Title :
link :
Government Jobs Drop by 5,000
WWW.MOEISSUESOFTHEDAY.BLOGSPOT. COM
Fri. Mar. 9, 2019
All Gave Some~Some Gave All
*****
Why Trump Will Win in 2020
Americans have seen real improvements in their lives during his presidency.
by DAVID CATRON
In his closing remarks after the only presidential debate of the 1980 campaign, Ronald Reagan famously looked into the camera and asked the voters, “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” This boiled down that year’s contest to a question that most voters eventually ask themselves, consciously or not, in every election involving an incumbent president. The obvious answer in 1980 was, “No,” and Jimmy Carter became unemployed. The same implicit question will determine the outcome of the 2020 election, and President Trump’s fate. Fortunately for the nation, the clear answer will be an unequivocal, “Yes.”
Indeed, according to Gallup, the general public has already decided on the answer: “Fifty percent say they are better off today than they were a year ago… the first time since 2007 that at least half of the public has said they are financially better off than a year ago.” To put this in historical perspective Gallup points out, “Only 11 times in 109 polls stretching back to 1976 have at least half of those polled said they were in better financial shape than they had been a year prior.” And the good news doesn’t end there. A record number of Americans are optimistic about where their personal finances are headed during the next 12 months:
Americans’ optimism about their personal finances has climbed to levels not seen in more than 16 years, with 69% now saying they expect to be financially better off “at this time next year”… only two percentage points below the all-time high of 71%, recorded in March 1998 at a time when the nation’s economic boom was producing strong economic growth combined with the lowest inflation and unemployment rates in decades.
This is why the Democrats in the House have doubled down on their investigative overreach and hysterical characterizations of the President. It is why House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) has taken to suggesting that Trump is a “dictator.” This is indicative of sheer panic. Nadler and the rest of the Democratic leadership know that, unless the economy takes a dive in the next twelve months or they somehow manage to force the President out of office, the voters will pull the lever for the presidential candidate whom they trust most on the economy. And that candidate’s name will be Donald J. Trump.
But the Democrats and their friends in the media have done their best to spin the nation’s economic gains as bad news for ordinary Americans. After they tried to give erstwhile President Obama retroactive credit for the improved economy and the howls of laughter stopped, they exhumed many of the moldering arguments they used when the economy improved during the Reagan era — even such withered clichés as “trickle-down economics” and “income inequality.” And, all too predictably, economist cum columnist Paul Krugman has suddenly spotted a worldwide recession looming ominously on the horizon:
There is a significant chance the world economy is headed for a recession in 2019, according to Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman.… When asked whether investors should expect to see a recession in the coming months, Krugman replied: “I think that there is a quite good chance that we will have a recession late this year (or) next year.” He highlighted President Donald Trump’s tax cut stimulus as one area of concern, saying the program was “not very effective.”
But the people who have benefited most from Trump’s economic policies don’t read the New York Times. Nor do they devote a lot of angst to the value of the euro. Democratic propaganda notwithstanding, the beneficiaries of tax reform are not “rich.” They are, in fact, working people who had enormous difficulty finding jobs during the anemic economy that the Democrats and Obama told them was the “new normal.” And those who were lucky enough to be employed don’t see the raises, bonuses, and tax cuts they have received during the past year as the “crumbs” Nancy Pelosi sneered at in January of 2018.
Out here in the real world beyond the Beltway, working people don’t enjoy the luxuries that people like Pelosi take for granted. They certainly can’t count on the lucrative lifetime jobs that congressional Democrats call “public service.” When the demand for employees increases to the point at which it exceeds the supply of workers — and that’s where we are now — wages go up for those with jobs as well as those seeking them. This makes a real difference in the lives of real people. And these are the very people the Democrats claim to represent — blacks, Hispanics, Asians, women, etc. As the Wall Street Journal points out:
All sorts of people who have previously had trouble landing a job are now finding work. Racial minorities, those with less education and people working in the lowest-paying jobs are getting bigger pay raises and, in many cases, experiencing the lowest unemployment rate ever recorded for their groups. They are joining manufacturing workers, women in their prime working years, Americans with disabilities and those with criminal records, among others, in finding improved job prospects after years of disappointment.
All of this has happened on Trump’s watch. This is not a coincidence. The President is an unapologetic advocate of free-market capitalism. He understands that tax cuts for individuals and businesses — combined with aggressive deregulation — stimulate economic growth and job creation. That translates into improvements in the lives of real people and a general sense of optimism about the future. Are the voters going to give that up for pie-in-the-sky promises from a left wing Democrat who can’t explain how to pay for them, yet insists that the President is a crook? Nope. Trump, warts and all, will win in 2020.
Nancy Pelosi Loses Control Of House Democrats 
by Deanna Fisher
This has been a revealing week for House Democrats, and none of it is good. The far-left wing of the party is in the process of assimilating the left wing, which leaves Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a precarious situation.
This shouldn’t be a hard call. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar is an anti-Semite. Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib is an anti-Semite. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is extremely comfortable around anti-Semites and has no problem parroting the lines she’s heard.
But Nancy Pelosi needs these Congresswomen in order to keep her own hold on power. She already conceded as much by appearing with them of the cover of Rolling Stone. Imagine what would happen if, in a fit of spite, AOC and company decided to support a different candidate for Speaker of the House. Pelosi’s election as Speaker this time around was rockier than she had anticipated. But Pelosi is watching her coalition tear itself apart as Ilhan Omar keeps spouting off, and she can’t stop it.
Tensions ran high at a caucus meeting Wednesday as some Democrats privately vented that Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her leadership team had failed to adequately respond to the escalating political crisis, with too little outreach to their own rank and file.
Freshman Rep. Jahana Hayes of Connecticut stood up and confronted Pelosi directly, arguing that she shouldn’t have to learn about the official Democratic Caucus response from MSNBC. Hayes said she now has to vote on a resolution that she’s barely read, without a private briefing from leadership, according to five sources.
Pelosi countered that the Democratic measure to condemn anti-Semitism is not final, though text had been circulating and a vote had been tentatively planned for Wednesday. That vote was postponed amid a last-minute backlash from progressives in the caucus.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) later told reporters that leadership hadn’t decided whether a vote on the resolution would take place this week, adding, “We’re working on language.“
Pelosi also said Democratic leaders were forced to respond quickly over the weekend — a task made trickier with Omar on a congressional delegation trip to East Africa over the weekend.
As Hayes was then talking to another member, Pelosi said, “Well if you’re not going to listen to me, I’m done talking,” then set down the microphone and walked out of the room, the sources said.
And now, protected by the Congressional Black Caucus, Pelosi is unable to get Omar to fall in line.
Melanie Zanona ✔@MZanona
Leaving CBC meeting, members formed a circle around @IlhanMN and Marcia Fudge literally stuck her arm out to prevent reporters from asking her questions.
Then a few members hugged Omar, including Al Lawson.
So, if you can’t beat them, cover it up.
Jake Sherman ✔@JakeSherman
Replying to @JakeSherman
She said she isn’t sure a resolution will get a vote this week. She said foreign affairs committee is writing it.
Jake Sherman ✔@JakeSherman
PELOSI just told us she did not think @IlhanMN’s comments were “intentionally anti Semitic”
And the atmosphere is definitely rubbing off on the far left. Senator Chuck Schumer was just announced as a speaker at the AIPAC Policy Conference.
IPAC ✔@AIPAC CONFIRMED : Senate Democratic Leader @SenSchumer will speak at the 2019 AIPAC Policy Conference.The Senate is a far different place than the House, and something tells me Schumer isn’t going to cave like Pelosi has.
The question is, what does Nancy Pelosi do now? She has two options.
2) Bide her time, and then exact her revenge. These freshmen Congresswomen aren’t bothering to hide their true colors. Eventually, they’re going to make an unforced error that is going to create amazing blowback. Or, in AOC’s case, the money is going to get followed right back into the FEC. And when they go down, Nancy Pelosi, in all her Botoxed glory, will still be standing.
Given Pelosi’s political gamesmanship, I’m learning toward option #2. But don’t think that she isn’t furiously chewing her dentures into pieces at the moment.
Featured image: Original Victory Girls art by Darleen Click
Written by Deanna FisherTO PAY FOR REPARATIONS, WILL DEMOCRATS SUE THEMSELVES?
Larry Elder spotlights party's historic involvement in slavery, Jim Crow
BY LARRY ELDER
After the election and re-election of the country’s first black president, who would have thought that, less than two years later, leading Democrats would seriously debate paying blacks reparations for slavery?
Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi supports a bill that would set up a commission to consider reparations, which she says is “One of the things that we can do not only just in terms of trying to make up for a horrible, sinful thing that happened in our country in terms of slavery, but for our country to live up to who we think we are.” She added: “We have to reduce the disparity in income in our country. We have to reduce the disparity in access to education in an affordable way in our country, reduce the health disparities in our country.”
But two years ago, President Barack Obama called reparations a political nonstarter. “It is easy to make that theoretical argument,” Obama said in an interview. “But as a practical matter, it is hard to think of any society in human history in which a majority population has said that as a consequence of historic wrongs, we are now going to take a big chunk of the nation’s resources over a long period of time to make that right.”
President John F. Kennedy took the same position. Asked in 1963 about race-based affirmation action for blacks, Kennedy said: “I don’t think we can undo the past. In fact, the past is going to be with us for a good many years in uneducated men and women who lost their chance for a decent education. We have to do the best we can now. That is what we are trying to do. I don’t think quotas are a good idea. I think it is a mistake to begin to assign quotas on the basis of religion or race or color, or nationality. … On the other hand, I do think that we ought to make an effort to give a fair chance to everyone who is qualified, not through a quota, but just look over our employment rolls, look over our areas where we are hiring people, and at least make sure we are giving everyone a fair chance, but not hard-and-fast quotas. We are too mixed, this society of ours, to begin to divide ourselves on the basis of race or color.”
Slavery in America ended more than 150 years ago.
Neither former slaves nor slave owners are alive today. Furthermore, columnist and radio host Michael Medved says that only about 5 percent of whites have any sort of “generational” connection to slavery. “The importation of slaves came to an end in 1808 (as provided by the Constitution), a mere 32 years after independence, and slavery had been outlawed in most states decades before the Civil War,” wrote Medved in 2007. “Even in the South, more than 80 percent of the white population never owned slaves. Given the fact that the majority of today’s non-black Americans descend from immigrants who arrived in this country after the War Between the States, only a tiny percentage of today’s white citizens – perhaps as few as 5 percent – bear any authentic sort of generational guilt for the exploitation of slave labor.”
Finally, what about the role of the Democratic Party in slavery, Jim Crow and the resistance to ending them? Republican President Abraham Lincoln, elected on an anti-slavery platform, signed the Emancipation Proclamation and led the North in its victory over the South at the cost of at least 620,000 soldiers dead on both sides. Democrats opposed the 13th Amendment, which freed the slaves, the 14th Amendment, which conferred citizenship on them, and the 15th Amendment, which gave them the right to vote.
During the debate over the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Democrats, including Sen. Al Gore Sr., orchestrated a record-breaking 60-day filibuster in an attempt to block the bill from coming to a vote. By percentage, more Republicans in the House and the Senate voted to pass the bill than did Democrats. Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen received an honor, 40 years after his death, from his hometown’s local chapter of the NAACP for his work navigating the bill through the Senate. When Republican Rep. Bill McCulloch of Ohio announced his retirement, he received a handwritten letter from former first lady Jackie Kennedy, who thanked him for his role in the bill’s passage. Kennedy, who considered the bill a legacy of her husband, wrote: “Your integrity under such pressures is what makes our political system worth fighting for and dying for. Please forgive the emotional tone of this letter – but I want you to know how much your example means to me. It is a light of hope in an often dark world, and one I shall raise my children on as they grow older.”
To pay for reparations, does the Democratic Party intend to sue itself for damages?
Democrats Can’t Condemn Anti Semitism but Trump Said ‘Very Fine People’ in Charlottesville
Democrats Can’t Condemn Anti Semitism but Trump Said ‘Very Fine People’ in Charlottesville
J. Scott Applewhite / Associated PressFive months after an antisemitic gunman murdered eleven Jews at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, the worst attack on Jews in American history, the Democratic Party is struggling to condemn anti semitism.
House Democrats were to have voted Wednesday on a resolution on anti semitism, after first-year Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) used what Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) called a “vile anti-Semitic slur” to attack pro-Israel colleagues. But even after the resolution was watered down to include anti-Muslim bigotry, some anti-Israel Democrats rejected it.
Now a new resolution is being drafted by Omar’s own committee — one that will reportedly condemn “all hate.”
Democrats cannot bring themselves to offer a simple, straightforward condemnation of the hatred of Jews. Nor can they find the political courage to punish Omar, who has repeatedly used anti semitic rhetoric even after objections from party leaders and intervention by her own constituents.
Yet Democrats continue to remind the American people that President Donald Trump said there were some “very fine people” on both sides in Charlottesville in August 2017.
Democrats, and their media allies, like to pretend Trump was talking about the neo-Nazis and white supremacists.
In fact, as the transcript (rarely quoted) shows, Trump was talking about peaceful protesters who came to Charlottesville to protest, for historical reasons, the removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee. He was also talking about peaceful left-wing protesters who came to oppose the neo-Nazis.
Moreover, In the same press conference where he used the phrase “very fine people,” he condemned the neo-Nazis and white supremacists several times, and called the murder of counter-protester Heather Heyer an act of terror.
Yet Democrats and the media pretend otherwise.
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) claimed falsely on CNN in January that Trump reacted to Heyer’s murder by saying “there were equal sides to this.” CNN’s own Chris Cuomo used a deceptively edited clip of Trump last week to make it appear as though Trump had praised torch-bearing neo-Nazis.
Today, in real time, we see Democrats struggling to condemn the hateful views that those neo-Nazis and white supremacists share with Ilhan Omar. She, like they, believe that American politicians who support Israel are bribed to do so, or that they have sworn “allegiance to a foreign country.” Former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke has been praising Omar effusively on Twitter for telling the “truth” about Israel and its supporters.
Has CNN demanded that Omar, or the Democrats, “disavow” David Duke? They barely bring themselves to vote against what Duke believes.
And yet we will continue to hear fake news about Trump and Charlottesville.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
Pelosi: ‘When You Leave This Earth and Go to Heaven and Meet Our Founders, Are You Going to Say to Them…’
Pelosi: ‘When You Leave This Earth and Go to Heaven and Meet Our Founders, Are You Going to Say to Them…’
(CNSNews.com) - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said at a press conference with Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D.-Texas) on Tuesday that she sometimes told people—presumably administration officials—that they ought to imagine "when they go to heaven and meet our Founders" and try to explain to them why they wanted the Census to ask people whether or not they were citizens.
“But also, this Administration is trying to jeopardize, jeopardize, who we are as a nation by making citizenship a question on the Census rolls,” Pelosi said. “We cannot let that stand.
“So, this is all part of a whole picture, you see, of undermining the Constitution of the United States, which says every ten years there will be a Census of the people,” she said. “It doesn’t say registered voters or anything like that.
“And Congress has a role in how that happens and we intend--we are asserting our role in that regard,” she said.
“But, see all of this in the context. I say to them sometimes: ‘When you leave this Earth and go to heaven and meet our Founders, are you going to say to them: I did everything in my power to suppress the vote--because that is what you are doing. That is what you are doing--affecting by the Census what happens in redistricting and reapportionment through the country, but only, not only that, delivery of service.’”
The Trump administration planned to include a question on the 2020 Census on the citizenship status of the people counted. In January, a federal judge in New York ruled that the administration could not ask that question. Then, yesterday, a federal judge in California also issued a ruling against allowing the Census to include a citizenship question.
The Supreme Court is now scheduled to hear arguments on the question on April 23.
Here is the transcript of an excerpt from Pelosi’s press conference with Rep. Doggett:
"But also, this Administration is trying to jeopardize, jeopardize, who we are as a nation by making citizenship a question on the Census rolls. We cannot let that stand. So, this is all part of a whole picture, you see, of undermining the Constitution of the United States, which says every ten years there will be a Census of the people. It doesn’t say registered voters or anything like that. And Congress has a role in how that happens and we intend--we are asserting our role in that regard.
"But, see all of this in the context. I say to them sometimes: ‘When you leave this Earth and go to heaven and meet our Founders, are you going to say to them: “I did everything in my power to suppress the vote”--because that is what you are doing. That is what you are doing--affecting by the Census what happens in redistricting and reapportionment through the country, but only, not only that, delivery of service.
"So, when you hear Julieta talk about the fact that she is a victim of the actions taken by the Secretary of State and so many other people as well, well, that only shows, more importantly, the need for H.R. 1.
"And I want to thank our friends in labor who are here, Indivisible, who are, so many people who helped us win this election. Not to get partisan in it, but to win the election to have leverage against these unconstitutional actions that are being taken by some in power in this state and certainly nationally, as well.
"So, I thank all of you for your patriotism because this is, this is in respect for our Constitution; respect for people who are here; and, respect for the fact that we are a nation that is so diverse and beautiful and not to fear that, but to embrace that. And that is, what I guess it must be their fear that is saying more than a commitment to what our Founding Fathers intended, but our Constitution requires, what the Voting Rights Act spelled out, what the American people expect and deserve.
"You want us to be—uh, uh, handmaidens has different meanings now than it used to--handmaidens to a special interest. So again, this is about instilling the confidence of the American people in the political process, in what happens in government, that it is the people's’ interest that are being served, not dark special interests of that dark special interest money that is coming in.
"So, it is pretty exciting. It is a moment. The actions taken here in Texas are crossing a threshold of saying ‘no’--saying ‘no’ to what is happening here, but saying ‘yes’ to what the vision was of our Founders of a democracy.
"So again, thank you for your patriotism."
Rep. Rashida Tlaib-Impeach Trump Because He Was A CEO
Repainting a room in the house today, I thought I may have breathed in too many paint fumes. I could have sworn that I heard Representative Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) indicate that President Donald Trump needed to be impeached so that no other CEO would get the idea to run for President. Come on now, nobody but Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez aka Chiquita Khrushchev is that kind of ugly stoopid, right? Oh no, mes freres. Rashida Tlaib is that kind of ugly stoopid.
Since her remarks were live, I couldn’t find any transcript, but Rep. Doug Collins was on America’s Newsroom with Sandra Smith and Bill Hemmer and the CEO comment was in the video package. Both Collins and Hemmer even make note of it. The video evidence:
“This is not going to be the last CEO that runs for President?” Are you freaking kidding me? What’s the matter, Rashida, you jelly? Can’t you build anything, Rashida? Negotiating skills in the negative range?
I know that Tlaib has a bee up her buttocks because Trump handed the reins of his companies over to his sons and didn’t totally divest himself. Umm, dear girl, that would have taken a long time. If you object to the fact that he might make a “Benjamin” or two off of his Presidency, take a look around you. How do you think those government servants around you got rich?
In case you have been breathing paint fumes too, remember that the newly sworn in Representative Tlaib celebrated by announcing that “we’re going to impeach the m*th*rf*cker”. From Vox.com:
A video clip of new Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) dropping the f-bomb while calling for President Donald Trump’s impeachment on Thursday evening quickly went viral.
Speaking at a MoveOn event in Washington, DC, just hours after being sworn in, Tlaib — the first Palestinian-American woman in Congress — said, “When your son looks at you and said ‘Mamma, look, you won — bullies don’t win.’ And I said, ‘Baby they don’t, because we’re gonna go in there and we’re gonna impeach the motherfucker!’”
Speaking at a MoveOn event in Washington, DC, just hours after being sworn in, Tlaib — the first Palestinian-American woman in Congress — said, “When your son looks at you and said ‘Mamma, look, you won — bullies don’t win.’ And I said, ‘Baby they don’t, because we’re gonna go in there and we’re gonna impeach the motherfucker!’”
Way to talk to your child, Congresswoman. And, you, Madam, are a bully.
The Victory Girls Blog has been covering the three new Congresswomen who are dragging the Dems leftward. Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and Alexandria Occasional Cortex. The unholy troika of hatred. We’ll continue to write on them. You have to admit, well you don’t have to admit it, I will, I wish someone would shove them back in the kitchen to make sammiches.
Democrats have gone all Joseph Stalin on Donald Trump. They have the man and they’ll find the crime. The Dems don’t care who that have to smash and ruin to get rid of Trump. They are hell bent on impeaching Donald Trump. In that case, they have a fine fellow traveler in Rashida Tlaib.
I am going to go kill some brain cells with a paint fume and scotch combination. Toodles.
Photo Credit: Rashida Tlaib Official Portrait
Judge Gives Manafort Much Shorter Sentence Than Expected…Admonishes Prosecutors: “You Don’t Really Care About Mr. Manafort’s Bank Fraud”…You Just Wanted To Destroy Trump
The Victory Girls Blog has been covering the three new Congresswomen who are dragging the Dems leftward. Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and Alexandria Occasional Cortex. The unholy troika of hatred. We’ll continue to write on them. You have to admit, well you don’t have to admit it, I will, I wish someone would shove them back in the kitchen to make sammiches.
Democrats have gone all Joseph Stalin on Donald Trump. They have the man and they’ll find the crime. The Dems don’t care who that have to smash and ruin to get rid of Trump. They are hell bent on impeaching Donald Trump. In that case, they have a fine fellow traveler in Rashida Tlaib.
I am going to go kill some brain cells with a paint fume and scotch combination. Toodles.
Photo Credit: Rashida Tlaib Official Portrait
Judge Gives Manafort Much Shorter Sentence Than Expected…Admonishes Prosecutors: “You Don’t Really Care About Mr. Manafort’s Bank Fraud”…You Just Wanted To Destroy Trump
He’s been sitting in solitary confinement since June. His lawyers say he’s been mostly serving his time in a wheelchair or with a walker. Now, the man who Robert Mueller successfully brought to his knees, is now getting a much lighter sentence than the original 17-24 Robert Mueller had hoped for.
The Washington Examiner is reporting – Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort was sentenced to nearly four years in prison on Thursday for concealing millions of dollars he earned overseas.
Legal observers had long wondered how the outspoken Judge T.S. Ellis might rule. During the court proceedings in 2018, Ellis had told prosecutors: “You don’t really care about Mr. Manafort’s bank fraud … What you really care about is what information Mr. Manafort could give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump or lead to his prosecution or impeachment.”
When arguing for a lengthy sentence, the special counsel’s office said “Manafort’s misconduct involved more than $16 million in unreported income resulting in more than $6 million in federal taxes owed, more than $55 million hidden in foreign bank accounts, and more than $25 million secured from financial institutions through lies resulting in a fraud loss of more than $6 million.”
Manafort’s attorneys say that for the 69-year-old Manafort, “a significant additional period of incarceration will likely amount to a life sentence for a first time offender.”
President Trump has remained steadfast in his resolve that the Paul Manafort case has nothing to do with Russia.
This is a witch hunt, and it’s a disgrace: Trump
Government Jobs Drop by 5,000
By Terence P. Jeffrey
(CNSNews.com) - As the number of people employed in the United States climbed to a record 156,949,000, the number of people working for government in the country declined by 5,000, according to data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
As of January, 22,488,000 people were employed by government in the United States, according to BLS. In February, that dropped to 22,483,000.
Local government led the way in trimming employment by dropping 4,000 jobs. There were 14,512,000 people working for local governments in January, but only 14,508,000 in February. State government employment dropped by 1,000 from January to February—declining from 5,177,000 to 5,176,000 in February.
Federal employment saw no change at all. It was 2,799,000 in both January and February.
Ciao…..G’Day…….Helen & Moe Lauzier
Thus articles
that is all articles
This time, hopefully can provide benefits to you all. Okay, see you in another article post.
You are now reading the article the link address https://fairyforreference.blogspot.com/2019/03/government-jobs-drop-by-5000-www.html
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment