#50 | Posted by BellRinger

That's the metric you utilize?! Speaks volumes, JEFF.

HAHAHA! Nice self-own!

This will be a never ending 3 yr conspiracy. How do I know, because people still yell Russia Russia Russia even when there no there there, and investigation turned up nada.
#24 | Posted by oneironaut

Your willful ignorance is stark, cultist! HAHAHAHA!

Come on, cultists! There's got to be more of you who will neutralize child sex abuse, yes? YES?!

#12

Great parallels. Thank you for posting.

Now swallow it.

Epstein files are released. At least some of it
#140 | Posted by eberly

How would you quantify "some of it"?

You mean 17,000 errors.
#25 | Posted by eberly

Error in aggregate, but you knew that, right? HAHAHA!

My question is, according to some things I have seen, the victim that was redacted was the one who killed herself. She is on record as saying Trump did nothing to her.
Is there anything there? And why are we going to just automatically take Epstein's word for anything. He was conspiring with Wolf to blackmail Trump.
It really shows what type of man Epstein was and makes you wonder why anyone would even deal with him in the first place.
#12 | Posted by boaz

She was only in Epstein's orbit for 2 years.
We need to see what the files contain regarding the then 13-year-old who said Trump violently raped her at Epstein's NYC apartment. And other trafficked girls and women ...
#166 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

The cult members, like BOAZ, are fascinatingly short sighted and small minded.

Why would Republican congress block Prince Andrew's testimony? Why are Trump and Republicans running cover for pedos? Is it only because they're just copying the Democrats (under Biden)? So the Republicans ARE ALSO pedo protectors just like the Dems? Kash Patel lied to Congress when he testified that only Epstein abused children?

Inquiring minds would like to know.

"The Biden-era sanctuary state policies in California foisted on the state and Americans by Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom have once again collided with federal law " this time on America's highways."

The statement exaggerates the novelty and political attribution of the crisis; the CDL compliance failures are long-standing and multifaceted federal-state regulatory issues, with enforcement actions occurring during Newsom's governorship but rooted in deeper systemic causes.

Systemic issues related to the improper issuance of commercial driver's licenses (CDLs) in California predate Governor Newsom's tenure and have been an ongoing challenge for years. Federal investigations and prosecutions have previously uncovered cases of DMV employees accepting bribes, identity fraud, and widespread failures to verify lawful presence or work authorization for CDL holders in the state. There have been several incidents and audits revealing California's troubles with licensing, including improper verification protocols, record-keeping failures, and compliance gaps that resulted in thousands of ineligible individuals receiving CDLs.[1][4][6]

Similar problems with license issuance have resulted in criminal prosecutions, regulatory crackdowns, and calls for reform and oversight well before the current scandal or Newsom's administration. These ongoing challenges highlight that California's CDL licensing controversies are part of a broader and persistent problem, not simply a recent development.[4][6][1]

The original information about the removal of the memorial to Black U.S. soldiers who died in WWII comes from reputable sources, including Newsweek, and has been confirmed as accurate reporting.

Key Findings
- Newsweek reported that panels commemorating African American soldiers were quietly removed from the visitor center at the Netherlands American Cemetery in Margraten.[1][3]
- These panels specifically highlighted the contributions of Black soldiers and the history of racial segregation in the U.S. military.[3]
- The panels had only recently been installed before their removal, raising criticism and questions from Dutch officials, historians, and family members of the commemorated soldiers.[6]
- No detailed explanation was given by the ABMC or U.S. officials about the removal, though some news outlets referenced vague statements about internal policy review.[3][6]
- Multiple outlets confirm that the removed panels were those specifically focusing on Black servicemembers, rather than a wider rotation of content.[2][6][3]

Conclusion
The removal event is factual, and the details were first widely covered by Newsweek. However, the rationale for the removal"including whether it was part of a regular rotation or a specific reversal of commemorative policy"remains unclear and disputed in reporting. The lack of transparent explanation has led to further criticism from officials and historians.[2][6][3]