Wednesday, April 29, 2026

The Snapshot

Wednesday, April 29, 2026.  Chumps continues his war on Iran and his war on the US economy, King Charles speaks to the US Congress but not to survivors of Jeffrey Epstein, Chump goes after James Comey again, Senator Patty Murray notes Secretary of Education Linda McMahon's 'success' rate (Senator Patty Murray noted, "For the record, the answer to my question is zero."), and much more.



The country continues to suffer.  Martha McHardy (DAILY BEAST) reports:

More Americans say they are getting poorer than at any point over the past 25 years, in a warning sign for President Donald Trump and the Republicans ahead of the midterms.

Trump has promised to usher in a new “golden age” for the U.S. economy. But according to a new Gallup poll, conducted April 1–15 among 1,000 people, an ever-growing number of Americans say their personal finances are deteriorating.
In the survey, 55 percent of respondents said their financial situation is getting worse—up from 53 percent last year and 47 percent the year before.

The figure marks the highest level recorded since Gallup started the survey in 2001, surpassing even periods of economic strain during the pandemic and the global financial crisis.


President Donald Trump's approval rating fell to the lowest level of his current term, as Americans increasingly soured on his handling of the cost of living and an unpopular war with Iran, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos poll.
The four-day poll completed on Monday showed 34% of Americans approve of Trump's performance in the White House, down from 36% in a prior Reuters/Ipsos survey, which was conducted from April 15 to 20. 



President Donald Trump’s approval rating hit a low point in another poll released Tuesday as the Iran war has driven up gas prices and heightened voters’ economic concerns. 
Trump’s 42% approval rating is his lowest in the past year and down one point from March, according to an April Harvard CAPS/HarrisX poll, which found support for his actions in Iran is growing, despite concern across both parties about rising gas prices (the online survey of 2,745 registered voters was taken April 23-26 and has a margin of error of 2). 
Eight-five percent of voters are concerned that higher gas prices will lead to an increase in the cost of living, and just over half (52%) of voters say the economy is worse under Trump than it was under President Joe Biden.


Out of touch as usual, Chump's responded by lying yet again to the American people.  Jing Pan (MONEYWISE) reports:

“We’re getting inflation — we’re crushing it,” he added. “I mean, the only thing that is really going up big, it’s called the stock market and your 401(k).”

Trump doubled down on these assertions in this year’s State of the Union address, saying his administration’s policies are “rapidly ending” high prices: “Those prices are plummeting downward,” he claimed (2).


Klaus Marre (WHO WHAT WHY) notes what Chump and his ilk are spending time on instead of working to improve the lives of Americans:

With six months to go before the midterms and poll after poll showing that the American people are deeply unhappy about the direction of the country, the president’s underlings in the administration and in Congress made it clear this week where their priorities lie: in pleasing Donald Trump.

The Department of Justice, after claiming to have spent nearly a year investigating the matter, indicted former FBI Director James Comey for an Instagram post in which he had arranged seashells to spell out “86 47.” This, according to DOJ, would be interpreted by a “reasonable recipient who is familiar with the circumstances” as a “serious expression of an intent to do harm to President Trump.”

It’s tough to take this indictment seriously. Anybody who is actually “familiar with the circumstances” knows that this is just a hyper-weaponized DOJ using contrived charges to settle one of the president’s scores after it badly bungled the first attempt to get Comey.

Of course, the fact that this is happening at all is anything but comical. It’s clearly not good that the entire federal government seems to care more about the whims of the president than the needs of the American people.

Which brings us to the State Department, which on Tuesday announced that Trump’s visage will soon grace the inside of special commemorative passports (it is unclear whether the president’s enemies could be indicted for stamping that page or putting a thumbtack through it).

Will taxpayers foot the bill for this stunt? Yes. Is it totally tone deaf? Absolutely! Does anybody in the administration care about those things? Of course not, because the boss likes having his name and picture on stuff.

Speaking of tone deaf…

Not to be outdone, Republicans in Congress want to spend $400 million on Trump’s big, beautiful ballroom.

Hey, at least that’s something they could probably get passed, which is more than can be said of the Farm Bill, a FISA extension, and a bill that would fund DHS, all of which seem to be doomed in the House because of GOP infighting.







In The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli states it is ideal to be both loved and feared, but because they rarely coexist, it is safer to be feared than loved. He argues that fear is more reliable than love, which is fickle, but crucially advises that a leader must avoid being hated. Donald Trump wants to be an autocrat who follows this advice but fails at it miserably on the international stage, and the world is in greater danger because of this.
Donald Trump has had success with this model inside the United States, to be sure. He is loved by a few, hated by many, and feared by all. Institutions routinely cave to his demands, including individuals, corporations, law firms, hospitals, and universities, even when those demands violate state or federal law.

The Republican Party has become the Party of Trump, where the organizational platform is whatever Trump says it is today. Indeed, Republicans are so afraid of Trump that they have all united around unrealities, like January 6 being a peaceful protest. To paraphrase George Orwell, “The president told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was his final, most essential command.” To do otherwise means losing your office at best, and being indicted by the Trump Department of Justice at worst.

Trump, however, does not have such leverage over people living in other countries, or their leaders. He is widely despised in educated, democratic countries, which even a year ago had no confidence in his leadership. Today, most people of the world express significantly higher approval of China’s despotic, genocidal regime than they do of U.S. leadership.

Behind Trump’s back, world leaders reportedly consider him a “laughing fool” and a buffoon. They even were caught sniggering at him in 2018. Reports indicate that many foreign leaders and diplomats view him as vain, susceptible to flattery, and easy to manipulate. This perception has led to a strategic, often performative, approach by world leaders to manage his transactional style of diplomacy, sometimes referred to as “kissing the ring” or “Trump Management 101.”

Now, even countries that had regarded him as a useful idiot, like Russia, are increasingly seeing diminishing value in courting him as an asset as the 2026 midterms approach. They sense that it’s going to be a drubbing, and Trump’s ability to throw his weight around will be constrained by a democratically held House, and perhaps Senate. Now, in places where Trump used to be popular (like Hungary), even Trump and JD Vance’s ham-handed attempts to influence elections fell flat.


One foreign leader is visiting the United States right now.  King Charles of England and his wife Queen Camilla.  Michael D. Shear and Zolan Kanno-Youngs (NEW YORK TIMES) note:


And yet, on the first full day of a state visit focused on the shared history between the United States and Britain, the king sprinkled in some ever-so-subtle rebuttals to Mr. Trump. Charles spoke on Tuesday of the value of the trans-Atlantic alliance, the importance of checks and balances and his passion for the environment. He even spoke of his time in the Royal Navy, after Mr. Trump belittled British naval capabilities in recent weeks.

The king tucked his rejoinders into a mostly lighthearted speech to Congress on Tuesday afternoon and during evening remarks at a formal banquet at the White House.

“Please rest assured I am not here as part of some cunning rear-guard action!” the king told lawmakers in the afternoon, only the second time a British monarch had addressed Congress.

[. . .]

During his speech to Congress, he appeared to address — obliquely — the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, which has caused political headaches for the Trump administration and led to a rupture in the royal family.

“In both of our countries, it is the very fact of our vibrant, diverse and free societies that gives us our collective strength, including to support victims of some of the ills that, so tragically, exist in both our societies today,” Charles said.











Last night on MS NOW, Lawrence O'Donnell noted Todd Blanche's latest stupidity as he tries to get Chump to name him Attorney General (he's only acting Attorney General currently), going after James Comey in another revenge effort on the part of Chump. 



Back to Charles' visit to the US, Kristie Lau-Adams (US WEEKLY) reports:

Congressman Ro Khanna, a Democrat representing California's 17th congressional district,  has expressed disappointment after King Charles III reportedly refused to meet with survivors of convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

"It's very disappointing after the British Ambassador [Sir Christian Turner] told me that the King would talk about the survivors and sex trafficking," Khanna, 49, told Us Weekly in a Tuesday, April 28 statement - the same day that Charles, 77, was a no-show at a roundtable discussion in Washington, D.C., that united Khanna, 49, with Epstein survivors.

"The King's failure to acknowledge the pain his brother had caused is a moral failure and emblematic of an elite impunity that is an ongoing affront to survivors," Khanna added.

