YubNub Social YubNub Social
    #virginia #democrats #astronomy #texas #moon
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Night mode
  • © 2025 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode toggle
Community
New Posts (Home) ChatBox Popular Posts Reels Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore
© 2025 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
7 w

Israel PM nominates President Trump for Nobel Peace Prize
Favicon 
www.brighteon.com

Israel PM nominates President Trump for Nobel Peace Prize

Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
7 w

Trump sent a ‘message to the world’ with Iran strike
Favicon 
www.brighteon.com

Trump sent a ‘message to the world’ with Iran strike

Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
7 w

Trump ‘working hard’ to secure Middle East peace deal
Favicon 
www.brighteon.com

Trump ‘working hard’ to secure Middle East peace deal

Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
7 w

Are the Chinese Already Here?
Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

Are the Chinese Already Here?

Foreign Affairs Are the Chinese Already Here? After high-tech surprise attacks in Russia and Iran, Americans should start worrying about what might be afoot on their own turf.  Back on May 11, this author warned that the People’s Republic of China could be pre-positioning weapons, including nuclear bombs, inside the United States with the idea that, in the event of hostilities, the Chinese could fire them off.  Three weeks later, on June 1, Ukraine used pre-positioned drones, bearing conventional warheads, to destroy Russian military assets thousands of miles behind the warfront. Twelve days after that, the Israels used a similar tactic to inflict massive damage on faraway Iran.  To put the matter plainly, the concept of activating “sleeper” weapons has been proved. Nobody wants a war with China, but even more, nobody should like the idea of the Chinese having planted dragon’s teeth in our midst. It could happen here, some kind of Pearl Harbor or 9/11—or maybe something a thousand times worse. So we need a thorough national assessment of our vulnerability.  We could start with the sober knowledge that Chinese entities have purchased some 384,000 acres of land in the U.S. Many of those properties are near U.S. military bases and population centers. To be sure, ownership of land doesn’t prove that the PRC has weaponized it, but the Russians and Iranians were insufficiently suspecting—and look what happened to them.  Happily, there’s a significant effort to unwind those Red Chinese land purchases, and yet for the sake of safety, or at least peace of mind, it’s best to apply the fearful Cold War joke: Maybe there really is a red under the bed. Is this paranoia? It wasn’t paranoiacs who built rogue communications devices into Chinese solar power components; it was the observant who found them. The discovery of those spy gadgets should convince us, once and for all, not to import such wares from China—and to examine all solar equipment, wherever it comes from.  Speaking of gadgets that could have nefarious use, China controls an estimated 90 percent of the world drone market. Not only does that mean that the PRC can whip up locust-like—and mosquito-sized—drone swarms, it also suggests that Red China could use its economies of scale to accelerate drone innovation, e.g. further miniaturization and kit-compartmentalization, such that components to be smuggled into the U.S., appearing harmless and thus slipping past inspectors. So we need a thorough review of risks, being as imaginative in our defense plans as other countries have been in their attack plans.  Thankfully, most PRC-funded Confucius Institutes have been closed. Furthermore, it’s a good thing that the Trump administration has locked down the border. Yet, in the most literal sense, we don’t know who entered this country during the Biden years. So now have the task of surveilling—and perhaps apprehending or expelling—organized malefactors. Just on June 5, two Chinese nationals were arrested on charges of smuggling toxic funguses that could destroy crops and God knows what else. Is this “agroterrorism”? Or just a bad science experiment? Inquiring minds want to know—and should probe deeply.  Yet it’s also possible that we are being penetrated in ways that require no direct human invader. Let’s keep asking: Was Covid 19, that worldwide pandemic, actually a Chinese bioweapon? Some well-credentialed experts allege that the Wuhan Bat Lady gain-of-functioned a lethal virus and released it in 2019, killing millions and costing the world economy tens of trillions.  In 2024, the Heritage Foundation released a bipartisan report, led by John Ratcliffe, formerly a member of Congress and director of national intelligence. The report didn’t reach a definitive conclusion as to virological mass murder, but it perceived the Middle Kingdom through a glass darkly:  China has been in a league uniquely of its own in its active and aggressive opposition to honesty, transparency, and accountability regarding the virus and its spread. This behavior by the Chinese government, more than anything else, was the proximal origin of the COVID-19 pandemic. A year later, Ratcliffe is the Trump administration’s director of the CIA. So presumably, there will be more moments of hard-nosed looking at China’s infectious misprisions.  And there are other ways of stealthily penetrating the U.S. In a May op-ed, Michael Lucci, CEO of the State Armor Foundation, a body that counts the former Trump national security adviser Robert O’Brien as one of its advisers, noted the presence of Chinese spyware in American medical devices. In addition to the obvious privacy and blackmail concerns, Lucci pointed out that the accumulation of medical data could give the Chinese an edge on genetic sequencing technologies that could, in turn, aid the production of new medicines—or, of course, new contagions.  There’s more. On July 1, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) highlighted allegations that China interfered in the 2020 presidential election on behalf of Joe Biden. (Grassley further alleged that, five years ago, the ancien régime FBI leadership interfered with the field investigation. Now why might that have happened?) Meanwhile, we should trust—but verify—that the Trump administration’s dig, baby, dig policies are addressing the strategic problem of China’s chokehold on rare earths.  Still, more concerns loom: It seems, for example, that hostile foreign powers are using our freedoms to manipulate Western political systems for their own interests.  It’s long been recognized that the Russians have been funding green groups in Europe, even as Russia itself is not so green. Why this generosity to foreign ecological activists? The answer seems clear enough: to discourage European energy production and encourage importing of Russian energy. (And if useful-idiot greens discombobulate Western societies, that’s gravy for Moscow.)  Now Beijing appears to be playing the same game. The Washington Examiner’s Robert Schmad has detailed China’s boosting the revenues of major U. S. philanthropies, through Uyghur slave labor and good deals with the People’s Liberation Army. In turn, these philanthropies have amplified pro-Chinese policy positions on green issues. Given that China is not at all green—it belches more CO2 than the U.S. and the other 37 OECD countries combined—this merits examination.  In fact, it appears that the PRC is playing a geopolitical three-cushion shot: China money to green groups to hits on the U.S. economy. Schmad details how Chinese money is reaching into U.S. state legislatures, aiming to reshape policy.  To cite just one of Schmad’s examples, the Iowa Environmental Council (IEC) has actively opposed state legislation that would establish a legal-liability shield around Bayer, the company that makes Roundup—Bayer having purchased the herbicide’s original maker, Monsanto. Tort lawsuits on Roundup have cost Bayer some $11 billion, and the greens like it that way, hoping to eliminate the herbicide altogether, at least in the U.S..  To that end, IEC assigned no fewer than seven lobbyists to work against the shielding legislation, which is backed by Hawkeye State farm groups. And here’s Schmad’s kicker: Describing itself as a “nonpartisan alliance of diverse organizations and individuals working together to protect and preserve Iowa’s environment,” the Iowa Environmental Council has, since 2015, consistently received a large portion, at times a majority, of its funding from the Energy Foundation, an international green nonprofit group with deep ties to the Chinese Communist Party. According to another digging journalist, Thomas Catenacci, while the Energy Foundation is technically headquartered in San Francisco, its true hub is in China. For instance, the CEO of the Energy Foundation is one Ji Zou. Catenacci adds:  Zou previously served as the deputy director general of China’s National Center for Climate Change Strategy, an agency within the Chinese government’s National Development and Reform Commission. Ping He, a senior policy adviser at the group, worked for eight years at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, a leading state-run research institution. The Energy Foundation is not small: According to Pro Publica, its revenues in 2023 totaled $286 million. So in addition to its funding of activities in Iowa, it can afford to fund similar lobbying efforts in other states, like Florida, Idaho, and Missouri.  For its part, American agriculture fears this onslaught. In the words of Missouri State Senator Kurtis Gregory, Show Me State farmers are “under attack from two fronts: trial lawyers looking to cash in on frivolous lawsuits and Communist China, which aims to infiltrate and control our agricultural industry.” Gregory adds, “Legislation to end lawfare against Roundup is a critical line of defense to protect Missouri’s farmers and keep our food supply secure.”  To add another twist to the tale, China is the world’s leading producer of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup—and the country shows no inclination to halt its own production. So if Roundup is sidelined in the U.S.—with likely deleterious effects on U.S. farm production—the PRC stands to gain from the vacuum. Maybe that’s the grand strategy: The Chinese are working hand-in-glove—perhaps money-in-palm is a better way to put it—with American green groups to manipulate American politics.  To be sure, some will argue that health concerns about Roundup are perfectly valid, and that IEC and other green groups would be acting exactly the same way without any help from the Chinese (even if it seems inarguable that they’d have fewer resources with which to lobby). That’s why we need rigorous investigations, threshing out legit fears from fake news.  In the meantime, admittedly, a blow to American agriculture is not the same thing as a mass-casualty event. Still, it is a cut—one of a thousand the Chinese could be inflicting.  And yes, the U.S. might be preparing sneaky stratagems of its own to affect China. To which we can say: Good. It’s good, that is, to have deterrence. Valuable perspective comes from the aforementioned State Armor Foundation:  The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP’s) plan to defeat America includes maneuvering the United States into dependence on China for energy and other critical supplies while preventing the U.S. military from intercepting China’s energy sources. To secure U.S. dependence, the CCP has been co-opting the progressive American climate change lobby to push a transition from fossil fuels and other critical inputs on which the United States (or the broader West) is self-reliant onto “green” technologies controlled by China. Through this strategy, the CCP has already increased U.S. dependence on their batteries, solar panels, electric vehicle charging stations, and other components produced in China. The CCP is now trying to compel further shifts of the U.S. electricity grid and fertilizer market away from Western companies. It’s through this bleak template that we might consider all the other concerns about Chinese activities that touch the U.S., from TikTok to AI to more familiar types of espionage.  Admittedly, this is a depressing topic, all this long-twilight-struggling, as we are forced to contemplate the many threats and terrors creeping towards us like so many Lovecraftian tentacles. Yet the prospect of actually losing a war is even more depressing, so that should help keep us watchful.  The post Are the Chinese Already Here? appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
7 w

Why Trump Should Stay Out of Israel’s War on Iran
Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

Why Trump Should Stay Out of Israel’s War on Iran

Foreign Affairs Why Trump Should Stay Out of Israel’s War on Iran The opportunity for diplomacy still exists—if the U.S. president is willing to take it. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) President Donald Trump’s admission last week that Iran had refused to abandon uranium enrichment—even after U.S.–Israeli strikes in June—exposes the harsh reality of Mideast power politics. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Washington on Monday, ostensibly to discuss Gaza, but, according to a well-informed Israeli journalist, with the next steps on Iran topping his actual agenda. Trump now faces a pivotal choice: statesmanship in pursuit of U.S. interests or subservience to Israel’s radical government.  The recent strikes were meant to cripple Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Instead, they proved the limits of coercion. Satellite imagery shows Iran rebuilding its bombed Fordow facility, and Tehran has suspended cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Far from surrendering, Tehran has struck notes of defiance, and the Iranian people have rallied around the flag, with public opinion now favoring weaponization as the ultimate deterrent against future attacks—a marginal stance before the strikes. In other words, the hoped-for benefits failed to materialize, though the predictable costs came to pass: a destabilized Middle East and a distracted America, forced to choose between arming Israel or Ukraine amid congressional budget fights. Yet opportunities for peace with Iran and stability in the Middle East remain. A revived nuclear deal—even an interim accord—could reinstate inspections, cap uranium enrichment, and engineer creative solutions for the reportedly missing 60 percent enriched uranium from Fordow, possibly by transferring it to Russia. In fact, Trump has consistently seen Moscow as a potential partner in resolving the Iranian standoff, a topic that regularly arises in his calls with Vladimir Putin. Meanwhile, backchannel talks through Oman suggest renewed U.S.–Iran diplomacy may be possible, with U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff reportedly meeting Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Oslo. In an interview with American journalist Tucker Carlson that aired Monday, Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian reaffirmed Tehran’s readiness to resume talks with Washington. Enter Netanyahu. The Israeli leader’s maximalist demands have complicated diplomacy, and the White House’s adoption of some of those demands as its own has put a nuclear deal beyond reach. Netanyahu desires not just an end to Iran’s civilian nuclear energy program, but the dismantling of its missile arsenal and, ultimately, all conventional defenses, ensuring Israel can dominate and bomb Iran at will, as it does in Lebanon and Syria in pursuit of regional hegemony. One reason U.S.–Iran diplomacy has faltered is that Trump started pushing for zero enrichment on Iranian soil, a nonstarter for Tehran. The Islamic Republic will also resist any efforts to dismantle its conventional military deterrent.   For a small nation dependent on outside help, these ambitions may sound delusional (The American Conservative’s Andrew Day explored them in detail last week), but they have proven politically advantageous for Netanyahu and his messianic extremist coalition. The Iran war reversed the decline in Netanyahu’s popularity—polls from Israel’s Maariv newspaper show his Likud party regaining its position as the country’s most popular political force, rising to 27 seats in the parliament if the elections were to be celebrated now, compared to 13 according to a pre-war poll. At the same time, the party of his right-wing rival Naftali Bennett dropped from projected 27 seats to 24. Civilian casualties from Iranian retaliatory strikes—29 dead and thousands wounded—have only reinforced the siege mentality among Netanyahu’s allies. The war has also, for now, eased Netanyahu’s legal troubles, in large part because Trump, citing the prime minister’s leadership during the conflict, called for charges to be dropped. An Israeli court postponed the looming corruption trial testimony at Netanyahu’s request, due to his role as a “wartime prime minister.”  The surest way for Netanyahu to secure Israel’s regional dominance and consolidate his political gains is to resume hostilities with Iran. But Israel—a densely packed country of 9.8 million people with no strategic depth—cannot on its own sustain a prolonged conflict with a nation ten times its population. Leaked documents reviewed by The Telegraph reveal that the damage from Iran’s retaliatory strikes was worse than officially acknowledged. Israeli military censorship had kept hidden the full extent of Iran’s tactical successes, but the data shows five military bases hit in 12 days, with missile defenses strained to their limits. Unlike Iran’s vast geography, Israel’s concentrated population and infrastructure—including the Dimona nuclear facility—make it uniquely vulnerable to escalation.  This is why Netanyahu needs to entangle Trump in his war: Israel cannot fight Iran without the support of its superpower patron. Trump must avoid this trap. Crucially, he has already shown reluctance to fully indulge Netanyahu’s escalatory plans. During Israel’s 12-day war with Iran, the administration authorized limited strikes on Fordow—reportedly with prior warning to Tehran—demonstrating resolve while deliberately avoiding the full-scale U.S. war that Netanyahu sought. This calibrated approach blocked Israel’s push for deep U.S. military involvement and avoided triggering a regional conflagration.  Trump has strong political incentives to hold firm in this pragmatism. According to a YouGov/Economist poll, 60 percent of Americans think the U.S. military should not get involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran, with only 16 percent supporting military action. Most MAGA voters went along with Trump’s strikes, but many could turn on the president if the U.S. wages a prolonged war with Iran. Tucker Carlson’s viral segments (such as his latest with the Libertarian Institute’s Scott Horton) and warnings from allies like Steve Bannon and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene show that prominent MAGA influencers won’t compromise on their rejection of Middle East quagmires. With 52 percent of Americans now disapproving of Trump’s foreign policy and no clear path to ending the war in Ukraine, starting another conflict could fracture his coalition.  Another key reason to deescalate relates to America’s improving relations with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar, ties that grew only stronger during Trump’s landmark visit to the region in May. Preserving those relationships requires avoiding open-ended wars that destabilize the region. The Gulf states’ cautious neutrality during recent conflicts underscores the value of this approach.  Chasing Netanyahu’s fantasies would also divert resources from the defining challenge: countering China, America’s only peer competitor. A diplomatic deal with Iran would free up political and military capital for the strategic “pivot to Asia” that Washington has failed to execute since the Barack Obama administration.  Moving forward, Trump should reject Netanyahu’s push for deeper U.S. involvement in Israel’s war on Iran. Instead, he should intensify backchannel diplomacy through Oman and other mediators, including possibly Russia.The contrast between the interests of the two leaders is stark: Netanyahu needs war to survive politically, while Trump needs peace to fulfill his “America First” campaign promises. The latter’s pragmatism has prevented worse escalation before, and it motivated him to keep U.S. strikes on Iran restricted to a specific mission, however ill-conceived. Now is the time to cement that restraint.  The door to true statesmanship remains open, or at least unlocked—but only if Trump resists the Israeli push toward escalation. For a president who vowed to end “stupid wars,” the choice should be clear. The post Why Trump Should Stay Out of Israel’s War on Iran appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
7 w

Who Wants to Balance the Budget?
Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

Who Wants to Balance the Budget?

Politics Who Wants to Balance the Budget? The deficit is a major problem for the U.S. The biggest obstacle to taming it is the voters. Credit: Win McNamee/Getty Images The deficit is once again a major issue among Republicans, who have just emerged from a brutal battle to pass President Donald Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill”. The bill, which makes the 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent and provides a big funding boost for border security and national defense, was bitterly opposed by Thomas Massie (R-KY) in the House and Rand Paul (R-KY) in the Senate because of its dismal fiscal implications: an estimated $3.3 trillion increase in the national debt over the next decade, according to a report from the Congressional Budget Office. Widening the hole in the budget at a time when the United States is already running record-high levels of debt is a matter that ought to be of serious concern to the nation, especially given the circumstances. In 2024, the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio stood at a staggering 123 percent, topping American indebtedness at the height of the Second World War—all without the U.S. being involved in a major war or suffering the effects of a recession. American indebtedness is also not just a problem for future citizens—the cost to service the country’s debt has grown rapidly. In 2024, the U.S. federal government spent $665 billion, 14 percent of the federal budget, on interest payments. That is more than the U.S. spends on any government program except Social Security and Medicare—and it may soon surpass Medicare, whose $700 billion in spending is the second-largest budget item. Despite the obvious issues with increasing the federal budget deficit and consequently the national debt, neither Republicans nor Democrats show much interest in curbing the unfolding crisis. Most Republicans, even those skeptical of the debt increases, rightly pointed out that passing the Big Beautiful Bill was necessary to provide desperately needed funding for deportations and border enforcement, as well as providing a shot in the arm for American shipbuilding and missile manufacturing, key industries for effectively containing China. Democrats, on the other hand, lambasted the bill not for its budgetary extravagance, but for the only major cost-cutting measure implemented by the GOP, a work-requirement addition for Medicaid that is estimated to save $1 trillion by eliminating some 10 million people from the welfare rolls. The lack of interest by politicians in curbing the national debt is only rational, given the almost complete lack of interest from voters in fiscal discipline. Much of Trump’s appeal was in his explicit rejection of Paul Ryan–style fiscal conservatism: “I’m not going to touch Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid,” the president has promised repeatedly. Major entitlement reform is no longer on the table from the right, for the simple reason that any major attempt to reduce expenditures on the biggest entitlement programs, the ones Trump has promised not to touch, would be immediately and harshly punished by older voters, who are the largest demographic in the U.S. and the most likely to vote.  The other option to curb the debt would be to raise taxes, something almost equally unpopular with voters and deeply contrary to the most fundamental impulses of both the GOP base and Republican politicians. Tax cuts have been at the center of Trump’s legislative accomplishments both in 2017 and today, and despite a more populist approach towards entitlements Republicans show little inclination towards leaving their tax-cutting sentiments behind and adopting a tax-and-spend policy. Democrats, who are today no less enthusiastic about government spending, entitlements, and welfare than yesterday, have become more reticent about taxation. Their soak-the-rich rhetoric still plays well to some sections of their base, but as the country polarizes by class and the Democrats increasingly lose blue-collar workers and become the party of the upper-middle section of the country, the political benefits of increasing taxes on the rich have become more and more tenuous. Thus, almost none of the rhetoric the party has deployed against the Big Beautiful Bill was aimed at convincing voters it represents an impending fiscal calamity—there’s no market for it on the left, either. Thus, Massie and Rand’s ostensibly principled stand in opposition to the bill is essentially performative. There is no “fiscally responsible” option on the table, not from the nefarious betrayal of the MAGA movement or the Republican Party, but because the American public does not want it. Republicans and Democrats alike are acting in accordance with the wishes of their constituents: They want lower taxes, more spending on the things they find important like defense and border security, and no cuts to their government-provided welfare benefits. The only way this is achievable is by blowing an ever-larger hole in the federal budget, and as the consequences are not immediately dire, both congressmen and voters are happy to make the trade. The unhappy question is not “will we solve America’s national debt or not”; it is “will we achieve our political priorities while blowing up the deficit or not.” This situation is only likely to worsen in years to come. Over half of the federal budget is spent on Social Security and healthcare benefits, which overwhelmingly benefit wealthier, older, retired Americans at the expense of young working people. As America’s fertility rate falls, older Americans outnumber younger ones in an increasing proportion, and wield correspondingly greater political power. Older Americans are also disproportionately likely to vote and contribute to political causes, having both more resources and more time than their younger counterparts. Nor is there an AARP equivalent for young people to lobby Congress to reduce payroll taxes and old-age entitlements. The out-of-control federal deficit is thus, unfortunately, symptomatic of a deeper and more profound challenge to the American system of government. The idea that democracies fail once the public accustoms itself to voting public largess from the private purse is a venerable one, and an argument that has often been seen as discredited. But there is no question that something along those lines confronts the U.S. today. The Social Security system was never designed for a populace as long-lived as modern Americans, or one with the age-distribution the modern fertility collapse has produced. Any significant reform, however, would be political suicide: Entitlements, once expected, cannot be easily or even peacefully revoked. Political grandstanding, like that of Massie and Rand, is no solution.  What a solution might look like, if there is one, is unclear: Japan, which has suffered from a very similar problem for decades longer than the U.S., is no further towards remedying the issue than America. Until such a solution presents itself, Republicans have decided that, if we as a country are going to spend ourselves into bankruptcy, we might as well get deportations out of it. The post Who Wants to Balance the Budget? appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
7 w

Trump just made freakin' HISTORY. #maga #conservativenews #trump
Favicon 
www.youtube.com

Trump just made freakin' HISTORY. #maga #conservativenews #trump

Trump just made freakin' HISTORY. #maga #conservativenews #trump
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
7 w

?? JakeGTV - FACTUAL News Report!! ??
Favicon 
api.bitchute.com

?? JakeGTV - FACTUAL News Report!! ??

UTL COMMENT:- Awesome and more truth in that 30 seconds than you will ever get in a whole year of news!!! Video done in AI With thanks to:- https://x.com/JakeG_Official
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
7 w

Health Care Welfare Panic
Favicon 
townhall.com

Health Care Welfare Panic

Health Care Welfare Panic
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
7 w

The Green Agenda Wants Missouri Land—and They Want You to Pay for It
Favicon 
townhall.com

The Green Agenda Wants Missouri Land—and They Want You to Pay for It

The Green Agenda Wants Missouri Land—and They Want You to Pay for It
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 6372 out of 87965
  • 6368
  • 6369
  • 6370
  • 6371
  • 6372
  • 6373
  • 6374
  • 6375
  • 6376
  • 6377
  • 6378
  • 6379
  • 6380
  • 6381
  • 6382
  • 6383
  • 6384
  • 6385
  • 6386
  • 6387
Stop Seeing These Ads

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund