Wait… What??

Uncategorized 1 Minute

New details about Pelosi attack

We still don’t know what happened there. Where are the police videos?

Published by Don Tabor

I am a former Chairman of the Tidewater Libertarian Party and was the 2007 LP candidate for the 14th district VA Senate. Previously, I was the Volunteer State Director for the FairTax. I am married 50 years with two grown children and 5 grandchildren.

Published

105 thoughts on “Wait… What??”

  1. You are a very dutiful little parrot, aren’t you? Instead of simply decrying political violence and wishing Mr. Pelosi a speedy and full recovery, right wing leaders and their media is full of this kind of scurrilous bullshit. And you join in by spreading the filth.

    Your “source” states . . . “Well well well. It seems that Paul Pelosi is the mysterious person who opened the door and let illegal migrant and nudist into the house.”

    And for proof it links to an NBC video which says NO SUCH THING. Mr. Pelosi opened the door to the police responding to his 911 call not to the attacker.

    You really embarrass and disgrace yourself with this kind of posting. What do you think you are achieving? Are you too lazy to use the Google and get some reliable facts? It took me less than a minute to find this which appears to be a well-documented time line of events . . .

    https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/san-francisco/timeline-paul-pelosi-attack/3068017/

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Did you not read the part where NBC DELETED the tweet? I had already read your link while looking for the deleted but preserved tweet.

      I didn’t pay a lot of attention to the commentary surrounding the preserved tweet, just to the tweet itself.

      The tweet itself does not support Pelosi opening the door to the attacker, but it does support him opening the door to the police and not seeking protection from them.

      As I wrote, we don’t know the whole story, but we do know that the police bodycam videos will resolve the issue if we ever see them.

      Like

      Reply

      1. So what if the Tweet got deleted. There is nothing in it that was not reported elsewhere, as in the link I provided. Maybe the author was embarrassed by his tone deafness once he understood the facts better.

        The lead sentence from your source is a flat out lie dripping with perverse innuendo. Now you are trying to make something out of the fact that Pelosi apparently tried – unsuccessfully – to avoid provoking the lunatic to violence when the police arrived.

        THERE IS NO “ISSUE” TO RESOLVE. The facts are very clear. A deranged person motivated by rightwing hate speech and demonization of Nancy Pelosi sought her out to do her harm.

        As I said above, you are a dutiful little parrot spreading baseless slime and innuendo. And in doing so you exhibit the level of intellect and honesty one has come to expect from MAGA-Republicans. You ought to be embarrassed and ashamed. IMHO.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. The tweet was from an NBC spokesman. The article was by a commentator who downloaded it before it was deleted.

          All Pelosi had to do when the police arrived would have been to step out the door and ask for protection. He didn’t, instead walking back into DePape’s reach.

          I have not assigned any motive to that choice, but I note that it is odd and requires some explanation. The police bodycams could provide that explanation, so why have they not been released or at least shown to independent parties?

          Like

          Reply

        2. RE: “The facts are very clear. A deranged person motivated by rightwing hate speech and demonization of Nancy Pelosi sought her out to do her harm.”

          That sounds more like fantasy than fact to me. There is little evidence DePape is rightwing and contradictory evidence that he is leftwing. Reportedly he had a web site with some Qanon material on it, but that is hardly definitive. Also, he decorated his abode with a BLM flag, but that isn’t definitive, either.

          My guess is that DePape was a homosexual pick-up that went wrong for Pelosi, but I don’t expect that to be confirmed. But it is a certainty that Democrats are trying to spin the incident to fit their delusions. Sad.

          Like

          Reply

          1. “My guess is that DePape was a homosexual pick-up that went wrong for Pelosi”

            Your “guess” is common among MAGA-Republican shitheads because, you know, they are shitheads without much intelligence, education, decency, or common sense. And, although evidence means nothing to you people and you have pre-discounted it with your cover-up conspiracy theory, the authorities have already reacted to the shitheads with the facts of the incident.

            https://www.metroweekly.com/2022/11/fbi-police-debunk-anti-gay-conspiracy-about-paul-pelosi-attack/

            Liked by 1 person

          2. At least I didn’t try to pass off my guess as factual. Your assertions, on the other hand, remain dubious.

            Like

          4. “I won’t try to make a guess as to what the truth is but one thing is certain, and that is that the official narrative is a lie.”

            Certain?

            So, the police and the FBI are “corrupt” and are covering up what?

            No need to answer, you are obviously full of shit.

            All the MAGA-Republicans had to do was decry violence and wish Mr. Pelosi a speedy recovery. It is now clear that for many of them – including you – that was just too darn hard. It would have required a modicum of decency.

            Liked by 1 person

          8. DePape is a gay militant nudist Republican who makes hemp jewelry for a living?

            Sure.

            Alternatively, a paranoid psychotic who jumps from one conspiracy theory to another based on the degree of paranoia with no particular ideological base.

            Neither right crazy not left crazy, just crazy.

            Like

          9. There is nothing dubious about what I said. It was NOT a guess. It is the simple fact of the matter as reported in reliable media. According to the police and the FBI reports the maniac was there specifically to harm Nancy Pelosi. The MAGA-Republican idea of political rhetoric is to demonize Democrats in general and Nancy Pelosi in particular. That kind of rhetoric has consequences. Crazy people will try to act on it. And that is precisely what happened.

            Your “guess” on the other hand was without ANY merit of any kind – just another sick product of the kind of mind that unreservedly supports Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.

            Liked by 1 person

          10. Oh piffle.

            Your tribalism is showing again.

            Democrats demonize everyone not in lock step with their agenda.

            The country is in a bad place where both sides can’t simply say their opponents are wrong, they have to be monsters.

            Like

          12. “Democrats demonize everyone not in lock step with their agenda.”

            Seriously? I don’t recall Democrats forcing Manchin and Synema out of their party for not being in lock step. HOWEVER, I do recall Cheney and Kinzinger being tossed form their party for not being in lock step with MAGA-head cultists.

            Monsters? The right DEMONIZES everyone NOT onboard. Many of the criticisms foisted at Democrats are illegitimate fertilizer. “Defund the Police” was laid to rest by Biden, himself. Yet when the FBI was DOING ITS JOB and serving a LEGAL search warrant, MTG started screaming “DEFUND. the FBI!”

            It is maddening that someone of your caliber does the same damned thing, in a much more subtle manner.

            Screw your hypocrisy.

            Like

  2. This story is getting more weird by the moment. I find it at least a tad funny that the attacker is an illegal alien and a nudist too. Open borders and San Francisco become one and no firearms handy to defend oneself. Oh the irony of the Democrat utopia…

    Like

    Reply

        1. “ According to federal records, DePape, a Canadian citizen, entered the country on March 8, 2008, at the San Ysidro port of entry, which is along the California-Mexico border, as a temporary visitor. Generally, Canadians who are visiting for business or pleasure don’t require a visa and are allowed to stay in the US for six months.”

          https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/03/politics/david-depape-paul-pelosi-attack/index.html

          He overstayed his temporary visitor status and is a Canadian national. He entered legally.

          But the important thing is that he is proof of the danger of replacement folks from “shithole countries”…even if he isn’t one.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

          1. No, the important thing is that trying to characterize him as representative of all Republicans is no more truthful than trying to claim the Central Park Rapist as representative of all Democrats.

            Like

          2. Democrats and MSM (except FOX, of course) are the enemies of the people. That’s not painting with a broad brush, that is using a sprayer.

            Was the rapist hunting for Pelosi too?

            Liked by 3 people

          4. Enemy of the people? Just like voiced and acted upon by Mao, Stalin, Kim, Xi, ….

            You don’t seem to understand that such a label is a lot more incendiary than “you can’t believe everything to hear and read by media or politicians.”

            Because you don’t agree with reporting, opinion or policies does not make those entities “enemies”.

            ISIS is an enemy. Al Qaeda is an enemy. We are raised and trained to kill enemies.

            Words have meaning, Don. You say that every time during contentious discussions around speech.

            Did we call Democrats or some media “enemies of the people” before 2015? No. Why not?

            Because they are not unless some autocrat wants us to parrot and act.

            Liked by 2 people

          5. So, it’s OK for Biden to say that 70 million MAGA Republicans are enemies of the people and “democracy” but when the people finally realize they have been gaslighted and manipulated by the liberal media for decades and say they no longer trust them, that’s a problem?

            Half the people, and especially the young, in the US believe that climate change is an existential threat.

            It isn’t. The IPCC says it is not, NASA says it is not, and we skeptics have been saying so for decades. But based on that media narrative, we have adopted policies that will kill hundreds of millions of people worldwide and crush the US middle class.

            Lies like that have consequences, and little by little, people are realizing they were lied to.

            So, yes the MSM is an enemy of the people, and will have the blood of more people on its hands in the coming decades than Hitler, Stalin and Mao combined.

            How many deaths does it take to make an enemy?

            Like

          6. Like I said…

            Well, why don’t you just kill the enemies. Or are you just blowing smoke.

            Not even considering that not everyone agrees with you, or that you may be wrong, is the problem. You accuse the left of not seeing your side, and yet you continue to vilify.

            Your incredible hyperbole is a sample of why we had 1/6. And why election officials are under grave threats to their families and lives. Why Oathkeepers demanded to know where Pelosi, Schumer or Pence were after assaulting police and trashing the Capitol for hours and are now facing years in prison.

            PS: 100’s of millions are under threat now from weather shifts causing droughts, floods, excessive heat AGW or not. Food shortages and war are adding fuel. Our middle class and working classes have been screwed since 1980.

            Liked by 2 people

          8. So a few traitors realized they were actually trying to maim or kill police.

            From the perspective of law abiding citizens, those gangs are pretty much scum. But even scum can shine prettily with the right light and camera angle.

            Liked by 2 people

          11. So what? There are traitors in every field. They are so lucky to be in this country rather than Russia and they want to commit treason. Scum.

            Liked by 2 people

          13. A bunch are on seditious conspiracy trial as we write.

            I gather you are a supporter of the gangs. I for one lost my love for them when they plotted, planned and carried out the stack assault on 1/6. Their defense was they expected Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act.

            Now why would they think that? And what did they expect to do? From the trial we and the hearings we know they had caches of arms nearby to amp up the attack as needed.

            If these are your heroes, and they sure seem to be, then why are they so imbued with violence to change government.

            See, I consider those the real enemies of the people. Along side ISIS terrorists.

            Liked by 1 person

          14. Where they broke the law, OathKeeper members should be prosecuted, but not persecuted.

            But that is a tiny fraction of the membership. The basic premise of the OathKeepers is a refusal, as LEO’s or soldiers, to carry out unConstitutional orders, thus keeping their oath.

            And I do support that.

            Like

          17. The officer who sought and got the assistance of the Oath Keepers in evacuating his fellows was named Jackson, not Dunn. Dunn was in a different part of the building.

            Like

          18. So where was the “help” for Dunn? Why did they chase him and not the cop talking to gang members outside? Was “oath keeping” just for select folks.

            Liked by 2 people

          19. I don’t know anything about Dunn’s situation, I pointed out the assistance rendered to Jackson and the officers he was worried about.

            Dunn’s claims have nothing to do with that.

            Like

          22. “ After it happened, he came over and he was physically and emotionally distraught. And I actually gave him a hug and I said, ‘Sir, you did what you had to do,’” Mullin said.

            “He was doing his job. He got put in a situation where he had to do his job,” the Republican continued. “And if you’re going to present your weapon … and give commands and they still don’t listen and they still approach, you don’t have a choice.”

            Republican Rep. Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma After Babbitt was shot.

            He was there when it happened. You keep beating the drum that she was murdered because the officer hated her and he was sympathetic to BLM. You were not there.

            Liked by 1 person

          23. There may have been an angry crowd on the other side of the door, but she was the only one on his side and she was not a threat,

            I would not have fired in that situation, and would have expected to be prosecuted if I did.

            Like

          26. “Alone on her side of the door”

            Yep, that is what happens when you move out in front of the mob or the cowards behind you push you forward into the drawn weapons of the defenders.

            Your insistence that her death was “murder” is patently ridiculous. We have all seen how it went down. It is tragic that anyone could be so stupid as to throw away their life for Donald Trump, but that is exactly what she did.

            But keep at it. Make her your own very special Horst Wessel. Just what every fascist movement needs.

            Liked by 2 people

          27. We’re you there?

            The Oklahoma congressman I quoted was there. If commands to stop are ignored and a person lunges through the door at the head of a raging mob that had injured scores of police to get where they were, the officer had little choice. Either defend Congress or be derelict in your duty.

            How long would he have lasted had the mob broken through? Judging by the racial epithets hurled at Dunn as they chased him up stairs as he used himself as a decoy, the officer would not have fared well at all.

            Yet, it sounds like that would not fit your narrative based on speculation, innuendo and guess work.

            Liked by 2 people

          28. “I would not have fired in that situation,”…

            You do NOT know that for certain, and to claim so is disingenuous. And we are talking about a trained officer doing HIS duty.

            But then of course if Ms. Babbit were Black and the officer were white, my guess is you would be cheering him as an officer of the law doing his duty. Similar to the way you cheered Rittenhouse as some property protecting hero.

            Being first is sometimes a bad thing.

            But go ahead and keep defending those who stormed the Capitol with murderous intent. It shows your true colors.

            Liked by 1 person

          30. “If she were a 110lb, unarmed Black woman who was not advancing on me, same thing.”

            Maybe if she were there by herself. How about if she was the point person for a mob of armed Black Panthers screaming for blood? Still gonna hold fire? Don’t bother to answer. None is needed.

            Liked by 1 person

          31. I would shoot the first one that advanced on me. But I would not shoot the person who was not a threat because someone else was.

            Perhaps it is a good thing you don’t like firearms, you have no concept pf responsible use.

            Like

          32. “Perhaps it is a good thing you don’t like firearms, you have no concept pf responsible use.”

            Your imaginary perfect reaction braggadocio is laughable. Just so you know.

            Like

          33. You can say that all you want, I do NOT believe you. You have NEVER been in that circumstance and to claim you would respond differently that a trained police officer, under threat of mob violence, who’s duty is to PROTECT Congressional members, is about as legitimate as the fraud claims levied by those on the MAGA Right.

            Liked by 1 person

          34. How hard can the concept be?

            You don’t shoot someone who is not a threat because someone else is. That’s why they put sights on firearms, so you can select your target.

            Like

          35. I guess the officer should have waited until he was shot first. He had no idea whether the mob was armed or not. All he would know through his earpiece, and he probably had one, was that officers were get seriously attacked and injured by the same folks breaking down the last door to the chamber.

            Like I said, you were not there, the Congressman who was quoted was there and knew what had happened and why.

            This was not a firing range with paper targets. This was life and death by enraged people who had just smashed their way into the Capitol leaving a trail of blood and injured police.

            How long would the officer have to wait? Until they overwhelmed him?

            The mob refused to obey his commands and attacked violently, led by a woman whom they pushed in first. Cowards, but still a deadly, insane screaming mob.

            Liked by 1 person

          36. “How long would the officer have to wait? Until they overwhelmed him?”

            Who is they? The crowd on the other side of the door?

            How do they make Babbitt a threat?

            Let’s assume the crowd on the other side of the door was a real threat. Babbitt was still a small woman, by herself, unarmed, and not advancing on him.

            Why is it you think that fear of an angry crowd in the hallway justifies shooting Babbitt? Because she was more convenient?

            Like

          37. I don’t know why you have such a problem with the stack. Remember these are trained police officers and soldiers, Armed or otherwise, the stack is an effective way to penetrate a crowd and keep your people together. It is part of their training.

            There’s nothing sinister about it.

            Like

          38. No problem with a stacking tactic. But that is like discussing the quality of bluing on that new shotgun that just killed your family.

            I do wonder why they were all dressed in tactical gear and moving up towards Congress in session performing a Constitutional legislative duty.

            They didn’t position themselves in front of the mob to protect police. They were part of the mob. We know that 1/6 was planned by Trump and his minions to disrupt the ceremonial certification of state electoral ballots. So how did the gangs know that too?

            Liked by 2 people

          39. “That’s not my judgment . . .”

            Yes, it is undeniable. The Trump-Russian project to undermine our democracy and turn is into a Klepto-Fascist state is making a great deal of headway. That is why the election next Tuesday carries unusual importance.

            Liked by 1 person

          40. No, it is the MSM, and the entertainment industry that have undermined our republic by relacing reason with emotion.

            Tuesday is about fixing that before it’s too late.

            Like

          41. “replacing reason with emotion.”

            You are unbelievably full of yourself. You think that only what YOU want to believe is based on reason. And that the BULLSHIT you find in the dark corners of the web is the only reliable source of good information because it says what you want to believe.

            The obvious explanation for the poll is that our former President and his slavish minions have systematically attacked the free press non-stop for the last decade. And their reason for doing so is obvious – TRUTH based in reality does not work for them.

            Odd you drag “entertainment” into your rant. What has it got to do with undermining “reason?”

            Liked by 1 person

          43. LOL!

            So YOU chose to watch a lot of dramas involving bad results for women denied abortions. And that is why the “entertainment” industry is fostering the end of “reason.” Absurd. Dramas are almost always about bad things. That is not new. My wife and I watch a fair amount of TV. I have not seen a single program even remotely related to the abortion issue. Not One.

            And, by the way, women of child-bearing age are not being “unreasonable” to fear what will happen to them in the event of an unwanted pregnancy. Your obsessive fear of government gun regulation is far more unreasoning than anything such women may fear.

            Liked by 1 person

          44. And it’s totally a coincidence that all these abortion centered episodes aired this week,

            Sure.

            But since “New Amsterdam” is set in NYC and “Grays Anatomy” is set in Seattle, please do tell me how Dobbs affected abortion acess there.

            Like

          46. He’s still an illegal alien. You have to watch what you ask for when you coddle illegal aliens. It come back to bite you or hit you with a hammer…oh the irony

            Like

          47. “And it’s totally a coincidence . . .”

            Probably yes. Abortion is a hot topic right now for obvious reasons. The two shows you cited are medical shows. Duh!

            Your alternative explanation – apparently some sort of “woke” conspiracy is far less likely.

            Liked by 1 person

          49. “They are only two of many”

            Yeah, sure. And you watched them all, did you?

            But, let’s say, hypothetically, that the producers, writers and actors of several TV shows have strong feelings about the harm to women when their reproductive choices are usurped by the government and their programming dramatized such issues in the lead up to the election. How is that – if it happened – an attack on “reason?” Is it “reasonable” to discount the pain inflicted on others simply because it is not inflicted on you?

            Liked by 1 person

          51. Of course it applies, but if we are going to have campaign finance laws, they should be enforced evenly, and these dramas are nothing other than in-kind campaign donations, so, when do the networks plan to give the GOP their 30 hours or so of equal time?

            Milton Freidman’s excellent series “Free to Choose” would be a good start.(Available on Youtube)

            Like

          52. Considering how often and by how many the Big Lie has been hammered home, the 30 hours is not just covered, but my exponential amounts.

            Not to mention the daily hammering by Carlson and Hannity and Ingraham.

            So try that on for size and see if you are even close.

            Liked by 2 people

          53. I doubt that the time positive consideration of Trump’s claims have aired is more than a fraction of 1% of time the MSM has spent refuting it, so what are you getting at?

            Like

          54. What am I getting at? Simply this: the right wing whine is just that.

            30 hours v 7 years of declaring our elections rigged by Trump and his insipid mouthpieces. No contest.

            Liked by 2 people

          55. Trump didn’t claim the 2016 election was rigged, that was your side followed by 4 straight years of the press trying to undo that election or destroy Trump’s Presidency,

            7 years of relentless negative and dishonest press doesn’t balance anything.

            Like

          56. What makes you say that? From my point of view, Trump was pounding the
            “elections are rigged unless I win” mantra from his nomination forward.

            Liked by 2 people

          58. Did she not concede? I did not know that.

            You believe the Big Lie. In a subtle way by saying we will never know. Not much anyone can do about that.

            Liked by 2 people

          59. Actually, Mr. Trump claimed that he LOST the popular vote because of several unproven acts of fraud that gave Ms. Clinton more votes than him.

            Silly truths that lay your BS to rest. But that is FRACTUAL and you cannot deny it.

            Liked by 2 people

          60. “7 years of relentless negative and dishonest press doesn’t balance anything.”

            I am not sure what you expect media’s role to be in our nation. Many supported the president. In fact according to a lot of sources, they were the most influential by virtue of audience. If other media criticized, questioned and contradicted the president, that is what they do here and around the world. Obama was excoriated daily by MSM…again the most popular media, the right wing one.

            Liked by 1 person

          62. Trust FOX?

            FOX tells its audience what they want to hear. That’s not trust that is messaging for profit.

            News doesn’t sell as well as outrage.

            Other media do similar approaches to be sure. “If it bleeds it leads” is the not so glib view of commercial news. This has been the case since men sold news for money.

            The key is to read and watch a broader spectrum. But most folks look for confirmation and comfort.

            IMO

            Liked by 2 people

          63. What has Biden done that requires a level of scrutiny equal to that necessary to detect what the most corrupt administration since Hoover did?

            You can disagree with policy. But the rest of your argument is sieve-like.

            Liked by 1 person

          66. James in Iraq

            Hunter in Ukraine

            Hunter and James in China.,

            All fronting for the Big Guy.

            Not to mention the corrupt suppression of the Laptop frior to the election.

            Like

          67. Trump and his China deals by excusing a banned company in return for a $500 million investment.

            Ivanka getting impossible copyrights in China.

            Kushner getting billions into his company from the Saudis as soon as he left office as an advisor to his father- in-law.

            Trying to extort dirt on his political opponent from Ukraine.

            Extorting GA officials for non-existent votes.

            Trying to extort the same in AZ.

            Sitting idly by while his gangs try to kill Congressmen and his own VP.

            I think Biden is a saint compared to your hero.

            About that laptop. Trump’s administration had it before the election, so how could Biden suppress it.

            Liked by 1 person

          70. “That October 2016 article was about concerns that there might be fraud in the upcoming election, it is not denial of the results.”

            What a weak defense for a bold-faced LIE. Trump campaigned on the idea that the 2016 election was “rigged” and that such rigging was the only way he could lose. You denied that Trump said the election was rigged. That was a LIE.

            Liked by 1 person

          71. “. . . these dramas are nothing other than in-kind campaign donations”

            That is utter nonsense. You seem to have an inexhaustible supply.

            If that were true then every show – of which there are many – which depicts people thwarting evil doers with a gun is also an in-kind campaign donation.

            Liked by 1 person

          72. Really?

            Where on TV have you seen a private citizens using a gun to effectively counter a criminal? Such events are almost always depicted negatively.

            Like

    2. “Open borders and San Francisco . . .”

      The attacker entered the country legally. He over-stayed his visa. Our borders are far from open.

      So, no firearms to defend himself? Or no firearms for the attacker? An attack with a hammer is bad. An attack with a gun is worse.

      And, BTW, the rate of homicides in California in general and San Francisco in particuluar are lower than national averages and MUCH lower than the rate in many GOP states and cities. For example, the homicide rate in California for 202o was 6.1 per 100k. The rate for Texas was 7.6. The bottom of the barrel are pure red – LA (19.9), MS(20.5), and AL(14.2).

      You have been gaslighted into believing falsehoods. The fact is that states with stronger gun controls – like California – have lower homicide rates.

      https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/homicide_mortality/homicide.htm

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

        1. “Guess where the murders happen.”

          Uh, in Louisiana?
          Where the GOP has control of the very lax gun laws.

          Just about as bad are Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, South Carolina, Oklahoma none of which have major urban centers and very little influence by Democrats.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          1. Never heard of Jackson. Natchez, Biloxi?

            Mobile, Montgomery, Birmingham,

            Little Rock, Fayettevillle.

            Spartansburg, Gastonia

            Oklahoma City, Witichita

            They’re not NYC or Detroit, but they’re all as big and urban and blue as Norfolk

            Like

          3. I have heard of all of them. OK City is run by Republicans. The point is that they do not represent a major part of their state’s population in the way that a city like New Orleans does. For example, the population of Jackson is 150,000 or 5% of the MS population. New Orleans is about 20% of the population of Louisiana. In other words, your usual blame shifting to “urban” people is a dog that won’t hunt to explain those sorry facts.

            Do you deny that the lax gun laws in those states are the work of the GOP which controls their Legislatures? Do you have any evidence that the high homicide rates of those states is centered in those small cities or is that just your good old boy assumptions kicking in?

            The reality is that red rural – especially southern – America is every bit as violent as San Francisco and then some.

            https://www.wsj.com/story/murder-rates-soar-in-rural-america-bb431022

            Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment