countries: “European leaders do not understand how people think. If refugees in the Near East hear that Europe [has introduced these quotas], they will understand it as an invitation to come.”
At the crux of Orban’s resistance to the migrant invasion is his determination to defend and save Christianity in Europe. In an interview with the The Times, Sept. 17, 2015, Orban points out that Europe’s identity is fundamentally threatened by the mass influx of migrants, most of them Muslims, who will live together in parallel communities that won’t integrate if they are allowed in. He vowed he would keep Hungary a Christian country, saying that there was an inevitable culture clash between Muslim migrants and their host country, not based on religion but based on different lifestyles and values.
Orban is right about demographics, as shown in the three graphs below from Pew Research Center (source).

↓Click images to enlarge↓

Muslims in EU countries in 2015
Muslims are concentrated in Europe’s major cities:
Muslims in major EU cities
Projection of increase in Muslims in Europe, Russia, and U.S. by 2050. Note that the projections were made BEFORE the current “refugee” crisis:
Increase in Muslim populations in EU 2010-2050
It doesn’t help that, according to a British peer, Muslim men in the UK are having 20 children each because of polygamy.
Meanwhile, British actor and supreme useful idiot Benedict “Sherlock” Cumberbatch had a meltdown after a performance as Hamlet at London’s Barbican theater on Oct. 27, 2015.
As reported by The Telegraph, after his final bow at the end of Hamlet, Cumberbatch made an impassioned speech to an audience including schoolchildren, telling them to “fuck the politicians” and to donate to the plight of Syrian refugees. He said it was an “utter disgrace of the British Government” for not doing enough to ease the “crisis”.

Hey, Cumberbatch. How come you’re not telling your useful-idiot audience to “fuck” Saudi Arabia and the other Arabic gulf states for refusing to take in their fellow Muslim “refugees”?
See also:

~Éowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

George Soros reportedly could face up to $7B tax bill, after delaying payment for years

George_SorosFox News: George Soros may soon face a monumental tax bill — of nearly $7 billion — after years of playing hard-to-get with the IRS. 
Despite Soros having advocated for higher taxes on the wealthy, the liberal billionaire reportedly has delayed paying his own for years thanks to a loophole in U.S. law.
That loophole was closed by Congress in 2008. But before that, Bloomberg reports, Soros used it to defer taxes on client fees. Instead, he reinvested them in his own fund, and they grew tax-free. 
Bloomberg, citing Irish regulatory filings, reported that Soros has made $13.3 billion in this way. Factoring in the various tax rates that would apply, one tax expert estimated this would leave Soros with a roughly $6.7 billion bill.
While Soros did not comment on the estimate, Bloomberg reported that Soros deferred his taxes for so many years by reinvesting client fees. While he technically was able to do this for U.S.-based funds, offshore funds were apparently preferred because otherwise clients would face negative tax implications. Congress closed that loophole in 2008, ordering fund managers to pay up by 2017.
According to Bloomberg, Soros moved assets shortly before the change to Ireland, seen as a possible shelter from the law. But tax attorneys told Bloomberg they don’t know of a way for money managers to avoid the bill in 2017.
al-sharpton-obama-7-16-08
Don’t worry George…like Obama’s buddy Sharpton, I’m sure the IRS won’t be too worried about collecting those taxes right away.
DCG

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Soros-Owned Restaurant Sued for Wage Violations

do as i say
Free Beacon: A Syracuse, N.Y., restaurant owned by the liberal billionaire George Soros doesn’t pay its tipped employees fair wages, some of those employees alleged in a lawsuit filed this week.
Those employees signed on to a class suit lodged this week against the Dinosaur Bar-B-Que restaurant chain, the Syracuse Post-Standard reported on Monday.

The suit claims Dinosaur failed to properly use the “tipped credit” provision in federal law, which requires employers to make up the difference between tips and pay to meet minimum wage standard. It also says Dinosaur required tipped employees to spend more than 20 percent of their work day doing “side work,” which includes setting up dining areas, for which they do not get tipped. The suit says workers should be paid minimum wage for that work.
The suit also claims Dinosaur failed to properly pay overtime wages, “misappropriated” tips belonging to the tipped workers, wrongly required tipped workers to share tips with managers for large events and failed to properly pay workers for shifts exceeding 10 hours. The suit also claims Dinosaur failed to keep accurate records of tips and wages.
The lawsuit was filed Thursday in federal court in New York City by the Fitapelli & Schaffer law firm, according to the firm’s web site. It says it seeks to represent “servers, bussers, runners, bartenders” and other tipped employees.

