59.3 F
San Francisco
Thursday, May 7, 2026
Home Blog Page 894

Trump’s Claim on Gas Prices Debunked by CNN’s Jake Tapper

Brent Edward
-
0
Trump’s Claim on Gas Prices Debunked by CNN’s Jake Tapper

Key Takeaways:

  • Trump claims gas prices are $1.98, but current prices are around $3.18.
  • Tariffs on Chinese goods have increased to 145%, potentially raising costs for everyday items.
  • An $800 tariff exemption has ended, impacting imports like those from Temu and Amazon.

Understanding the Debate:

CNN’s Jake Tapper recently fact-checked President Trump’s economic claims, highlighting discrepancies and potential impacts on consumers. Trump’s assertion that gas prices have dropped to $1.98 was met with skepticism, as current prices remain significantly higher.

Gas Prices: Fact vs. Fiction

Trump’s claim of gas prices at $1.98 contrasts sharply with current figures. According to recent data, the average price for regular unleaded gas is about $3.18, with only E-85 priced lower at $2.61. This discrepancy raises questions about the accuracy of Trump’s statements regarding economic improvements.

The Impact of Higher Tariffs

Beyond gas prices, Tapper discussed the increase in tariffs on Chinese goods to 145%. These tariffs could lead to higher costs for consumers, affecting everyday items. Popular online retailers like Temu and Amazon may see price hikes on imported goods, impacting budget-conscious shoppers.

Expired Tariff Exemption: What It Means

Previously, items valued under $800 were exempt from tariffs, offering relief to consumers. Now, with this exemption ended, all Chinese imports face the increased tariffs, likely leading to higher prices on a wide range of products.

Implications for Consumers

The expiration of the tariff exemption and increased rates signal tougher times for consumers. Higher costs on everyday items could strain household budgets, affecting everything from electronics to clothing. This shift may alter shopping habits, particularly for those relying on affordable online options.

Looking Ahead: Economist Warnings

Economists warn that these tariff changes could mean higher living costs. As prices rise, consumers may need to adjust their spending habits, potentially reducing non-essential purchases. This could slow economic growth, as consumers have less disposable income.

Conclusion

While Trump highlights positive economic indicators like lower mortgage rates and job growth, the reality of higher gas prices and tariffs paints a more complex picture. The end of the tariff exemption and increased rates on Chinese goods may lead to higher costs for everyday items, affecting many households. As the situation evolves, consumers should be prepared for potential price increases.

Why Elon Musk’s Tech Genius Matters More Than His Government Role

Jonathan Antonio Browne
-
0
Why Elon Musk’s Tech Genius Matters More Than His Government Role

Why Elon Musk’s Tech Genius Matters More Than His Government Role

Key Takeaways:

  • Elon Musk’s private ventures are more vital to the US tech race against China.
  • His government role, though impactful, doesn’t match his business impact.
  • Musk’s companies drive innovation, jobs, and economic growth in the U.S.
  • The U.S. needs Musk more in the private sector to compete with China’s growing tech industry.

Musk’s Time in Government

Elon Musk recently served the U.S. government as a special employee aiming to cut waste and fraud. He focused on improving government efficiency under President Trump’s initiative. Musk’s term was set for 130 days, and he’s now shifting focus back to his businesses, admitting it’s tough to meet his goal of cutting $1 trillion in spending, having achieved $160 billion so far.

Musk humorously compared his work to “DOGE,” a meme-inspired cryptocurrency, saying it’s a mindset like Buddhism. While his government work was significant, his real impact lies elsewhere.

Private Sector Impact

Reed Albergotti argues Musk’s private work is far more crucial. With companies like Tesla, SpaceX, and Neuralink, Musk pushes innovation and keeps the U.S. competitive with China. These companies create jobs, boost the economy, and force China to invest heavily to keep up.

The Tech Race with China

The U.S. and China are in a high-stakes tech competition. China’s companies, like BYD in electric cars, are rising fast. While BYD grows, Tesla remains a leader. Musk’s innovations set standards, making BYD and others follow.

If the U.S. falls behind, the consequences could be severe. Albergotti suggests it might even increase the chance of conflict over Taiwan. The U.S. needs companies like Tesla and SpaceX to stay ahead.

Why the U.S. Needs Musk More in the Private Sector

Musk’s role in the private sector is where he truly benefits the American people. His companies create jobs, drive growth, and innovate, which is harder for the government to achieve.

Businesses like Tesla are leaner and less reliant on cheap labor, giving the U.S. an edge. Musk’s return to focusing on these companies is good news as they lead in technology that the U.S. needs.

Conclusion

Elon Musk’s private ventures are essential for U.S. tech leadership. While his government work was valuable, his true impact lies in advancing Tesla, SpaceX, and other companies. The U.S. needs Musk innovating to compete with China and secure its future. Musk’s return to his businesses is a strategic move in the tech race, benefiting the U.S. on a global stage.

Republicans are pushing strict voting rules in many states and in Congress

Reginald Edward
-
0
Republicans are pushing strict voting rules in many states and in Congress

Key Takeaways:

  • Republicans are pushing strict voting rules in many states and in Congress.
  • A new law in Congress would require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections.
  • In North Carolina, a Republican judge is challenging over 67,000 votes in a close Supreme Court race.
  • Democrats warn this could set a dangerous precedent for overturning elections.

GOP’s Voting Rights Battles Intensify Across U.S.

A growing wave of Republican-led efforts to tighten voting rules is causing concern across the country. From Congress to state legislatures, these changes could make it harder for some people to vote and raise questions about the future of elections.

A New Federal Proposal to Restrict Voting

In Washington, D.C., Republicans in the House of Representatives recently passed a law called the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or SAVE Act. This law would require people to show proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections. Supporters say it’s about stopping fraud, but critics argue it could prevent eligible voters from casting ballots.

Princeton history professor Sean Wilentz, who writes for Rolling Stone, calls this law the biggest attack on voting rights in U.S. history. He says it’s a direct threat to democracy. The bill is unlikely to pass the Senate, but it shows how far some lawmakers are willing to go to change voting rules.

Local Battles Over Voting Rights Heat Up

Outside of Washington, over 2,000 similar voting bills have been introduced in state legislatures since January. These laws often target how people vote, making it harder to register or cast ballots. One of the most dramatic examples is happening in North Carolina.

North Carolina’s Contested Supreme Court Race

In North Carolina’s recent election for a Supreme Court seat, Republican Judge Jefferson Griffin lost by just 734 votes to Democratic Justice Allison Riggs. But Griffin isn’t giving up. He’s challenging over 67,000 votes, claiming some voters shouldn’t have been allowed to cast ballots. This has left the race unresolved even after 178 days.

The situation is especially personal for Justice Riggs. Her own parents’ votes were questioned after they received a mysterious mailer from the Republican Party. The mailer told them their votes might be contested and directed them to scan a QR code. Riggs believes this is an attempt to overturn the election and set a dangerous precedent.

Why This Matters

Riggs warns that if Griffin succeeds in overturning the election, it could have far-reaching consequences. She says it would send a message that losing candidates can challenge any election they don’t like, undermining trust in the democratic process.

“If this happens, there’s no going back,” Riggs said. “It wouldENCourage future candidates to challenge any election they lose, even if there’s no evidence of wrongdoing.”

A Test of Trump’s Election Strategies

The situation in North Carolina is also being closely watched because it resembles strategies explored by former President Donald Trump’s legal team in the 2024 election. While Trump ultimately didn’t need to use these tactics because he won, the case in North Carolina could provide a blueprint for future challenges.

The Bigger Picture

The battle over voting rights isn’t just about one election or one state. It’s part of a larger effort by Republicans to reshape how elections work. While some argue these changes are necessary to secure elections, others see them as a threat to democracy.

What’s happening in North Carolina and Washington shows how high the stakes are. If these challenges succeed, they could change the way elections are conducted across the country. For now, all eyes are on North Carolina, where the outcome of this race could set a precedent for years to come.

Capitol Dining Controversy: A Halal Restaurant Sparks Debate

Reginald Edward
-
0
Capitol Dining Controversy: A Halal Restaurant Sparks Debate

Key Takeaways:

  • A halal restaurant replaces Steak n’ Shake in the Capitol complex, sparking debate.
  • Rep. Mike Collins criticizes the change, drawing historical comparisons.
  • His comments receive backlash for intolerance and misinformation.

The Restaurant Change: In a recent update to the Capitol’s dining options, a new halal restaurant, CHA Street Food, will take over the space previously occupied by Steak n’ Shake. Known for its diverse menu offering Indian and Pakistani cuisine, CHA Street Food aims to bring a fresh culinary experience to Capitol Hill. Their menu includes a variety of options, from breakfast items to specialty drinks, catering to diverse tastes.

Rep. Mike Collins’ Reaction: Rep. Mike Collins expressed strong opposition to this change, likening it to a historical Muslim conquest. His comments sparked controversy, drawing criticism for promoting intolerance and misinformation. Collins’ remarks highlight a broader issue of cultural acceptance in public spaces.

Backlash and Reactions: Critics quickly responded to Collins, accusing him of racism and intolerance. Many pointed out his history of controversial statements, emphasizing the need for cultural understanding. Others defended the restaurant, celebrating the diversity it brings to the Capitol’s dining scene.

Why It Matters: The debate over CHA Street Food extends beyond a restaurant change. It reflects ongoing discussions about cultural diversity and inclusion. As the nation grows more diverse, such incidents highlight the importance of accepting and celebrating different cultures.

In conclusion, the replacement of Steak n’ Shake with CHA Street Food has become a symbol of broader societal issues. While it may seem like a simple dining change, it underscores the need for unity and understanding in a diverse world.

Trump’s Budget: Big Cuts and Controversy Ahead

Reginald Edward
-
0
Trump’s Budget: Big Cuts and Controversy Ahead

Key Takeaways:

  • President Trump’s 2026 budget cuts federal spending by $163 billion.
  • Military spending increases by 13.4%, reaching $892.6 billion.
  • Cuts affect healthcare, education, social programs, and environmental protection.
  • NIH faces a 40% budget slash, eliminating key research centers.
  • LIHEAP is ended, and FEMA’s emergency funds are cut.
  • Backlash from Democrats, with Schumer calling it a betrayal.

Military Spending on the Rise President Trump’s budget significantly boosts military spending. At $892.6 billion, it’s the largest increase in recent years. This funding surge is designed to strengthen national defense, though some argue it comes at the expense of other vital domestic programs.

Healthcare and Education Face Cuts The budget proposes cutting healthcare programs, including a $47 billion reduction for NIH, which affects research into diseases and global health efforts. Education also sees a $4.5 billion cut, impacting schools and early childhood programs. Critics worry this will harm low-income families and education quality.

Social Programs Slashed Home energy assistance is eliminated, affecting low-income families. FEMA’s funding is reduced, sparking concerns over disaster preparedness. These cuts have angered northeastern Republicans and Democrats alike, who fear the impact on vulnerable communities.

Environmental Protection Efforts Reduced Programs protecting clean drinking water and environmental loans are slashed. Critics argue this endangers public health and environmental safety, questioning the budget’s priorities.

Tax Cuts for the Rich Spark Outrage The budget trims essential services to fund large tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. This shift has drawn criticism, with opponents labeling it as favoring the rich over hardworking Americans.

Political Backlash Intensifies Senator Chuck Schumer and other Democrats vow to fight the budget, calling it heartless and morally bankrupt. They argue it betrays working people and harms families. Some Republicans are also concerned about the impact on their constituents, particularly with the end of LIHEAP and FEMA cuts.

Conclusion: A Divisive Budget President Trump’s budget reflects clear priorities: a strong military and tax cuts for the wealthy, at the expense of healthcare, education, and social programs. This has sparked intense debate, with opponents promising fierce resistance. As the budget heads to Congress, the battle over these cuts is just beginning.

7 Dead in Fiery Crash Near Yellowstone National Park

Brent Edward
-
0
7 Dead in Fiery Crash Near Yellowstone National Park

Key Takeaways:

  • 7 fatalities, including a pickup truck driver.
  • Collision involves a van with 14 passengers and a pickup truck.
  • Incident occurred near Henry’s Lake in eastern Idaho.
  • Air ambulance deployed for severe injuries.
  • Crash happened on a busy road leading to Yellowstone.

Tragedy Strikes Near Yellowstone

A devastating collision near Yellowstone National Park on Thursday evening has claimed seven lives, leaving a community in shock. The Idaho State Police reported that a passenger van carrying 14 people and a pickup truck collided, engulfing the van in flames. The crash, which occurred near Henry’s Lake, resulted in six fatalities from the van and the pickup driver’s death.

The Crash

The collision’s severity was evident as emergency services rushed to the scene, deploying an air ambulance due to the critical injuries sustained by the survivors. The van, which was extensively damaged, suggests that the passengers might have been tourists traveling to Yellowstone, though identities remain undisclosed.

The Victims

Among the victims were six from the van and the pickup driver. Their identities and nationalities are yet to be released, as authorities continue their investigation. The survivors face severe injuries, highlighting the dire outcome of the crash.

Aftermath and Investigation

Police are examining the circumstances surrounding the crash, which occurred at an intersection near Henry’s Lake. Authorities are yet to determine the cause, and the investigation is ongoing. The tragedy underscores the dangers of road travel, especially in areas with high tourist traffic.

Location’s Importance

The crash site is on a key route leading to Yellowstone’s west entrance, a bustling tourist hotspot. Yellowstone, America’s first national park, attracts millions annually with its geothermal wonders like Old Faithful. Travelers from around the globe visit to experience its natural beauty.

Conclusion

This tragic incident near Yellowstone serves as a reminder of the risks involved in road travel. As authorities investigate, the community mourns the loss of seven lives on a road many use to reach one of America’s most cherished natural wonders. This story continues to unfold, with details expected as the investigation progresses.

Tucker Carlson Backs Russell Brand Amid Controversy

Reginald Edward
-
0
Tucker Carlson Backs Russell Brand Amid Controversy

Key Takeaways:

  • Russell Brand faces rape and assault charges from over 20 years ago.
  • Tucker Carlson defends Brand, claiming lack of evidence and suggesting political motives.
  • Brand granted conditional bail, denies all allegations.

Background on Russell Brand’s Charges

Russell Brand, a well-known actor and comedian, recently found himself in the spotlight for serious allegations. The charges against him include rape and sexual assault, all purportedly occurring over two decades ago. Brand has been released on conditional bail, meaning he must adhere to certain conditions while awaiting his trial. He has denied all the accusations, and as of now, he hasn’t entered a formal plea in court.

Tucker Carlson’s Defense

Tucker Carlson, a former Fox News host, has publicly defended Brand, questioning the validity of the charges. He claims there’s no concrete evidence to support the allegations against Brand. Carlson suggests that the case is politically driven, drawing a comparison to Julian Assange’s situation, where he believes false charges were also brought.

In his defense, Carlson highlights how Brand was once celebrated for his progressive views but fell out of favor after criticizing government actions during the Covid-19 pandemic. He points out that the accolades stopped after Brand publicly denounced the government’s handling of the pandemic, suggesting a possible motive behind the charges.

Carlson’s argument hinges on the lack of hard evidence and the political timing of the charges, hinting at a larger governmental agenda against public figures who oppose authority.

Reactions and Controversy

Carlson’s defense of Brand has sparked a heated debate. Supporters of Brand appreciate Carlson’s outspoken support, while others criticize Carlson for dismissing serious allegations without thorough evidence. The case has become a focal point in discussions about false accusations versus the validity of sexual assault claims, especially when they are decades old.

Implications and What’s Next

The implications of this case are significant. It highlights the challenges of prosecuting historical sexual assault cases, where evidence may be scarce. It also raises questions about the influence of public opinion and media on legal proceedings.

As the case proceeds, attention will be on whether the prosecution can provide substantial evidence. Meanwhile, Brand continues to deny the charges, and his team may argue that the allegations are part of a larger effort to silence him for his political views.

The outcome of this case could set precedents for similar situations in the future, affecting how historical allegations are handled in the legal system.

Conclusion

The situation involving Russell Brand and Tucker Carlson’s defense underscores the complexities of balancing justice for victims with the rights of the accused. It serves as a reminder of the challenges in addressing historical allegations and the potential interplay between politics and the legal system. As the case unfolds, it will be important to consider the implications for both the accused and the broader societal discourse about justice and accountability.

Safety Fears at Newark Airport as Delays Continue

Brent Edward
-
0
Safety Fears at Newark Airport as Delays Continue

Key Takeaways:

  • Newark Airport faces major delays due to staffing issues.
  • Nationwide shortage of air traffic controllers affects operations.
  • FAA offers bonuses to attract new hires.
  • Disruptions expected to continue.
  • Fixing the issue won’t be quick or easy.

Introduction

Newark Airport is grappling with significant delays, raising safety concerns. Experts warn of staffing shortages and equipment failures, advising travelers to avoid the airport. The FAA confirms disruptions due to a lack of air traffic controllers, a problem affecting the entire nation.

Staffing Shortages at Newark Airport

Newark Liberty International Airport is experiencing major delays due to staffing shortages. This has led to flight cancellations and delays, causing inconvenience for travelers. The situation is so severe that some workers have walked off the job, exacerbating the problem. Equipment failures have also contributed to the chaos, making it harder for flights to operate smoothly.

Nationwide Shortage of Air Traffic Controllers

The issue at Newark is part of a larger problem: a nationwide shortage of air traffic controllers. The country is short by about 3,000 controllers, essential for guiding planes safely. This shortage is causing delays and disruptions at airports across the U.S., not just Newark.

Incentives to Attract New Hires

To address the shortage, the FAA is offering bonuses and incentives to attract new recruits. These include financial rewards for those who join the FAA Academy and stay on the job. The goal is to boost the number of air traffic controllers and reduce the strain on existing staff.

Ongoing Impact on Travelers

The situation at Newark is expected to continue, with flights likely to be delayed or canceled throughout the day. Travelers are advised to check their flight status regularly and consider alternative routes if possible. The airport has acknowledged the problem and is working to minimize disruptions, but the challenges remain significant.

Efforts to Fix the Problem

While the FAA is taking steps to hire more controllers, the problem won’t be solved overnight. Training to become an air traffic controller is rigorous and time-consuming, so it may take years to fill the shortage. In the meantime, travelers should be prepared for ongoing delays and plan accordingly.

Conclusion

The situation at Newark Airport highlights a broader issue affecting air travel nationwide. While efforts are underway to address the shortage, travelers face continued disruptions. Staying informed and flexible is key for those planning to fly in the near future.

Trump’s Gas Price Claims Spark Debate and Jokes

Reginald Edward
-
0
Trump’s Gas Price Claims Spark Debate and Jokes

Key Takeaways:

  • Former President Donald Trump claimed gas prices dropped to $1.98 per gallon and $1.88 in three states.
  • Fact-checkers say these claims are false, with current prices closer to $3.18 per gallon.
  • Trump’s post sparked jokes and criticism online.
  • Experts blame Trump’s energy policies for higher gas prices.
  • The debate highlights the ongoing political fight over gas prices.

A Look at Trump’s Claim

Former President Donald Trump recently made headlines after posting on Truth Social, a social media platform, that gas prices had dropped to $1.98 per gallon. He even claimed that in three states, gas was as low as $1.88. Trump ended his post with, “Can you believe it?”

The post quickly went viral, but not for the reasons Trump might have hoped. Instead of agreement, his claim sparked laughter and confusion. Fact-checkers and experts were quick to point out that Trump’s numbers were far from accurate.

What Do the Numbers Really Say?

According to the American Automobile Association (AAA), the average gas price in the U.S. is around $3.18 per gallon for regular unleaded gasoline. Even the cheapest option, E85 gas, is still about $2.61 per gallon. These numbers are much higher than what Trump claimed.

CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale was quick to call out Trump’s post. He wrote, “Trump keeps making up gas prices.” Dale also noted that no state currently has gas prices as low as $1.88. When Trump asked, “Can you believe it?” Dale simply replied, “No.”

CBS News Calls It Misleading

CBS News also weighed in on Trump’s claim, calling it “misleading.” They pointed out that gas prices are actually around the same as when President Joe Biden took office in January. This contradicts Trump’s suggestion that gas prices have dropped significantly.

Politifact, a well-known fact-checking organization, labeled Trump’s claim as “False.” They provided evidence showing that gas prices have not fallen to the levels Trump claimed.

What Are People Saying?

Trump’s post didn’t just catch the attention of fact-checkers. Everyday people and experts alike had something to say.

Steven Rattner, a former advisor to President Barack Obama, pointed out that Trump’s policies didn’t deliver on promises to lower gas prices. He shared graphs showing that crude oil prices have dropped, but gas prices remain high. Rattner also noted that oil rigs are being taken offline, which could further drive up prices.

Software engineer Alex Cole added to the debate by sharing a Fox News report. The report stated that gas prices have actually increased since Trump was elected. Cole joked, “I’m sorry, MAGAs, even Fox News is saying gas prices went up since Trump was elected.”

The Bigger Picture

The debate over gas prices is more than just a numbers game. It reflects a larger argument over energy policies and their impact on the economy. During his presidency, Trump pushed for “drill baby drill,” a policy aimed at increasing oil production. Critics argue this approach hasn’t led to lower gas prices.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent recently told Fox News that low gas prices act like “an automatic tax cut for the American people.” This comment led one person to ask, “If low gas prices are a tax cut, does that mean high gas prices are a tax increase?”

Conclusion

Trump’s claim about gas prices being as low as $1.98 per gallon has sparked a lot of conversation. While some people found humor in the situation, others used it as an opportunity to Criticize Trump’s policies.

What’s clear is that gas prices remain a hot topic in politics. As the 2024 election approaches, expect even more debate over energy policies and their impact on the economy.

At the end of the day, one thing is certain: gas prices are still higher than Trump claimed, and the debate over who’s responsible for that shows no signs of slowing down.

Trump’s Budget Plan Sparks Fury Among Republicans

Reginald Edward
-
0
Trump’s Budget Plan Sparks Fury Among Republicans

Key Takeaways:

  • Trump’s budget proposes slashing $163 billion from non-defense programs.
  • Republicans are pushing back against the cuts, calling them extreme.
  • Funding for programs like FEMA and heating subsidies could be eliminated.
  • Even GOP leaders are criticizing Trump’s budget, especially defense spending.

Trump’s Budget Plan Sparks Fury Among Republicans

President Donald Trump’s latest budget proposal has caused a stir, but not just from Democrats. This time, it’s his own party that’s upset. The plan seeks to cut $163 billion from non-defense programs, which has left many Republicans frustrated and concerned. Let’s break it down.

Republicans Push Back Against Trump’s Budget Cuts

Trump’s budget proposes deep cuts to many federal programs. These cuts target areas like biomedical research, education support for low-income families, and heating subsidies for poor households. However, some Republicans are saying these cuts go too far.

Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, has spoken out against the plan. She criticized the cuts to programs that help low-income families and dismissed the idea of keeping military funding at $893 billion as insufficient. Collins argues that these cuts could harm vulnerable Americans and weaken important research initiatives.

Meanwhile, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who oversees defense funding, is also unhappy. He called out Trump’s budget office for proposing defense spending that doesn’t meet the needs of the military. McConnell said the White House is using “accounting gimmicks” to make it seem like they’re spending enough on defense, but he’s not buying it.

Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi went even further. He called Trump’s defense spending proposal a “cut in real terms” and accused the White House of trying to “shred to the bone our military capabilities.” Wicker believes the proposed budget doesn’t do enough to support U.S. servicemembers or address growing threats from countries like China and Russia.

Democrats Join the Criticism

Democrats have also slammed the budget proposal. They point out that while Trump wants to cut funding for essential programs like FEMA disaster relief and heating subsidies for the poor, he’s still finding money for his own golf vacations. Critics argue that this shows a lack of priorities and fairness.

Why This Matters

Budget proposals are always contentious, but this time, the pushback is coming from Trump’s own party. Congress has until September 30 to pass a funding bill to avoid a government shutdown. Republicans are trying to find a way to fund the government without cutting as deeply as Trump wants. However, the president’s budget has made it harder for them to find common ground.

The White House’s budget office, led by Russ Vought, a far-right activist, drafted the proposal. Vought has a history of advocating for drastic cuts to federal spending, and this budget reflects that ideology. However, it seems even many Republicans are unwilling to go as far as he wants.

What’s Next?

As the deadline for funding the government looms, both Republicans and Democrats are trying to find a middle ground. But with such deep divisions over Trump’s budget, it’s unclear how they’ll reach an agreement. One thing is certain: This budget battle is far from over. Stay tuned for more updates as the situation develops.

For the latest news and updates, visit www.digitalchew.com.

1...893894895...2,360Page 894 of 2,360

Explore

Trending

Follow us

© All Rights Reserved, Newspaper Theme.