cb passive income 4.0, cb passive income 3.0, cb passive income 3.0 review, cb passive income review, cb passive income review 2016, cb passive income video review, cb passive income 2016, cb passive income honest review, cb passive income 3.0 scam, cb passive income bonus discount
cb passive income 4.0, cb passive income 3.0, cb passive income 3.0 review, cb passive income review, cb passive income review 2016, cb passive income video review, cb passive income 2016, cb passive income honest review, cb passive income 3.0 scam, cb passive income bonus discount
cb passive income 4.0, cb passive income 3.0, cb passive income 3.0 review, cb passive income review, cb passive income review 2016, cb passive income video review, cb passive income 2016, cb passive income honest review, cb passive income 3.0 scam, cb passive income bonus discount
cb passive income 4.0, cb passive income 3.0, cb passive income 3.0 review, cb passive income review, cb passive income review 2016, cb passive income video review, cb passive income 2016, cb passive income honest review, cb passive income 3.0 scam, cb passive income bonus discount
cb passive income 4.0, cb passive income 3.0, cb passive income 3.0 review, cb passive income review, cb passive income review 2016, cb passive income video review, cb passive income 2016, cb passive income honest review, cb passive income 3.0 scam, cb passive income bonus discount
For more infomation >> CB Passive Income 4.0 | Truth Exposed - Duration: 10:54.-------------------------------------------
리니지 이예진) 요정 vs 기사 1대1 별4개 잡을수 있을까? (쪼렙기사 도전) Lineage live streaming highlight - Duration: 3:21.
For more infomation >> 리니지 이예진) 요정 vs 기사 1대1 별4개 잡을수 있을까? (쪼렙기사 도전) Lineage live streaming highlight - Duration: 3:21. -------------------------------------------
IRISH GRIME - THE END OF BGMEDIA - Duration: 5:10.
jesus christ
my name is jeff
-------------------------------------------
STRONG # war film "Trap" # 2017 Russian Military Movies! - Duration: 1:16:32.
STRONG # war film "Trap" # 2017 Russian Military Movies!
-------------------------------------------
Meet the 5 Families that control the WORLD - Duration: 4:08.
Meet the 5 Families that control the WORLD
by Ivan
At some point in history, which many point out around the Renaissance, political and
economic models were oriented toward the creation of financial and commercial entities, now
transformed into the most powerful corporations on the planet. There are five families that
control the world, by having unprecedented ties in political, economic and military systems.
Beyond the political-business framework, behind the corporations, there is a hardcore basis
of hegemonic power, which is perpetrated almost exclusively in a subsidiary way. Here are
the families that according to historians and scholars control the world:
The Rothschilds: although many claim this family has extremely ancient ancestral links,
it is possible to identify the official beginning of this dynasty in the middle of the eighteenth
century, with German banker of Jewish origin Mayer Amschel Rothschild, identified by Forbes
magazine as �the founding father of international finances�. Since then, the family has remained
at the top of the planetary oligarchy and has a determining influence on the US Federal
Reserve, as well as the British financial system.
The Rockefellers: this empire began at the end of the nineteenth century when the consolidation
of the Standard Oil Company placed the family at the head of an incipient oil industry.
John D. Rockefeller, the first of the dynasty, was considered the richest man in history
by Forbes magazine, with a fortune to date equivalent to 340 billion dollars. The family
has been perpetrated in the most ambitious circles of power and has influence over virtually
any world politics.
The Morgans: Towards the end of the nineteenth century, John Pierpont Morgan founded J. P.
Morgan & Company, a financial company that has played a leading role in the economic
history of the United States and, therefore, the world.
This banker is identified as the savior of the American economy, leading a movement of
bankers to sell bonds and buy back gold, avoiding the sinking of national reserves. Since then,
the Morgan family has controlled its country�s gold supply.
The Du-Pont: Economist Pierre Samuel du Pont de Nemours, arrived in the United States in
1799, escaping the French Revolution. He founded his company, which did not take long to establish
itself as the main supplier of gunpowder of the government, and went on later to monopolize
the dynamite market. 40 percent of the Allied armament of the First War was provided by
him and he was involved in the Manhattan Project, which led to the creation of the first atomic
bomb.