Dinosaur Bar-B-Que is majority owned by Soros Strategic Partners, an investment firm run by George Soros, who bankrolls liberal groups that complain about unfair wages for tipped workers.
Shocker, not.
George_Soros
DCG

Please follow and like us:
0
 

A Look Inside the Net Neutrality Rules: It's Worse Than You Think!

Written by  for the New American Magazine
A Look Inside the Net Neutrality Rules: It's Worse Than You Think!

After the FCC made its “Net Neutrality” rules public late last week, The New American began poring over the 400 pages of rules and comments in the document, officially entitled “Report and Order on Remand, Declaratory Ruling, and Order” in an effort to inform our readers about what is actually in the rules.
What we found affirms the statements by FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai that the rules are a threat to the future of the Internet and a danger to both liberty and a free market.
The report put forth by the regulatory regime is broken down into several parts. Before actually getting into the rules, the document spans 45 pages laying down philosophical and legal arguments for both the FCC’s justification and authority for regulating the Internet in the first place. Furthermore, the FCC document relies on and quotes from sources that have a history of attempting to abolish the free market capitalist nature of the Internet. As pernicious as those arguments and sources are, what’s actually in the rules is even worse.
The report repeatedly makes mention of the “bright-line rules” the FCC has created to keep the Internet open and free. “Bright-line” refers to rules, laws, or legal decisions that are clear and unambiguous. These are usually created when a previous rule, law, or legal decision left room for multiple interpretations. Cornell University Law School’s legal dictionary defines a bright-line as: “An objective rule that resolves a legal issue in a straightforward, predictable manner. A bright-line rule is easy to administer and produces certain, though, arguably, not always equitable results.” The USLegal website gives a similar definition and explains, “For example, in American statutory rape laws, the age of the victim and the age of the accused are the only relevant factors determinative of guilt or innocence. Because it is a bright-line rule, there is no balancing test to examine factors such as mistake of the accused, the misrepresentation of age by the minor, or the minor’s consent to sexual intercourse.”
So bright-line rules are clear, and do not allow anything other than the rule to be considered when determining a case.
What exactly are the bright-line rules the FCC has created to regulate the Internet?
1. No Blocking
“A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not block lawful content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices, subject to reasonable network management.”
While this seems straightforward, the devil is in the details. The report offers the following “clarification” to this rule; “The phrase ‘content, applications, and services’ again refers to all traffic transmitted to or from end users of a broadband Internet access service, including traffic that may not fit clearly into any of these categories.” One is left to wonder why the categories are listed in the first place, if the definition is broader than the categories.
The report’s “clarification” goes on to explain, “Further, the no-blocking rule adopted today again applies to transmissions of lawful content and does not prevent or restrict a broadband provider from refusing to transmit unlawful material, such as child pornography or copyright-infringing materials.” This opens up a whole new Pandora’s Box of ISPs being put in a position to determine what is “unlawful material.” Might ISPs block traffic to torrent sites that host “copyright-infringing materials” alongside public domain materials?
Since the “No Blocking” rule bans ISPs from blocking “lawful content,” what are the ramifications for services such as American Family Online, which offer filtered Internet access to customers who want to have pornography and other materials blocked at the server level? Since such content is lawful and the bright-line rule does not allow the fact that the customer wants such materials to be blocked to be taken into account, one is left to believe it would violate the rule.
Notice, too that the rule allows blocking for “reasonable network management.” One can imagine a new set of bright-line rules in the next iteration of Net Neutrality to clarify what constitutes “reasonable network management.”
2. No Throttling
“A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not impair or degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of Internet content, application, or service, or use of a non-harmful device, subject to reasonable network management.”
Again, the details of the rule demonstrate its problems. The report explains, “With the no-throttling rule, we ban conduct that is not outright blocking, but inhibits the delivery of particular content, applications, or services, or particular classes of content, applications, or services. Likewise, we prohibit conduct that impairs or degrades lawful traffic to a non-harmful device or class of devices. We interpret this prohibition to include, for example, any conduct by a broadband Internet access service provider that impairs, degrades, slows down, or renders effectively unusable particular content, services, applications, or devices, that is not reasonable network management.”
Again, there is an exemption for “reasonable network management” that will undoubtedly need to be defined later.
The report continues, “For purposes of this rule, the meaning of ‘content, applications, and services’ has the same as the meaning given to this phrase in the no-blocking rule,” meaning lawful content of any type whether or not it fits any of the categories listed. As in the “No Blocking” rule, “unlawful material” is neither protected nor clearly defined: “Further, transfers of unlawful content or unlawful transfers of content are not protected by the no-throttling rule.”
Under the “No Throttling” rule, the commission is showing what it meant by its commitment to “forbear” regulating rates and plans. According to the continued explanation, “Because our no-throttling rule addresses instances in which a broadband provider targets particular content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices, it does not address a practice of slowing down an end user’s connection to the Internet based on a choice made by the end user. For instance, a broadband provider may offer a data plan in which a subscriber receives a set amount of data at one speed tier and any remaining data at a lower tier.” Sounds nice until the next line: “If the Commission were concerned about the particulars of a data plan, it could review it under the no-unreasonable interference/disadvantage standard.” So much for forbearance.
The “no-unreasonable interference/disadvantage standard” will be covered in more detail later in this article. Spoiler alert: It’s particularly nasty. By application of the “no-unreasonable interference/disadvantage standard,” the report seems to hint at regulating both rates and plans and much, much more.
3. No Paid Prioritization
“A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not engage in paid prioritization. “Paid prioritization” refers to the management of a broadband provider’s network to directly or indirectly favor some traffic over other traffic, including through use of techniques such as traffic shaping, prioritization, resource reservation, or other forms of preferential traffic management, either (a) in exchange for consideration (monetary or otherwise) from a third party, or (b) to benefit an affiliated entity.”
If it weren’t for the “no-unreasonable interference/disadvantage standard,” this would possibly be the most excrable rule of them all. “Paid Prioritization” is a name given to the practice of ISPs striking deals with content providers (often their own affiliates) to speed up traffic to and from those services to make them more attractive and valuable to the end user. The entire argument against the practice is that it is not “fair” to services who can’t or won’t pay the price to have their traffic sped up.
The report’s explanation for the adoption of this rule is that many of the people who participated in the public comment period don’t like this practice and fear the results if it continues. According to the report, “The record is rife with commenter concerns regarding preferential treatment arrangements, with many advocating a flat ban on paid prioritization. Commenters assert that permitting paid prioritization will result in the bifurcation of the Internet into a ‘fast’ lane for those willing and able to pay and a ‘slow’ lane for everyone else. As several commenters observe, allowing for the purchase of priority treatment can lead to degraded performance — in the form of higher latency, increased risk of packet loss, or, in aggregate, lower bandwidth — for traffic that is not covered by such an arrangement.”
Commenters further argue that paid prioritization will introduce artificial barriers to entry, distort the market, damage competition, harm consumers, discourage innovation, undermine public safety and universal service, and restrict free expression. Never mind that ISPs have expenses connected to bandwidth, network maintenance, and equipment — all of which are more costly for services that use higher bandwidth, particularly those that stream large video files. It only makes good business sense to pass part of that faster-connection cost along to the consumers they are trying to reach with their content; however, because “commenters” were “concerned,” the FCC has banned the practice.
For a bright-line rule to mean anything, there can be no exceptions, especially those that are handled on a case-by-case basis; however, that is exactly what the FCC is doing with this rule. According to the report, “Given the potential harms to the virtuous cycle, we believe it is more appropriate to impose an ex ante ban on such practices, while entertaining waiver requests under exceptional circumstances.”
The report explains the waiver process: “Under our longstanding waiver rule, the Commission may waive any rule ‘in whole or in part, for good cause shown.’ General waiver of the Commission’s rules is appropriate only if special circumstances warrant a deviation from the general rule, and such a deviation will serve the public interest. In some cases, however, the Commission adopts specific rules concerning the factors that will be used to examine a waiver or exemption request. We believe that such guidance is appropriate here to make clear the very limited circumstances in which the Commission would be willing to allow paid prioritization. Accordingly, we adopt a rule concerning waiver of the paid prioritization ban that establishes a balancing test, as follows: The Commission may waive the ban on paid prioritization only if the petitioner demonstrates that the practice would provide some significant public interest benefit and would not harm the open nature of the Internet.”
So “No Paid Prioritization” really means that rather than the free market deciding this practice, the FCC will decide it on a case-by-case basis. It is a system wide open for favoritism.
After listing the bright-line rules which have dominated most of the discussion of the Net Neutrality issue, the report addresses the rule that is the vilest of all:
Preventing Unreasonable Interference or Unreasonable Disadvantage that Harms Consumers and Edge Providers.
This is not a bright-line rule by even FCC Commission Chief Wheeler’s definition. He describes it in his commentary toward the beginning of the report, referring to ISPs as “gatekeepers” because he claims they have the ability and the motive to manipulate the Internet. He writes, “The bright-line bans on blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization will go a long way to preserve the virtuous cycle. But not all the way. Gatekeeper power can be exercised through a variety of technical and economic means, and without a catch-all standard, it would be that, as Benjamin Franklin said, ‘a little neglect may breed great mischief.’ Thus, the Order adopts the following standard”:
Any person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not unreasonably interfere with or unreasonably disadvantage (i) end users’ ability to select, access, and use broadband Internet access service or the lawful Internet content, applications, services, or devices of their choice, or (ii) edge providers’ ability to make lawful content, applications, services, or devices available to end users. Reasonable network management shall not be considered a violation of this rule.
What does Wheeler mean when he writes, “Gatekeeper power can be exercised through a variety of technical and economic means”? The body of the report puts it this way, “We believe that there may exist other current or future practices that cause the type of harms our rules are intended to address.” So now the report is attempting to protect end users from something that has not even happened yet, and the architects of this rule are not even trying to hide it.
How exactly will the regulatory regime go about enforcing a rule that prohibits something as nebulous as “unreasonably interfer[ing] or unreasonably disadvantag[ing]” the use of the Internet? On a case-by-case basis. The report states, “For that reason, we adopt a rule setting forth a no-unreasonable interference/disadvantage standard, under which the Commission can prohibit, on a case-by-case basis, practices that unreasonably interfere with or unreasonably disadvantage the ability of consumers to reach the Internet content, services, and applications of their choosing or of edge providers to access consumers using the Internet.”
Here is the greatest danger of the whole scheme. This is total control of the Internet. It is how digital freedom dies.
This rule allows the FCC to unilaterally decide everything from rates to plans, from equipment to content, from the introduction of new technologies to the number of ISPs in a region. Everything. On a case-by-case basis. With only the conscience of the commissioners as their guide.
This is why concerned citizens must defeat Net Neutrality. Congress could set it aside. The courts could overturn it.
Americans must act soon in order to save the greatest form of communication, education, information, and innovation man has ever known.
AND THERE’S MORE:
FCC Cites Soros-Funded, Neo-Marxist-Founded Group 46 TIMES In New Regs
New internet regulations finally released by the Federal Communications Commission make 46 references to a group funded by billionaire George Soros and co-founded by a neo-Marxist.
The FCC released the 400-page document on Thursday, two weeks after it passed new regulations, which many fear will turn the internet into a public commodity and thereby stifle innovation.
“Leveling the playing field” in that way has been a clear goal of Free Press, a group dedicated to net neutrality which was founded in 2003.
As Phil Kerpen, president of the free-market group American Commitment, first noted, Free Press is mentioned repeatedly in the FCC document. Most of the references are found in footnotes which cite comments by Free Press activists supporting more internet regulation.
The term “Free Press” is mentioned 62 times in the regulations. Some are redundant mentions referring to the same Free Press activists’ comments in favor of more oversight. In total, the FCC cited Free Press’ pro-net neutrality arguments 46 times.
And from Godfather Politics:
Based on references in the regulations alone, it is clear that Barack Obama’s takeover of the Internet was actually written – in large part – by radical Marxist-leaning organizations; and it has also come to light that radical socialist-leaning organizations funded by Billionaire Socialist George Soros and others have spent approximately 200 MILLION DOLLARS ($200,000,000.00) to make Barack Obama’s tyrannical and dictatorial takeover of the Internet a reality.
And we have only one hope of stopping this master plan to transform the United States into a socialist utopia. As of this writing, Representative Marsha Blackburn and 43 other Republicans have signed onto legislation (H.R. 1212: The Internet Freedom Act) that will totally reverse this dictatorial Obama-FCC dictate… but this legislation is stalled in committee because John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are in no rush to bring it to the floor of the House and the Senate for a vote… and that needs to change right now.
 
Please follow and like us:
0
 

Sandy Hook families sue Bushmaster gun manufacturer

Sandy Hoax
One of the many curiosities about the Sandy Hook massacre of Dec. 14, 2012 — in which alleged lone gunman, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, allegedly killed 20 kids and 6 adults in the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut — is the absence of lawsuits by the victims’ families. (See my post of March 29, 2014, “Why are there no Sandy Hook lawsuits?”)
That has to be a first in notoriously litigious America, where in 1994, 79-year-old Stella Liebeck who spilled a cup of hot McDonald’s coffee on herself sued McDonald’s restaurant and was awarded $2.86 million by a New Mexico civil jury. (The trial judge later reduced the final verdict to $640,000, and the parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided.)
On Dec. 14, 2014, two years to the day after the alleged massacre, the strange absence of Sandy Hook lawsuits came to an end when, as the AP reports, the families of 9 of the 26 people killed, as well as a teacher who was wounded, filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer, distributor and seller of the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle that Lanza allegedly used in the shooting.
The negligence and wrongful death lawsuit, filed in Bridgeport Superior Court, asserts that the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle should not have been made publicly available because it was designed for military use and is unsuited for hunting or home defense. As attorney Josh Koskoff put it in a release, “The AR-15 was specifically engineered for the United States military to meet the needs of changing warfare. In fact, one of the Army’s specifications for the AR-15 was that it has the capability to penetrate a steel helmet.”
The lawsuit claims that Bushmaster is clearly aware that the AR-15 has become the weapon of choice for mass shootings: “Time and again, mentally unstable individuals and criminals have acquired an AR-15 with ease, and they have unleashed the rifle’s lethal power on our streets, our malls, our places of worship, and our schools.”
As one of the plaintiffs, Bill Sherlach, put it, the gun industry needs to be held to “standard business practices” when it comes to assuming the risk for producing, making and selling a product. “These [gun] companies assume no responsibility for marketing and selling a product to the general population who are not trained to use it nor even understand the power of it.”
The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages for the 10 plaintiffs, 9 of whom are the families of:

  1. Daniel Barden, child
  2. Rachel D’Avino, special ed teacher
  3. Dylan Hockley, child
  4. Jesse Lewis, child
  5. Noah Pozner, child
  6. Lauren Rousseau, teacher
  7. Mary Sherlach, school psychologist
  8. Vicki Soto, teacher
  9. Benjamin Wheeler, child
  10. The 10th plaintiff is Natalie Hammond, a teacher who was injured in the shooting.

The lawsuit names three defendants:

  1. Bushmaster Firearms, the manufacturer of the rifle.
  2. Camfour, a firearm distributor.
  3. Riverview Gun Sales in East Windsor where Adam’s mother, Nancy Lanza, allegedly had purchased the Bushmaster rifle in 2010.

Bushmaster Firearms International
There have been two notable lawsuits against gun manufacturers:

  • In 2002, a federal judge in California ruled that Bushmaster and other gun manufacturers were not responsible for a 1999 shooting spree that killed a postal worker and injured five people at a Jewish community center in Los Angeles. The judge said a lawsuit by the victims’ families did not show a link between the manufacturers and the shooting rampage.
  • In 2004, in a lawsuit over the .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle used in the Washington, D.C.-area sniper shootings that killed 10 people in 2002, Bushmaster and a Washington state gun dealer agreed to pay $550,000 and $2.5 million, respectively, to two survivors and six families. It was the first time a gun manufacturer had agreed to pay damages to settle claims of negligent distribution of weapons.

In 2005, Congress and President George W. Bush approved a federal law, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which shields gun makers from lawsuits over criminal use of their products, with 6 exemptions. One of the exemptions is the “negligent entrustment” exemption, defined in the law as “the supplying of a qualified product by a seller for use by another person when the seller knows, or reasonably should know, the person to whom the product is supplied is likely to, and does, use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury to the person or others.”
Dan Altimari reports for the Hartford Courant, Dec. 15, 2014, that the Sandy Hook lawsuit will test the 2005 federal law designed to protect gun companies by using the negligent entrustment exemption, normally applied to car accident cases. In a negligent entrustment case, a party (Bushmaster) can be held liable for entrusting a product, in this case the Bushmaster rifle, to another party (Nancy and Adam Lanza) who then causes harm to a third party (Lanza’s victims).
Albany Law School Professor Timothy Lytton, who has written a book about the history of lawsuits against gun companies, said an example of negligent entrustment would be the sale of a weapon by a gun retailer to a suicidal person. A negligent entrustment lawsuit would claim the retailer should have known not to sell that person a gun. Lytton said, “The court needs to decide whether they want to extend negligent entrustment from a retailer selling a gun to someone standing right in front of them to the theory that the manufacturer of the weapon is also responsible when the weapon they made is then sold by another party to a third person.”
Dennis Henigan, former vice president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said that extending negligent entrustment to the gun manufacturer Bushmaster Firearms is unprecedented, having never before been brought before a court. It is therefore difficult to predict what will happen, although “Most state judges will want to find a way to allow these victims their day in court.”
There are rumors on the Internet that financier George Soros, a gun control advocate, had bought Bushmaster. If this is true, we would have good reason to question the Sandy Hook lawsuit and if the lawsuit would ever go to trial.
But the rumor is not true. (See my post of Nov. 1, 2011, “Is Soros Buying Up Guns in the U.S.?“)
Instead, Bushmaster and other leading gun makers had been acquired by a company called the Freedom Group that the New York Times calls “the most powerful and mysterious force in the American commercial gun industry today.” Behind Freedom Group is the private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management (CCM), which is named after Cerberus, the 3-headed dog that guarded the gates of Hades or Hell in Greek mythology. Steve Feinberg, CCM’s chief executive, co-founded CCM in 1992 with William L. Richter, who currently serves as a senior managing director.
From The New York Times, Nov. 26, 2011:

In recent years, many top-selling brands — including the 195-year-old Remington Arms, as well as Bushmaster Firearms and DPMS, leading makers of military-style semiautomatics — have quietly passed into the hands of a single private company. It is called the Freedom Group — and it is the most powerful and mysterious force in the American commercial gun industry today. […]
Even within gun circles, the Freedom Group is something of an enigma. Its rise has been so swift that it has become the subject of wild speculation and grassy-knoll conspiracy theories. In the realm of consumer rifles and shotguns — long guns, in the trade — it is unrivaled in its size and reach. […]
Behind this giant is Cerberus Capital Management, the private investment company that […] has been buying big names in guns and ammo. […] “We believe our scale and product breadth are unmatched within the industry,” the Freedom Group said in a filing last year with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
[…] Mark Eliason, the vice president for sales and marketing at Windham Weaponry, a new competitor of Bushmaster that was established by Bushmaster’s founder […] estimates that roughly 20 percent of the long guns for sale here are made by Freedom Group companies. […] About a third of it [ammunition] comes from the Freedom Group […].
Some gun enthusiasts have claimed that the power behind the company is actually George Soros, the hedge-fund billionaire and liberal activist. Mr. Soros, these people have warned, is buying American gun companies so he can dismantle the industry, Second Amendment be damned.
The chatter grew so loud that the National Rifle Association issued a statement in October denying the rumors. “N.R.A. has had contact with officials from Cerberus and Freedom Group for some time,” the N.R.A. assured its members. “The owners and investors involved are strong supporters of the Second Amendment and are avid hunters and shooters.”
Mr. Soros isn’t behind the Freedom Group, but, ultimately, another financier is: Stephen A. Feinberg, the chief executive of Cerberus {…] a Princeton graduate who [joined the Reserve Officer Training Corps while at Princeton].
Today, Mr. Feinberg presides over a private empire that rivals some of the mightiest public companies in the land. Cerberus manages more than $20 billion in capital. Together, the companies it owns generate annual revenue of about $40 billion — more than either Amazon or Coca-Cola last year.
Why Cerberus went after gun companies isn’t clear.
[…] Cerberus brings some connections to the table. The longtime chairman of its global investments group is Dan Quayle, the former vice president. The Freedom Group, meantime, has added two retired generals to its board. One is George A. Joulwan, who retired from the Army after serving as Supreme Allied Commander of Europe. The other is Michael W. Hagee, formerly commandant of the Marine Corps.

For the links to the posts we’ve published on the Sandy Hook mystery, go to our “Sandy Hook Massacre” page.
H/t FOTM’s MomOfIV

UPDATE (Oct. 15, 2016)

Yesterday, Oct. 14, 2016, Connecticut Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis struck down the lawsuit that families of alleged victims had brought against Remington Arms, the parent company of Bushmaster, the brand of AR-15 that Adam Lanza allegedly used in the alleged massacre of 20 children and 6 adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
Bellis cited the 2005 Lawful Protection of Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which protects gun manufacturers from being sued in instances where the gun in question was legally made and sold — which was the case with the AR-15 allegedly used by Lanza. (Source: Breitbart)
H/t Will Shanley
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0