Among those in attendance at the roundtable was Sky Roberts, younger brother of Virginia Guiffre, an Epstein survivor who also accused the monarch's brother, former Prince Andrew, of sexually assaulting her when she was a teen. (Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has repeatedly denied the allegations.)


Charles' brother Andrew has been stripped of his titles due to his involvement in Jeffrey Epstein's ring of sex trafficking.  MJ Lee (CNN) notes:

As King Charles III and Queen Camilla were being greeted by the US president and first lady with pomp and circumstance designed for royalty at the White House on Tuesday morning, a group of individuals who had been denied an in-person meeting with the king and queen took their chance to be heard a couple of miles down Pennsylvania Avenue.
The group on Capitol Hill included survivors of Jeffrey Epstein, their family members and advocates, who also gathered over the weekend for a memorial for Virginia Giuffre. The late Epstein victim had accused Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the king’s brother, of sexual assault and died by suicide one year ago. The former prince has denied all accusations against him and insisted he never witnessed or suspected any of the behavior of which the late Epstein is accused.

“Today, survivors are here, sitting with members of Congress, still fighting to be heard, still pushing for real accountability, while many of the powerful figures connected to these systems remain just out of reach, unable to acknowledge survivors face to face,” Sky Roberts, Giuffre’s brother, said Tuesday.

“You would expect this to be a moment for the king to give a message to the world that he stands with survivors. We still can’t get that from our own president of the US, who continues to say ‘hoax,’ ‘victims or whatever.’”


Ahead of the visit, there were calls for Charles to meet with the survivors.  These calls have been ignored.  Daniel Bates (THE I PAPER) reports:


A British survivor of abuse by the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has called on King Charles to do something “meaningful” on his state visit to the US.

Anouska De Georgiou, the first British woman to publicly allege she was sexually abused by Epstein, told The i Paper: “If the King were to meet survivors, it would send a message that would change England for ever and change the monarchy for ever.”
De Georgiou, an actor, says she was abused over several years on the convicted paedophile’s private island and at his homes in New York and Paris from when she was a teenager. She added: “It would probably be one of the most meaningful gestures any member of the monarchy, but particularly the King, could send to survivors in general and to the public, that there’s a priority given to compassion, empathy and human connection.”

A teenage model from an affluent family, De Georgiou was groomed by Epstein after they met in London before he flew her to his properties around the world. She said a meeting with Charles would “bridge a gap that seems to keep widening between the people and monarchy”.

“I would like to think that the monarchy represents the people and models how we should be with each other,” she added.



The brother of the late Virginia Giuffre criticized King Charles III for not meeting with survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse during his visit to the United States this week.

“Survivors are here sitting with members of Congress, still fighting to be heard, still pushing for real accountability, while many of the powerful figures connected to these systems remain just out of reach, unable to acknowledge survivors face to face,” Giuffre’s brother Sky Roberts said. “You would expect this to be a moment for the king to give a message to the world that he stands with survivors.”
Roberts spoke at a roundtable discussion hosted by Ro Khanna, the California Democratic representative, who co-authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The discussion included relatives of Giuffre, who took her own life last year, Sharlene Rochard and Danielle Bensky, Epstein survivors, and representatives from several human rights and women’s rights organizations. The roundtable was held ahead of King Charles III’s address to Congress on Tuesday.


Meanwhile, bad news continues to emerge for the Justice Dept.  For example, Theodoric Meyer (WASHINGTON POST) reports:


The Government Accountability Office plans to examine the Justice Department’s handling of files related to Jeffrey Epstein after a bipartisan group of senators raised concerns that the department violated the law.

The Justice Department has released millions of pages of documents related to the late convicted sex offender since President Donald Trump signed a law in November requiring the department to make the records public with narrow restrictions.

But Democrats and some Republicans in Congress questioned whether the Justice Department released all the required files and have criticized officials for not redacting some victims’ names and for redacting the names of some Epstein associates.

Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Ben Ray Luján (D-New Mexico) and Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) last month asked the GAO — an independent agency that is part of the legislative branch — to look into how the department reviewed the files “and the resulting failure of the Department to follow the law, respond to Congress and protect victims.”

Merkley said Tuesday that the GAO has agreed to do so.

“This independent investigation is an important step in holding this Administration accountable for siding with the rich and powerful to help cover up the abuse of our most vulnerable,” Merkley said in a statement. “I’ll keep fighting to use all the tools at my disposal to deliver justice for Epstein’s victims and transparency for the American people.”


In other bad news for the Justice Dept, Rachel Dobkin (INDEPENDENT) notes the lawsuit Katie Phang has brought:

President Donald Trump’s acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has been sued over his alleged failure to release all the government’s files related to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

“This case is about Defendant Todd Blanche’s brazen, shocking, and ongoing violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act,” a lawsuit filed on behalf of journalist Katie Phang read.
The lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court in Washington, D.C., accuses Blanche, who was the deputy attorney general at the time and formerly Trump’s personal lawyer, of failing to comply with the law.

Last fall, there was an intense bipartisan push on Capitol Hill to release the so-called Epstein files following backlash over what critics saw as the Trump administration’s lack of transparency in the case. Trump was friends with Epstein decades ago but has not been formally accused of any wrongdoing related to the late convicted sex offender.

Epstein, a wealthy financier who pleaded guilty in 2008 to sex crimes in Florida, was facing federal sex trafficking charges in 2019 when he died by suicide in his New York jail cell. The American public has long sought answers about the extent of Epstein’s crimes and his potential ties to the global elite.


Katie discussed her lawsuit with Jim Acosta yesterday.






New Mexico, where Epstein's Zorro Ranch still stands.  There were complaints about it in real time and, in 2019 (when Chump was in the White House), New Mexico began investigating to see what had happened there.  But they were told, by the federal government, to stop because they -- the federal government -- would investigate.  They never did.  They let the matter drop, they let it slide.  They did so while Donald Chump was in the White House.  Henry Giardina (QUEERTY) reports:

Earlier this year, New Mexico authorities reopened a long-stagnant investigation into Epstein’s Zorro Ranch property, and we’ve already seen troubling developments come to light in the intervening months. For 26 years, Epstein cycled girls through the property, possibly burying the bodies of two missing women on or near the Santa Fe border.
As scandalous as the ranch’s history has always been, the bigger bombshell in all this is that Tr*mp’s DOJ appeared to have actively worked to quash the investigation back in 2019, claiming that they planned to fold it into a larger Epstein case being handled in New York. Now, we may be on the verge of understanding why.

In addition to the many sex trafficking crimes against women Epstein and his cohort perpetrated at Zorro Ranch, a new documentary exposes a shocking history of abuse against male victims as well.
At least one male survivor opened up to New Mexico congresswoman Melanie Stansbury about the abuse he and other men suffered there. On a 60 Minutes Australia segment, Stansbury explains that “multiple young men… [were] raped at the ranch in front of [the victim] after he was drugged.”
Allegations of violent sexual abuse at Zorro Ranch, aka “Playboy Ranch,” are nothing new, but this would appear to be the first time a male victim has come forward against Epstein in New Mexico. An earlier male victim, known only as M.H., claimed in a 2021 suit that he was forced into sex work by Epstein when he interned for the disgraced financier as a high schooler in 2013 and 2014. As Stansbury explains, Epstein and his accomplices were “serial abusers [and] super predators” who did not discriminate on the basis of gender or age.
Among repeat sex offenders, this phenomenon is more common than we might assume: a 2021 study found that polymorphic or “crossover” offenders had a 15% incidence of attacking both adults and children, and a 19% likelihood of having both male and female victims. Epstein, who allegedly raped trans whistleblower Ava Cordero when she was a teenager, also didn’t appear to discriminate between cis women, trans women, adults, or children.

We’re learning more about Epstein’s widespread crimes against humanity by the day, but the true shocker is that the Zorro Ranch investigation almost went cold for good, under Tr*mp’s watch.


One more time, let's note  Australia's 60 MINUTES did a report on Epstein's New Mexico ranch on Sunday.






Let's wind down with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:

ICYMI: Senator Murray on President Trump’s FY27 Budget Request

***WATCH: Senator Murray’s full questioning***

Washington, D.C. — Today,—at a Senate Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Subcommittee hearing on the FY27 budget request for the Department of Education (ED)—U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, questioned Secretary Linda McMahon on how her efforts to dismantle the Department of Education are hurting students.

In opening comments, Senator Murray said:

“You know, I don’t think the solution to helping kids who are falling behind is to destroy the Department of Education. But I know you and the president seem to think that is the solution.

“I think that’s kind of stunning—because I [never] hear from teachers and parents in my state: ‘Hey, you know what I really need? Less funding,’ I just don’t hear people saying that. I don’t hear people saying, ‘I really wish the federal government would do less to help student borrowers.’

“But that is what you are proposing in this budget: tearing down the Department of Education even more. Why? So, we have more money to throw at the Pentagon? Trillions of dollars—half a trillion dollars [more].

“I just have to say, as a former preschool teacher, maybe I’m biased, but I think that giving all kids, every one of them, a brighter future is really more important than shoveling money at defense contractors. But that is what’s being proposed.”

[Jeopardizing Programs for Students with Disabilities]

Senator Murray began by noting grave concern that ED is ignoring parents who don’t want management of programs to protect the rights of students with disabilities to be transferred from ED to other agencies with little to no relevant expertise or experience.

MURRAY: Let me just start with this: look I am really concerned you’re not listening to parents of children with disabilities and their profound objections to moving IDEA and Rehabilitation Act programs out of the Department of Education.

I’ve gotten a petition from thousands of parents, educators, advocates who are concerned that will really undermine 50 years of progress in making sure the rights of children and students with disabilities are met.

So, I wanted to ask you today, what is the status of moving programs for children and students with disabilities out of the Department of Education?

MCMAHON: Well, currently, we are still evaluating of where those programs would best be located. We have not made that determination yet. We are looking at the Department of Labor for some of its programs and we are also looking at HHS for a potential home for some of those programs. I can assure you that the intent of this administration is not to put these students at risk in any way whatsoever. I have met—I have not received thousands of applications as you have but I have met with parent groups all over the country who have children with disabilities. We have talked about what they need. And, I have said to each of them, who is better positioned to know what your children need then you working with them and then working with your local school board—

MURRAY: That is exactly why these parents and advocates are spitting mad because what they want to make sure is that their child with a disability has an education. And moving it out of the Department of Education is not only undermining that … But [parents] want their kids to get a good education and that is why I am hearing from so many parents. So, I am deeply concerned that your answer sounds like you’re still moving ahead. Just—let’s make it clear: that will break the law, and it will make it a lot harder for these students with disabilities to get the education and the understanding that their country will stand behind them with that.

MCMAHON: Well, I just have to object to your framing of this. First of all, it is not against the law. And, secondly, these parents need to understand that regardless of which department these programs are located, they will still get the same treatment, the same funding.

MURRAY: Well, are you under the Department of Education which says that your education is the priority—that’s their concern. But let me move on. Because I have several other questions and my time is limited.

[Dismantling ED Decimates Protection of Students Civil Rights]

Senator Murray continued by pressing Secretary McMahon about how her efforts to dismantle the Department of Education have led to a precipitous drop off in resolution of students’ cases managed by the Office for Civil Rights.

MURRAY: Let me ask you, a little over a year ago, you made the decision to eliminate more than half the staff in the Office for Civil Rights and close half of the regional field offices.

Now, you’ve testified repeatedly that students won’t even notice your efforts to abolish the Department—but I’d like to hear you tell that to the students and parents who have yet to hear anything about their case, let alone have it be fully investigated and resolved.

Because you know—in President Trump’s first year of his first term, OCR resolved about 60 sexual harassment cases and 15 sexual assault cases.

Can you tell me how many of these cases were resolved in the first year of this term?

MCMAHON: Well, I can tell you what we are doing with our OCR program. We are definitely moving forward. We inherited—

MURRAY: No, I asked how many—

MCMAHON: We inherited about 19,000 backlog of cases from the Biden administration—

MURRAY: How many of those were resolved last year?

MCMAHON: So, what we have done, and I have hired into the Department of Education, Kim Richey, who was the director of that department—

MURRAY: I had a quick question, and I have more questions, so I want you to answer the question I asked [which] is how many of those cases were resolved last year?

MCMAHON: We are moving to resolve as many cases as we can, we are bringing back many of those lawyers which were part of that RIF. And there was a time when we were not processing cases as quickly as we should, but we are now focused on that and moving forward with the expertise—

MURRAY: For the record, the answer to my question is zero.

MCMAHON: We are moving forward to resolve those cases today.   

MURRAY: Okay, as of this morning, 1% of all cases last year were resolved. 78% fewer cases were resolved than the year before. And really, we have to understand what that means is that kids are being denied equal access to education they are entitled to under law are now also being denied the justice they deserve.

And that is really wrong. So, you said you’re hiring people back, I want to see what those numbers are, I want to see what cases are being resolved because I think it’s really our responsibility to make sure those kids get the education they are promised.

MCMAHON: Well, I’d be anxious to share those with you because—

MURRAY: Well, right now, it’s zero.

MCMAHON: What we’re putting in place is to move forward, and so I’ll be happy to share that with you—

MURRAY: Happy to hear that but just telling this committee that it’s going to happen someday, to me, is not making sure those kids get an education.

MCMAHON: Well, I’ve hired the person and brought them back who made all of those things work in the first Trump administration, left office with 4,500 backloaded cases, and inherited again 19,000 from the Biden administration and has a full on attack now to resolve those cases, and we’re moving forward to make sure that gets handled.

MURRAY: Just for the record, we expect to see progress.

MCMAHON: So, do I.

MURRAY: Okay, I’m glad to hear that.

[McMahon Creating Extra Layers of Bureaucracy]

Senator Murray then addressed how the inter-agency agreements (IAAs) Secretary McMahon has illegally inked to offload fundamental Department of Education responsibilities to other federal agencies are ultimately doing nothing to make education programs more efficient—and are jeopardizing funding and support for students and schools.

MURRAY: Also, you have decided to move the Title I program and important parent and family engagement requirements to the Department of Labor. You’ve decided that agency, which, by the way, has no experience making sure families of K-12 students can meaningfully participate in their child’s education, to take over. Meanwhile, you are moving other parent and family engagement programming to HHS.

So, just for everyone to understand, now, if you are a superintendent looking for resources to help get parents more involved in their kid’s education, you have to contact at least three different federal agencies to get an answer.

So, how does that split help parents get involved in their kids’ schools? How does that create efficiency?

MCMAHON: Well—what we want to do is to make sure that kids have the same access that they need. These parents—you know, let me just back up for one second, and I’ll just take a minute to do this.

The implication is that we just pick up a program out of the Department and stick it in another department. But, that’s not how it works, the people who are managing the functions in the Department of Education are being detailed to the other department, so that the contacts that these parents have had, the numbers, the emails they have to reach out to are the same. They’re just located in a different agency.

MURRAY: Okay, but it is clear right now you have to contact three different agencies, and for the record—

MCMAHON: No, it is not clear, that is incorrect.

MURRAY: Yeah, it is correct and it’s not efficient and it’s not smart.

MCMAHON: It’s not, I beg to disagree.

MURRAY: Well, we have a disagreement and I’m happy to—  

MCMAHON: We’ll have to agree to disagree on that because you’re incorrect.

[Closing Comments]

MURRAY: Okay, well my time is up, but I just think that students in our country absolutely are being hurt by the actions we are seeing right now—and the budget that is front of us makes it even worse.

We have got to make sure we are training our teachers and providing our students access. And this budget, I really believe, leaves kids behind.

So, we have a lot of work in our Appropriations committee to make sure we meet the demands of families, and I will work with this committee to make sure we do that. Thank you.

MCMAHON: And I would just like to have one more response, and that is we have been doing the same thing since 1980, since this department was developed. Our scores have gone down, our kids haven’t improved. We have had some good programs in place, that we want to continue, we want to evaluate them, we want to make sure that those programs can continue and be enhanced. But I have to tell you, we have failed these generations of our children who cannot read and write.

MURRAY: Well, Madame Secretary, you and I just have a difference of opinion on how to make clear that we are working towards that goal. And having worked on many budgets and many authorization programs to continue our work to do that, I don’t think dismantling the Department of Education is the right call.   

###




The following sites -- plus Marcia's "We're all talking about Chump's decline" and Stan's "Lisa Kudrow, the FRIEND no one wants" -- updated:



Posted by at