The Bush: This family is considered as the newest family of the world elite and began
its legacy with Prescott Sheldon Bush, a US banker and senator who was accused, together
with the United States government, of obscenely profiting from World War II and having established
large Businesses with the companies that financed Adolf Hitler�s government. The alleged speculation
and lack of ethics were documented by an investigation of The Guardian newspaper.
-------------------------------------------
AMV สองสิ่งที่ยิ่งใหญ่ เวอร์ชั่น นารูโตะ Official Lyrics - Duration: 3:09.
For more infomation >> AMV สองสิ่งที่ยิ่งใหญ่ เวอร์ชั่น นารูโตะ Official Lyrics - Duration: 3:09. -------------------------------------------
Las Noticias de la mañana, martes 31 de enero de 2017 | Un Nuevo Día | Telemundo - Duration: 2:14.
For more infomation >> Las Noticias de la mañana, martes 31 de enero de 2017 | Un Nuevo Día | Telemundo - Duration: 2:14. -------------------------------------------
Sao nước Mỹ giàu quá vậy?😁 - Duration: 5:53.
The United States is the world's most prosperous economy.
It's been that way for so long -- over a hundred years -- that we take it for granted.
But how did it happen?
There are many answers, of course.
One is that the United States values the free market over government control of the economy.
But here's a point that is seldom made: It didn't begin that way.
Before the country placed its trust in the free market, it trusted the government
to make important business decisions.
Or to put it another way, only after the government failed repeatedly to promote economic growth
and only after private enterprise succeeded where the government failed,
did the United States start to develop a world beating economy.
Let's look at three telling examples: In 1808 John Jacob Astor formed the American
Fur Company and marketed American furs around the world.
Europeans adored beaver hats for their peerless warmth and durability.
Astor gave them what they wanted.
Instead of leaving the fur business to capable entrepreneurs like Astor, the government decided
it wanted to be in on the action.
So, it subsidized its own fur company run by a self-promoting government official named
Thomas McKenney.
McKenney should have won the competition.
After all, he had the federal government backing him.
But while Astor employed hundreds of people and still made a tidy profit,
McKenney's company lost money every year.
Finally, Congress in 1822, came to its senses and ended the subsidies
for McKenney and his associates.
A similar situation developed in the 1840's around the telegraph.
The telegraph was the first step toward the instant communication we have today.
Invented by Samuel Morse, the telegraph transmitted sound – as dots and dashes
representing letters of the alphabet.
Morse, more of an idealist than businessman, agreed to let the government own and operate
the telegraph "in the national interest."
But the government steadily lost money each month it operated the telegraph.
During 1845, expenditures for the telegraph exceeded revenue by six-to-one
and sometimes by ten-to-one.
Seeing no value in the invention, Congress turned the money-loser over to private enterprise.
In the hands of entrepreneurs, the business took off.
Telegraph promoters showed the press how it could instantly report stories
occurring hundreds of miles away.
Bankers, stock brokers and insurance companies saw how they could instantly monitor investments
near and far.
As the quality of service improved, telegraph lines were strung across the country –
from 40 miles of wire in 1846 to 23,000 miles in 1852.
By the 1860s, the U.S. had a transcontinental telegraph wire.
And by the end of that decade entrepreneurs had strung a telegraph cable
across the Atlantic Ocean.
Why didn't the US government profitably use what Morse had invented?
Part of the answer is that the incentives for bureaucrats differ sharply
from those of entrepreneurs.
When government operated the telegraph, Washington bureaucrats received no profits from the messages
they sent, and the cash they lost was the taxpayers', not their own.
So government officials had no incentive to improve service, to find new customers, or
to expand to more cities.
But entrepreneurs like Ezra Cornell, the founder of Western Union, did.
Cheaper, better service meant more customers and more profits.
Just fifteen years after Congress privatized the telegraph, both the costs of construction
and the rates for service linking the major cities were as little as one-tenth
of the original rates established by Washington.
In the steamship business, we see the story repeated yet again.
During the 1840s, regular steamship travel began between New York and England.
The government placed its bets on ship owner Edward Collins, a man more skilled at political
lobbying than at business.
While Congress funded Collins, Cornelius Vanderbilt started his own steamship company.
Vanderbilt cut the costs of travel, filled his ships with eager passengers, and built
a fabulously successful business, soon leaving Collins in his wake.
Collins failed because he didn't feel a need to improve, or even provide safe and
regular service (for example, two of his four ships sank, killing hundreds of passengers).
If he lost money, there was always another politician to appeal to.
Vanderbilt, in contrast, had to serve his customers or he would have lost his company.
You'd think we would have learned our lesson by now: economic prosperity comes from free
enterprise, not from government subsidies.
But it's a lesson we have to learn every generation.
I'm Burton Folsom, Professor of History at Hillsdale College, for Prager University.
-------------------------------------------
이달의소녀탐구 #67 (LOOΠΔ TV #67) - Duration: 0:33.
From day one, LOOΠΔ is filming all day long!
'Hello!'
'Finally it's the last filming of today!'
'There's a puppy~'
A dog is walking around the girls!
'Hey, puppy! hello?'
'It's so cute...!'
HeeJin's getting closer to the dog which is sittng alone…
But the dog from Taiwan leaves the place…
'I just want to communicate with the puppy..'
'I'm going to name you! Kkami~'
HeeJin tried to communicate with Kkami one more time!
'Hey~ you're sitting in a funny pose~'
But she failed again!
-------------------------------------------
Triverio aprovecha un error defensivo y marca para el Toluca - Duration: 1:18.
For more infomation >> Triverio aprovecha un error defensivo y marca para el Toluca - Duration: 1:18. -------------------------------------------
5 WWE Wrestlers Who Are More Successful Than Their Fathers - Duration: 10:04.
For more infomation >> 5 WWE Wrestlers Who Are More Successful Than Their Fathers - Duration: 10:04. -------------------------------------------
Switched at Birth 5x02 Promo "This Has to Do with Me" (HD) Season 5 Episode 2 Promo - Duration: 0:32.
People hate us.
I don't wanna talk to you.
You're not allowed to forgive him for something that happened to me.
I'm gonna get you some help.
My god!
If I hear that word one more time...
What are you doing?
Whatever it takes to protect my daughter.
Is any part of this to try and get back together with me?
Switched at Birth, the final season every Tuesday at 9/8c on Freeform.
Catch up now on the app or On Demand.
-------------------------------------------
How to kill Invoker for 1 SEC - NEW Dark Moon TRICK! - Duration: 1:10.
For more infomation >> How to kill Invoker for 1 SEC - NEW Dark Moon TRICK! - Duration: 1:10. -------------------------------------------
Bones 12x06 Promo "The Flaw in the Saw" (HD) - Duration: 0:22.
What did the math teacher say to the lumberjack?
It's all just simple geome-TREE.
Next Tuesday, a murder in the competitive world of...
Lumberjacking.
Lumberjacking?
... leads to a suspect with an axe to grind.
Wait until she puts down that big chainsaw before we accuse her of murder.
All-new Bones, next Tuesday on FOX.
-------------------------------------------
Trump Fires Attorney General For Defiance On Muslim Ban - Duration: 10:39.
AFTER THE ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL, SALLY YATES, ADDRESSED
TRUMP'S IMMIGRATION EXECUTIVE ORDER AND CLAIMED SHE WOULD NOT
DEFEND IT BECAUSE SHE BELIEVES IT'S UNLAWFUL, DONALD TRUMP
DECIDED TO TAKE MATTERS INTO HIS OWN HANDS AND FIRED HER.
HE
FIRED HER AND REPLACED HER IMMEDIATELY WITH ANOTHER
INDIVIDUAL BY THE NAME OF DANA BOENTE, THE U.S. ATTORNEY FOR
THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA.
THIS SHOULD RAISE RED
FLAGS CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE GENERAL ATTORNEY IS NOT
SUPPOSED TO BE SOMEONE WHO JUST AGREES WITH EVERYTHING THE
PRESIDENT DOES, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO INTERPRETS
THE LAW AND GIVES THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ADVICE BASED ON WHAT IS
AND ISN'T LAWFUL.
PART OF THE REASON WHY IS BECAUSE THEY WANT
TO AVOID LAWSUITS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
YATES, ACCORDING TO A
WHITE HOUSE LETTER, HAD --
>>TO GIVE YOU SOME MORE INFORMATION ABOUT HER
REPLACEMENT --
>>I SHOULD NOTE THAT BOENTE HAS BEEN OPEN ABOUT THE FACT THAT HE
PLANS ON DEFENDING TRUMP'S IMMIGRATION ORDER, THAT IS
PRECISELY THE REASON HE WILL BE THE ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL
UNTIL JEFF SESSIONS GETS CONFIRMED.
>>ATTORNEYS GENERAL ARE SUPPOSED TO BE INDEPENDENT, BUT THEY ARE
PICKED BY THE PRESIDENT AND WILL OFTEN GO ALONG WITH WHAT THE
PRESIDENT WANTS.
FOR EXAMPLE ERIC HOLDER UNDER OBAMA, THE
PRESIDENT DIDN'T WANT THE BANKS PROSECUTED SO HOLDER DIDN'T
PROSECUTE ANY OF THEM, SUPER OBVIOUS.
UNDER BUSH, HE WANTED A
LOT OF DISTRICT ATTORNEYS TO FIND VOTER FRAUD.
A LOT OF THEM
COULDN'T FIND VOTER FRAUD AND THEY SAID I LOOKED, I'M A
REPUBLICAN, YOU APPOINTED ME, I COULDN'T FIND IT, AND THOSE GUYS
WOULD EITHER GET FIRED OR DEMOTED, THAT BECAME A SCANDAL.
BUT FROM TIME TO TIME THEY DO STAND UP, WHETHER IT IS THE
REPUBLICAN DISTRICT ATTORNEYS WHO SAID YOU WANT ME TO FIND IT
BUT THERE IS NO VOTER FRAUD, OR, FUNNY ENOUGH, JAMES COMEY WHEN
HE WAS THE NUMBER TWO IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO ATTORNEY
GENERAL JOHN ASHCROFT, AND WHEN ASHCROFT WAS IN THE HOSPITAL AND
THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WANTED THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO DO
SOMETHING THEY PERCEIVED TO BE ILLEGAL, JAMES COMEY STOOD UP
AND SAID WE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THAT, THAT IS ILLEGAL AND WE
WON'T DO IT.
SO YATES NOW IS SAYING SOMETHING LIKE COMEY DID,
I THINK THIS ORDER IS ILLEGAL, SO I'M GOING TO TELL THE PEOPLE
WHO WORK UNDER ME IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO NOT FOLLOW IT
BECAUSE THAT IS MY CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY.
>>RIGHT.
AGAIN, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE PRESIDENT TO LISTEN TO
THE LEGAL ADVICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, OTHERWISE THERE IS
REALLY NO POINT IN HAVING AN ATTORNEY GENERAL.
YOU ARE
SUPPOSED TO ACCEPT THE LEGAL ANALYSIS OF THIS INDIVIDUAL, AND
OF COURSE TRUMP JUST DOESN'T LIKE THE FACT THAT SHE DOESN'T
AGREE, SO HE FIRED HER IMMEDIATELY.
BOENTE IS MORE THAN
WILLING TO WORK WITH TRUMP AND JUST AGREE WITH THIS IMMIGRATION
POLICY.
HE SAYS --
>>OF COURSE THERE WAS ALSO THE 1973 SITUATION WHERE RICHARD
NIXON SAID, THAT SPECIAL PROSECUTOR INVESTIGATING ME, I'M
BOTHERED BY HIM -- BECAUSE IT TURNS OUT HE'S RIGHT -- SO HE
ORDERED THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO FIRE HIM, HE WOULDN'T, SO NIXON
AND FIRED THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, THEN THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
ALSO WOULDN'T FOLLOW THE ILLEGAL ORDER AND ALSO WAS FIRED, THAT
WAS KNOWN AS THE SATURDAY NIGHT MASSACRE.
SOME ARE NOW CALLING
THIS THE MONDAY NIGHT MASSACRE.
SOME PEOPLE INCLUDING A PERSON
WHO IS ONE OF THE HIGHER-UPS AT IMMIGRATION WAS ALSO FIRED.
THEY
SAY THAT THAT FIRING WAS MORE IN THE WORKS, IT WASN'T JUST
BECAUSE OF SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IMMEDIATELY.
REMEMBER
THOSE PEOPLE AT THE STATE DEPARTMENT ALSO STEPPED DOWN, A
HUGE NUMBER OF THEM.
THERE IS A POLICY ANGLE TO THIS WHICH YOU
MIGHT BE SURPRISED TO FIND OUT I'M A LITTLE MIXED ON -- I WISH
SHE HAD BASED HER DECISION ON THE FACT THAT THEY WERE NOT
FOLLOWING FEDERAL COURT ORDERS.
>>THAT'S RIGHT.
THERE WERE AT LEAST FOUR FEDERAL COURTS THAT
ISSUED AT LEAST PARTIAL STAYS IN REGARD TO THIS IMMIGRATION BAN.
SO YOU'RE RIGHT, SHE COULD HAVE USED THAT TO STRENGTHEN HER
ARGUMENT BUT SHE DIDN'T, I THINK THAT WORKED AGAINST HER.
>>LET ME BREAK IT DOWN THIS WAY.
ON THE ISSUE OF THE LEGALITY
THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT COMPONENTS, THE ORDER ITSELF IS
A TRAVEL BAN THAT IS ARGUABLY ILLEGAL OR UNCONSTITUTIONAL, BUT
IT IS ARGUABLE.
FIRST OFF, IF YOU JUST SAID AS PRESIDENT OBAMA
DID IN 2011, WE HAVE A SPECIFIC SITUATION HERE WHERE WE HAVE LET
PEOPLE INTO THE COUNTRY WHO WE JUST FOUND OUT PLANTED A
ROADSIDE BOMB BACK IN 2005 IN IRAQ AGAINST OUR TROOPS, SO WE
WON'T DO A COMPLETE BAN LIKE TRUMP DID, AND WE WON'T DO
IT BASED ON RELIGION LIKE TRUMP, TRUMP SAID HE'S PRIORITIZING
CHRISTIANS, BUT FROM JUST THIS COUNTRY WE WILL SLOW IMMIGRATION
UNTIL WE CAN FIGURE OUT IF THE SAME LOOPHOLE THEY USE TO GET IN
IS BEING USED BY ANYONE ELSE.
BUT DURING THAT SIX-MONTH PERIOD
IT WAS NOT A HARD BAN, PEOPLE WERE STILL BEING ADMITTED.
BUT
CAN THE PRESIDENT CONTROL THE FLOW OF IMMIGRATION FROM CERTAIN
COUNTRIES?
AS A GENERAL PRINCIPLE, YES, SO THE ORDER
COULD BE LEGAL.
ON THE OTHER HAND IF THE PRESIDENT SAID I'M
GOING TO TARGET PREDOMINATELY BLACK COUNTRIES AND PRIORITIZE
WHITE PEOPLE FROM SOUTH AFRICA AND FORMER RHODESIA, IF YOU WANT
TO GO BACK THAT FAR, AND I'M GOING TO DE-PRIORITIZE BLACK
PEOPLE BECAUSE WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THEM AND WE HAVE TO FIGURE
OUT WHAT'S GOING ON BEFORE WE LET BLACK PEOPLE INTO THE
COUNTRY -- IF HE SAID THAT THEN YOU WOULD HAVE SIGNIFICANT
ISSUES WITH ILLEGAL OR UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTIONS.
IF SHE
HAD MADE A BETTER CASE FOR WHY THIS IS CLOSER TO I'M NOT
LETTING BLACKS IN, AND NOT CLOSE TO THE 2011 ORDER, OKAY, I THINK
SHE WOULD HAVE BEEN ON MORE SOLID GROUND.
I WISH SHE HAD
SPENT MORE TIME EXPANDING THAT A LITTLE BIT.
BUT SECONDLY, THE
SECOND COMPONENT, IS WHO DECIDES WHETHER IT'S ILLEGAL OR
UNCONSTITUTIONAL?
THAT PART IS CLEAR, IT'S THE COURTS.
AN
ATTORNEY GENERAL CAN SAY UNTIL THE COURTS SORTED OUT, UNTIL WE
FIGURE OUT WHAT'S GOING ON HERE, UNTIL THEY DO, I'M GOING TO LET
THE COURTS DECIDE WHETHER WE SHOULD PROCEED AS THEY ARE
SORTING IT OUT. AND THE COURTS HAVE DECIDED, A STAY MEANS DON'T
ACT ON THIS ORDER, IT IS NOW ILLEGAL TO ACT ON THIS ORDER
UNTIL WE HAVE FINAL ADJUDICATION THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM.
>>FOR ME THAT IS THE MOST CONCERNING PART OF ALL OF THIS.
THERE ARE MANY ELEMENTS TO THE STORY THAT I THINK PEOPLE SHOULD
BE CONCERNED ABOUT -- THE FACT THAT SALLY YATES GETS FIRED JUST
BECAUSE SHE DISAGREES WITH DONALD TRUMP, THE FACT THAT THE
ROLLOUT OF THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER WAS LACKING ANY AND ALL NUANCE
AND LED TO A LOT OF CONFUSION, PEOPLE ARE STILL WONDERING
WHETHER THIS WILL IMPACT GREEN CARD HOLDERS, THAT IS AN ISSUE
AS WELL.
BUT FOR ME THE PART THAT CONCERNS ME IS THE FACT
THAT THERE ARE FOUR FEDERAL COURTS WHO, AGAIN, HAVE ISSUED
AT LEAST PARTIAL STAYS AND THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS
ESSENTIALLY SAID WE DON'T CARE, WE ARE MOVING FORWARD.
SO YOU'RE
RIGHT, WE SHOULD ALLOW THE FEDERAL COURTS TO ADJUDICATE IT,
A STATUS MEAN THEY'VE ALREADY DECIDED IT'S UNLAWFUL OR
UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND HE CAN'T MOVE FORWARD, BUT WE NEED TO
KNOW WHAT HE PLANS TO DO AND HOW, AND WHETHER OR NOT IT'S
CONSTITUTIONAL.
>>SHE MIGHT HAVE BASED IT ON ALL THAT, I JUST WISH SHE HAD SAID
THAT PUBLICLY.
FOR EXAMPLE NOW WE HAVE REPORTING IN FROM TODAY
THAT THEY ARE STILL HOLDING 100 PEOPLE AT L.A.X.
BUT THEY HAVE
BEEN ORDERED BY FEDERAL COURTS NOT TO HOLD THESE PEOPLE.
THAT
IS THE LAW OF THE LAND AND TRUMP SAYS I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE LAW,
THAT'S WHEN AN ATTORNEY GENERAL SALES, AND SHE DID, AGAIN I WISH
SHE HAD CLARIFIED BETTER, YOU HAVE A FEDERAL COURT ORDER --
IT'S UP TO FIVE COURTS NOW -- FIVE COURTS HAVE TOLD YOU YOU
CAN'T HOLD THOSE PEOPLE, THE ORDER HAS BEEN STAYED.
THAT
MEANS IT IS NOT IN EFFECT.
IF YOU WANT ME TO SAY IT'S IN
EFFECT I WOULD BE IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL COURT ORDERS AND I'M
NOT GOING TO DO THAT BECAUSE I'M A LAWYER, IN FACT I'M THE TOP
LAWYER AS ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL.
THAT IS ON THE POLICY
END.
ON THE POLITICAL END I DON'T HAVE GOOD NEWS FOR US.
I
THINK THIS WILL PLAY WELL, NOT JUST FOR HIS BASE BUT FOR PEOPLE
IN THE MIDDLE.
PROGRESSIVES CAN STAND HIM, THIS ISN'T THE STRAW
THAT BROKE THE CAMEL'S BACK, THE CAMEL WAS ALREADY OBLITERATED.
BUT HE WILL SEEM STRONG AND DECISIVE, I GAVE YOU IN ORDER
AND YOU DIDN'T FOLLOW IT, JUST LIKE AT THE END OF CELEBRITY
APPRENTICE YOU'RE FIRED.
>>BUT WHAT ABOUT HIM IGNORING THE COURTS?
WILL THAT PLAY WELL
WITH INDEPENDENT VOTERS?
>>THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION ABOUT POLITICS, AND THAT DEPENDS ON
THE DEMOCRATS.
IF THE DEMOCRATS KEEP GETTING DISTRACTED AND IT'S
UNDERSTANDABLE, GIVEN HOW MANY THINGS HE'S DOING OUT THERE 100
MILES AN HOUR, AND LOSE FOCUS ON WHAT THE IMPORTANT PARTS ARE --
YOU'VE GOT TO BUILD A GOOD CASE, WHAT THE DEMOCRATS SHOULD BE
DOING IS, FOLLOW COURT ORDERS OTHERWISE WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS
ILLEGAL AND THERE IS ONLY ONE REMEDY FOR A PRESIDENT WHO IS
ACTING ILLEGALLY AND THAT IMPEACHMENT.
YOU ALREADY HAVE 20
REPUBLICANS WHO HAVE VOICED CONCERN ABOUT THE BAN, WHICH IS
UNUSUAL FOR REPUBLICANS, YES?
YOU NEED THOSE GUYS IF YOU ARE
GOING TO PUT REAL PRESSURE -- NOT TO SAY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO
IMPEACH TRUMP TOMORROW, BUT TO PUT PRESSURE ON HIM TO SAY OH, I
SEE HOW THIS IS COSTING ME POLITICALLY.
DEMOCRATS, FOCUS ON
THE COURT ORDERS.
THEY ARE AMAZING IN THEIR INCOMPETENCE.
THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WE STARTED JUSTICE DEMOCRATS,
STRONG PROGRESSIVES MAKE THESE MISTAKES.
-------------------------------------------
The NATIONAL for Tuesday January 31, 2017 - Duration: 59:58.
For more infomation >> The NATIONAL for Tuesday January 31, 2017 - Duration: 59:58. -------------------------------------------
How to Pronounce: FEMME | #frenchbites - Duration: 1:22.
Hi everyone!
Today we're going to learn how to pronounce the word FEMME in french.
Femme is a tricky word because it sounds like you should pronounce it f-E-mme.
Which was, historically, the way you would pronounce it.
But is was quite hard to pronounce so people started changing it for f-A-mme.
The thing is that back then, most people didn't know how to read or how to write so the pronunciation
changed but the way it's written didn't.
So this is why it's pronounce f-A-mme but it's written f-E-mme.
Now here's how to pronounce it:
femme
femme
fe-mme
fe-mme
Femme is the french word for woman
and if you would like to say women in french you would say femmes as well.
There's no difference of pronunciation in french if it's one femme or multiple femmes.
Even though there is an 'S' at the end you wouldn't pronounce it.
So FEMME and FEMMES, exactly the same pronunciation.
I hope you enjoyed this video and I will see you in the next one.
Bye!!
-------------------------------------------
Respuesta a @MateriaCris / YhoeDP / Yhoe el Chico Sexy - Duration: 4:24.
For more infomation >> Respuesta a @MateriaCris / YhoeDP / Yhoe el Chico Sexy - Duration: 4:24. -------------------------------------------
Colleen Lopez Turquoise and Sky Blue Topaz Ring - Duration: 4:38.
For more infomation >> Colleen Lopez Turquoise and Sky Blue Topaz Ring - Duration: 4:38. -------------------------------------------
Best TWERK VINES Compilation 2017 - Ultimate Twerk Vines 2017 - TwerkMoms - Duration: 10:08.
Best TWERK VINES Compilation 2017 - Ultimate Twerk Vines 2017 - TwerkMoms
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét