Sirji
That is interesting. I didn't know.SRajesh wrote: ↑12 Jul 2025 23:51 Please check out the 1930’s Indian Provincial Elections
The Jihadis and Muslim League suffered
The Unionist Party wanted to maintain the Zamindari as they controlled much of Punjab
The jihadi enticed the party members with promises of Zamidari and if not agreeable then pure intimidation
Eventually after Sikandar Hayat death the party disintegrated and members co-opted into ML which continued with Zamidari
Code: Select all
Period Receipts Outlays
Jun-24 466,255 537,220
Jul-24 330,377 574,119
Aug-24 306,540 686,620
Sep-24 526,990 462,304 - surplus 64,686
Oct-24 326,770 584,221
Nov-24 301,754 668,517
Dec-24 454,415 541,146
Jan-25 513,294 641,935
Feb-25 296,424 603,441
Mar-25 367,645 528,174
Apr-25 850,169 591,769 - surplus 258,400
May-25 371,229 686,881
Jun-25 526,445 499,435 - surplus 27,010
Fox is pro Trump. Don't know which channel to believe in anymore !bala wrote: ↑13 Jul 2025 21:12 This foxnews YT is claiming that in the month of June the treasury dept of US is reporting a $ 27 B surplus. I don't know how true this news is but to report surplus means that the US is reversing its huge borrowings which are increasing the deficit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_4ofthPq5s
If that were to be the case, Biden admin would have released the list long ago (after redacting the names of their boys - Bill Clinton/Bill Gates/Tom Hanks/Ellen De Generis/and other hollowheads of Burbank.
-------The DOJ’s deliberately opaque phrasing about what was not in the Epstein files tells us absolutely nothing about what was. The three words that do all the work here—“incriminating,” “client,” and “list”—only raise more questions.
What, exactly is an “incriminating ‘client list’”? Why are the words “client list” in quotation marks? What does the absence of an “incriminating ‘client list’” tell us about what is revealed in the Epstein files? Does it mean that Epstein’s clients, enablers, and party bros are indeed identified in the files, but not in the format of a “list”? Does it mean that there’s a list, but it doesn’t expressly identify those on it as “clients”? Does it mean that there’s a list of clients, but the Trump DOJ doesn’t interpret it as “incriminating”? If Epstein hooked up some of his party bros with underage (or drugged or coerced) girls but didn’t get paid money for doing so, are the bros—whose conduct may have crossed the line into criminality—“clients”? If their names are in a black book, a flight log, or a guest registry, is that a “list”? Is it a “client list”? Is it an “incriminating client list”?
When you get right down to it, does “no incriminating ‘client list’” mean anything at all, other than that there’s no single document with the words “INCRIMINATING ‘CLIENT LIST’” emblazoned on the cover?
Vivek Ramaswamy is not new to social media trolling as he's asked to go to India every time he posts something on X. As the Ohio Governor hopeful posted a family picture celebrating the Fourth of July, it was a repetition of the same situation -- people asking him what he has to do with July the Fourth and that he should go back to India, celebrate either in Mumbai and Gujarat -- summing up a few reactions to his post. How could they act like that who do they think they are, Doge?
At a time when ELon Musk has declared his independence from Maga and had to defend Vivek from its more racist elements, which ELon would know something about, Vivek is still shuffling for middle America biscuits even as they tell him to his face they don't want him. Only a Black conservative could truly understand.
