HomeNews & PoliticsRelated VideosMore From: CNN Business

Sen. Warren to CFPB's Mulvaney: You’re hurting people to score political points

154 ratings | 14907 views
Sen. Elizabeth Warren reminded Acting Director Mick Mulvaney that he argued to close the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau while in the Senate. She says that act would have hurt the American people.
Category: News & Politics
Get embed code!
Text Comments (88)
Ted Phillips (19 days ago)
No one fucks more hard working tax payers out of money than the government. How long has Warren's Consumer Finance Protection Bureau existed? What exactly have they accomplished? When will we know when their job is done? Consumers need to be free to make bad decisions, freedom and the pain of fucking up are valuable parts of a free market economy and ultimately incubate a more informed and productive consumer. Government groups like Ms. Warren's only exist to give losers another pension job and allow them to claim they are accomplishing something without actually lifting a single finger to help actual consumers. If you actually think government intervention helps anyone I invite you to visit a Native American reservation and investigate why the average Native American can't live past the age of 45 even though they literally have everything Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren want to extend to the rest of the nation.
James Jones (1 month ago)
Warren needs to know. She has worked the system for too long.
Garage Sale (2 months ago)
CFPB ia a progressive oxymoron, an attempt to have unaccountable control of private finance by radical liberals.
Colonel Wood (2 months ago)
She needs to take a midol.
Fmlyman 1012 (2 months ago)
Pocahiney 😂
Thomas Fleig (2 months ago)
Lol... Poor pocahontas created this bureau and made it independent (of republicans) where it didn't have to answer to anyone, and the head couldn't be fired. They even screened workers, to make sure they were all like minded democrats.... Lol. Unfortunately for pocahontas, the courts found it unconstitutional and to "fix" it they made it to where the president could fire and hire the head of the department at will. Just in time for Trump... Lol. Now TRUMP controls her baby and she can't do anything about it.... Lol. I love it. I want to see Trump wait till he's ready to leave office and then dissolve it.
Jonathan Froger (2 months ago)
The virulent racism, hopeless sexism, bottomless reservoir of hatred for not only native Americans labeled as 'indian', but also those with Indian ancestray as well, has been the soul of white, female Democrats for so long that it has essentially become an innate set of attitudes and behaviors for those of Elizabeth Warren's voting base. There simply will never be a time in history when white, female Democrats will shake their emotional and intellectual attachments to racism and bigotry and allow minorities to have a place at the dinner table. White, female Democrats will always strive to maintain their iron-like grip on money, property and political power, because Blue State and Blue City Barnyard Animals are just as virulently racist and hopelessly sexist as they are. The cycle of depair, destruction, eugenics and urban plantations continues, as does Elizabeth Warren dancing, singing, laughing, and spitting on The Trail Of Tears.
Midnight Rambler (2 months ago)
Fake Indian whore
Lynn Andrews (3 months ago)
Warren is a bitch.
Kris S (3 months ago)
Conservatives want to be scammed.
Old ironsides (3 months ago)
Ryan Zinnia, ypu can't be any further from the truth with your coment
10ft (3 months ago)
Elizabeth may have a degree and hold a position in our government but I think she is kind of stupid, just saying.
Greg Hudson (4 months ago)
Is everyone Trump brought in, "Pure Trash".
10ft (3 months ago)
Greg, that couldn't possibly be true, if so you would have a job in the government... hehe
Chihiro Fujisaki (4 months ago)
The monopoly man lol in the background lol
Natty Bumppo (5 months ago)
hey cnn do you really believe your own bullshit,sure you do ,you people are a joke.
tim walling (5 months ago)
the CFPB is one of the biggest government turd's ever laid on the american public...it need's to be flushed.
Gus McCrae (5 months ago)
....and the winner for Cunt of the Year is: wait for it------ Elizabeth Warren 🎇🎇🎇🎇🎇
proboy1 (5 months ago)
what a BITCH ! !
Frank Kush (5 months ago)
Lizzy Pocahontas Warren is so full of shit it's running out of her panty hose. Huge waste of money for free loading government bureaucrats who spend their days concocting more ways to impede small businesses with endless regulation unless you're one of the leftist scumbags who support them. CNN you are fake news with your leftist one-sided propaganda bullshit like you think we don't see through your crap. Screw you!
Seneca Brown (5 months ago)
Hurrah for Elizabeth Warren!! Masterfully running circles around Mulvaney, a radical Republican who describes Social Security as a Ponzi scheme, wants to eliminate Social Security Disability and deny Medicare. We'll see how red state seniors and seniors everywhere vote on that platform.
D p (5 months ago)
POCAHONTAS IS A LIAR AND PART OF THE DEEP STATE OBSTRUCTIONIST 😈🐀🤡
Old ironsides (5 months ago)
Coming to you from the Communist News Network
10ft (3 months ago)
Ryan Zinna, you are obviously in dire need of a safe place with your cookies and milk.
Ryan Zinna (5 months ago)
Old ironsides Spoken like a true fascist. Is it always the liberal and the socialist's fault because you felt public education was a communist plot and infringed on your ideologies?
ucouldbe (5 months ago)
Boy, Russian Bots working overtime here. This guy is trying to kill the only agency out there that is trying to protect the little guy.
Ted Peterson (5 months ago)
ucouldbe Take another bong hit
Vince Hughes (5 months ago)
Hello Pocahontas.
Ryan Zinna (5 months ago)
Vince Hughes Yes, public highschool was a communist plot, got any other info for us?
Richard Dixon (5 months ago)
Pocahontas is so cute, run bitch run
H K A (5 months ago)
Warren is corrupt to the core.
Raymond Remillard (5 months ago)
First and last off I would not have a conversation with a fruit basket who thinks she’s an Indian princess but has no ancestry of being an Indian. Warren should be kicked in the ass on a daily basis.
Tony Stark (5 months ago)
Pocahontas is a grandstanding hypocrite she is the worst best to Kamala Harris brutal
ndgo (6 months ago)
pppppprrrrrroooooooppppaaaaaggggggaaaaannnndddddaaaaa
Michael Monagan (6 months ago)
What kind of a moron would not promote a consumer protection agency? They are protecting the little guy- like you half-wits that are criticizing Warren. The corporations have you idiots by the cajones and you don't even know it. Wake up! (now that I think of it half of you are probably trolls anyway...)
Natty Bumppo (5 months ago)
Old ironsides exactly and not just that they are not funded by congress,but the Federal Reserve ,like you said another black hole,for our tax money.
Natty Bumppo (5 months ago)
Michael Monagan let me help your moronic name calling ass hull, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), created by the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, is living up to its billing as one of the most powerful—and unaccountable—federal agencies ever created. The bureau was designed to evade the checks and balances that apply to most other regulatory agencies. Its very structure invites expansive rulemaking,[3] as does its misappropriation of the emergent theory of behavioral economics that drives bureau decision making. It deems consumers prone to financial irrationality and thus ill-equipped to act in their self-interest. Consequently, the CFPB is compelled to intervene in consumers’ personal financial transactions. Lawmakers must curtail the bureau’s unconstrained powers. Outright elimination of the CFPB is the best option. Consumer protection can be advanced instead through better coordination among financial regulators. Proceeding toward bureau dissolution, bureau funding should be controlled by Congress, and the vague language of the CFPB’s statutory mandate must be tightened to stop bureaucrats from defining—and expanding—their own powers. if there is no over sight on nding then this agency is unconstitutional. anyone that can not see thei is either a moron or an idiot or both.
Old ironsides (5 months ago)
Michael Monagan they don't have me by the canjones.just another agency to get more of our $$$, do you know the word independent?
Natty Bumppo (5 months ago)
what kind of moron would believe this liar. Warren’s Top Donors Include Individuals From Firms That Represent Corporations Received hundreds of thousands of dollars from individuals in securities and investments; Wall Street lawyers. this dog and pony show is just that ,this woman is dirty as hell,talking out of both sides of her mouth. http://freebeacon.com/politics/warrens-top-donors-include-individuals-firms-represent-corporations/ she could care less about you or me man,she is all about the money.
H K A (5 months ago)
Quit watching fake news it's frying your brain.
C. Lincoln (6 months ago)
LOL Monopoly man is shocked he thinking to himself.... "Who's wife is this? Bro, come get your wife! Tell her to make me a sandwich, heavy on the mayo; my portfolio is down 20 basis points!".
Carly Elizabeth (6 months ago)
A bipartisan committee makes more logical sense than keeping it run by one person who changes with each admin. I’m with Mulvaney, the CFPB needs more stability and better oversight.
blksbth1 (6 months ago)
Hey CNN! Where's the clip showcasing the other side of the argument? You've given us Warren's little speech, now how about Mulvaney's so that I can consider both sides and draw my own conclusion on the matter? WAIT!!! CNN!!! COME BACK!!! Was it something I said!?!? Why are you running away!?!?
j brown (1 day ago)
I think he's referring to the part where Trey Gowdy is questioning Warren about how exactly are they going to protect consumers whose identity has been stolen and Loans been taken out in their name and she runs around in circles saying we're going to do great things we're going to do great things and it goes well how exactly are you going to do those great things she does but we're going to do great things. Any again ask for for specifics and she keeps running around in circles. You can't hear one side of the story make up your mind what's your complete d****** you have to hear both sides especially the part where she's claiming b******* that she never did she never intended to do and in fact she just walked away with a bunch of money like Democrats typically do
FilthyFascist (2 months ago)
blksbth1 Peter owes you money for tuition
10ft (3 months ago)
Peter, what an appropriate name considering you are talking like a dickhead.
blksbth1 (5 months ago)
+Peter First of all, if you insist on calling someone stupid, you might want to use proper grammar: "your to stupid to know your freedom is being dismantled be the republicant's" ...should have read... "You're too stupid to know your freedom is being dismantled by the republicants." Note that I did manage to keep your juvenile slur intact. I swear, the day I meet a leftist that doesn't resort to name calling, I'll be utterly amazed, but I digress... And just so I'm clear, considering you can't even write a single sentence without botching it no less than three times, do you honestly expect me to take your point seriously? Would you? But let's say I bite anyway: Please explain "how so?" as, where I come from, just saying something doesn't make it so. ...because from everything I've been seeing and reading (which involves looking at the news from multiple perspectives, not just a single opinionated side), here's what is going on, as I've explained at length in a different thread here: NOBODY is denouncing the idea of a consumer protection agency, especially one that works well and does what it was intended to do. The issue here, which Warren conveniently sidesteps, is that the CFPB - the department in question here - is a FUCKING MESS. Seriously. In unfamiliar with the issues that have plagued it, pretty much since its inception, here's some materials to get you up to speed - and there's a lot more where this came from: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/consumers-harmed-consumer-protection-bureau-again/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/10/03/the-consumer-financial-protection-bureau-is-plagued-by-internal-problems/#3cd1cc891b30 https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-constitutional-issues-in-the-cfpb-conflict https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/ken-blackwell/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-isnt-protecting-consumers https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/court-rules-consumer-financial-protection-bureaus-structure-is-unconstitutional/503660/ ...so let's be clear: Mulvaney - now acting director of the CFPB - is not opposed to a consumer protection agency. But he is definitely opposed to the current state of the CFPB, it being yet another over-bloated, hyper-bureaucratic and wholly inefficient department that has been allowed to operate with virtually no oversight and a terrible leadership structure...all of which Mulvaney is trying to fix. So, why, then, would Elizabeth Warren be so opposed to what Mick Mulvaney is trying to do, you might ask? Well, for one, Mulvaney is part of the Trump administration (and easily one of his best cabinet picks) and we all know how much of a fan Warren is of President Trump. Which isn't to say she doesn't have good reason for not liking Trump, but let's face it, Dems have been putting party before country A LOT since Trump took office, this being yet another example of that. Just like the tax cuts that are benefitting millions of Americans despite being labeled "armageddon", and then, laughably, "crumbs" by Democrats. Quite the opposite ends of the spectrum there - which is it? End of the world...or scraps? Ridiculous. Secondly, the CFPB was formed under Obama's watch (with a lot of involvement from Warren herself) and while I'm not going to say that the intent behind it's formation was not good natured, like Obamacare, it was put together sloppily and hastily, and folks like Warren can't stand it when another piece of Obama's legacy (let alone her own handiwork) collapses, whether warranted or not (as with her to-this-day stalwart defense of Obamacare). So you be the judge. Honestly I'm just trying to focus your attention on the specifics of this issue, which your comment didn't seem to grasp. Because, like I said, NOBODY is saying that a consumer protection agency is a bad thing. But the one that we have, in the CFPB, really, really, sucks. ...and if that's the case, wouldn't you agree that a department so bereft of problems - over a relatively short period of time, no less - should be heavily scrutinized and restructured into something far more efficient? Because that is what Mulvaney is trying to do. And Warren is just pissed because he's undoing a lot of her and her old boss' handiwork, even if completely justified in doing so. Feel free to effectively counter or correct anything I just outlined if you know any of it to be wholly inaccurate and/or undeniably false. Or just circle back with a compelling argument. I'll wait.
Peter J. Donnelly (5 months ago)
blksbth1------------what other side ! your to stupid to know your freedom is being dismantled be the republicant's !
Space Monkey (6 months ago)
Mr Monopoly again 0:44 lol
cman86s (6 months ago)
I can’t wait to see this scumbag on food stamps, once Trump is no longer president!
cman86s (3 months ago)
10ft what the hell are you talking about??
10ft (3 months ago)
cman86s, pay attention to the polls while Trump is elected again, just saying... LMAO
Dude on a computer (6 months ago)
If only Warren had not designed such an obviously corruptible and unaccountable agency. Who can argue with a straight face that this agency should not be overseen by Congress and have a bi-partisan leadership?? Please. Mick is making a point in such a way that forces the lethargic legislators to take notice. Go home Warren, you have had too much fire water.
Colin Mahoney (2 months ago)
Dude on a computer So you obviously support currupton and doing away with protection for consumers from corporate theft? I don't know "about too much fire water" but you are obviously high on Trumps Covfefe which has destroyed any brain cells you may (though Doubtfully) have had at Birth! So Dude why don't you crawl back under your bed and shove that empty head of yours back up your ASS
Bobby Cullari (6 months ago)
Pocahontas never met a bureaucracy she did not adore. Fuck this phoney old shrew!
Colonel Wood (2 months ago)
+cjsligo Jones I hope I spell midol correct, that is what she needs to take.
troy o'neal (5 months ago)
Bobby Cullari come get ya mama, I'm done 😎
cjsligo Jones (6 months ago)
It's spelled phony shit for brains.
Brad Raiche (6 months ago)
It's hilarious how Pocahontas' firm grasp of the obvious is played off a some kind of ominous accusation that Mulvaney denies. "So, Mr. Mulvaney, you don't like the CFPB, do you?" says Pocahontas. Mulvaney responds, "Gee, what was your first clue? You sure have extraordinary perception skills to be able to understand what I have made abundantly clear."
Peter J. Donnelly (3 months ago)
10ft nothing-------did listen to mulvaney's interview ! if you did then you know who the lying asshole would be ! that be you and any other of the con mans cabinet !
10ft (3 months ago)
Peter J. was being protected from ever knowing shit while in school, this is the kind of assholes the nation has to put up with, just saying.
Brad Raiche (5 months ago)
+Peter J. Donnelly Based on your complete inability to do so little as spell correctly, your opinion means exactly nothing. Learn how to spell, you fucking retard. LOL
Peter J. Donnelly (5 months ago)
bran---------your a lost cause trump humper !
Marc jackson (6 months ago)
Gotta love the "Banker" in the back! lol
Pondart Inc (5 months ago)
That is the "Monopoly Man".
Ted Peterson (6 months ago)
Average wage at the bureau is one hundred and ninety thousand dollars, and they constructed an opulent Taj Mahal for themselves. Don't be fooled, the only "protection" going on here is for a bunch of grifters. The corruption in Washington is truly profound.
erikehlert (1 month ago)
Yeah we understand that. So what? That is a good thing, because the politicians of Congress have largely been bribed into submission by their corporate donors. If their activities were ever called into question, the corporate donors at the crux of these criminal activities would squawk at their politicians, who would then either not act or act like they're trying but not doing much of anything. It's the same reason the Fed is not accountable to Congress. And the CFPB, before Mulvaney took over, had managed to claw back many many billions of dollars from these crooked companies, and stopped them from continuing their illegal, or fraudulent, or deceptive activities. Many branches of the government may be kind of worthless but this one wasn't one of them, if you are interested in financial justice for the consumer.
Dude on a computer (3 months ago)
Here's another. Bureaucracy pays well. MORE IMPORTANTLY they are unaccountable to Congress. Do you understand that? https://nationalmortgageprofessional.com/news/66643/report-finds-very-generous-salaries-cfpb-deputies
Dude on a computer (3 months ago)
LOL, Eskimo doesn't think that level of salary is not only possible, but regular in bloated government agencies?? That's cute. Stay here while I take 2 seconds to use my fingers and search...apparently you didn't have that keyboard acumen...
Eskimo Joe (3 months ago)
Cite a source for the salary or sod off mate.
ceesay mohamed (6 months ago)
why did a group of white men write laws for people that would be born hundreds of years later why aren't we aloud to change shit that from 300 years ago don't apply to today the fuck.
Kevin Conners (6 months ago)
Epic fail by Warren!
blksbth1 (5 months ago)
+Peter Instead of popping up elsewhere and resorting to the same old name-calling and finger-waving, how about you spend a bit of time familiarizing yourself with the ACTUAL ISSUES that are calling the CFPB into question before making yourself sound any dumber by barking up the wrong tree and insulting people when you yourself clearly have no idea what these hearings are all about. Allow me to help, as I had previously, but maybe this time you'll actually take the time to hear me out (instead of just going on and on about how dumb everyone else is, which is ironic considering how misinformed you are, let alone your poor excuse for spelling and grammar - just sayin'): NOBODY is denouncing the idea of a consumer protection agency, especially one that works well and does what it was intended to do. The issue here, which Warren conveniently sidesteps, is that the CFPB - the department in question here - is a FUCKING MESS. Seriously. In unfamiliar with the issues that have plagued it, pretty much since its inception, here's some materials to get you up to speed - and there's a lot more where this came from: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/consumers-harmed-consumer-protection-bureau-again/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/10/03/the-consumer-financial-protection-bureau-is-plagued-by-internal-problems/#3cd1cc891b30 https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-constitutional-issues-in-the-cfpb-conflict https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/ken-blackwell/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-isnt-protecting-consumers https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/court-rules-consumer-financial-protection-bureaus-structure-is-unconstitutional/503660/ ...so let's be clear: Mulvaney - now acting director of the CFPB - is not opposed to a consumer protection agency. But he is definitely opposed to the current state of the CFPB, it being yet another over-bloated, hyper-bureaucratic and wholly inefficient department that has been allowed to operate with virtually no oversight and a terrible leadership structure...all of which Mulvaney is trying to fix. So, why, then, would Elizabeth Warren be so opposed to what Mick Mulvaney is trying to do, you might ask? Well, for one, Mulvaney is part of the Trump administration (and easily one of his best cabinet picks) and we all know how much of a fan Warren is of President Trump. Which isn't to say she doesn't have good reason for not liking Trump, but let's face it, Dems have been putting party before country A LOT since Trump took office, this being yet another example of that. Just like the tax cuts that are benefitting millions of Americans despite being labeled "armageddon", and then, laughably, "crumbs" by Democrats. Quite the opposite ends of the spectrum there - which is it? End of the world...or scraps? Ridiculous. Secondly, the CFPB was formed under Obama's watch (with a lot of involvement from Warren herself) and while I'm not going to say that the intent behind it's formation was not good natured, like Obamacare, it was put together sloppily and hastily, and folks like Warren can't stand it when another piece of Obama's legacy (let alone her own handiwork) collapses, whether warranted or not (as with her to-this-day stalwart defense of Obamacare). So you be the judge. Honestly I'm just trying to focus your attention on the specifics of this issue, which your comment didn't seem to grasp. Because, like I said, NOBODY is saying that a consumer protection agency is a bad thing. But the one that we have, in the CFPB, really, really, sucks. ...and if that's the case, wouldn't you agree that a department so bereft of problems - over a relatively short period of time, no less - should be heavily scrutinized and restructured into something far more efficient? Because that is what Mulvaney is trying to do. And Warren is just pissed because he's undoing a lot of her and her old boss' handiwork, even if completely justified in doing so. Feel free to effectively counter or correct anything I just outlined if you know any of it to be wholly inaccurate and/or undeniably false. Or just circle back with a compelling argument. I'll wait...again.
Peter J. Donnelly (5 months ago)
conners how so ? mulvaney is a rat ! so you think the CFPB should be abolished ? kevin your IQ must be 50 or your a rodent also ! people of your ilke should crawl back in your rebublicant whole !
Stephan Bruno (6 months ago)
You spelled Mulvaney wrong.
Cassandra Girard (6 months ago)
Fourth weird bath land task commonly someone last celebration center successful.
The Oz (6 months ago)
Cassandra Girard - You Russian bots are drinking too much vodka before posting comments. Ease off a little(!)
Brad Raiche (6 months ago)
+Cassandra Girard Fifth strange shower swamp task usually anyone first festival middle fruitful. Make sense much?
Mark Irene (6 months ago)
Go Warren!
Old ironsides (5 months ago)
Mark Irene your comment go Warren go on to hell
blksbth1 (5 months ago)
+ChrisInAVan Just so I'm clear, with it now being well over 24 hours since my last, is it safe to assume that, when someone on the "other side" - which is to say MY side - actually DOES offer a well-articulated and compelling argument, as I have, folks on YOUR side - yourself included - can be expected to do nothing but run for cover, even in cases where they were so quick to chide others on the quality of their arguments? I ask because I keep seeing instances of that over and over and over again. Someone on the left blasts someone on the right for failing to make a good argument, and then along comes an actual good argument and all of the sudden person on the left disappears from the scene. I'd love to know why that keeps happening. Because, from I'm standing, your whole "why am I not surprised that this is all the other side can come up with?" claim is about as "pot calling the kettle black" as it gets, let alone being FAR more reflective of the best YOUR side seems capable of. It just seems SO hypocritical...unless, of course, there's something I'm missing...in which case, do tell!
Tony Stark (5 months ago)
Mark Irene lol 😂 your kidding right she is a hypothetic she just grandstanded for 3 mins she is the worst one next to kamala Harris she is brutal
blksbth1 (6 months ago)
+ChrisInAVan While not a fan of the name calling myself, apparently you missed the part about "never met a bureaucracy she did not adore", which was the true crux of Bobby's response, the CFPB being an over-bloated, massively inefficient, arguably unconstitutional MESS of a department that Mulvaney - now acting director - is trying to fix. But Warren can't stand for that sort of thing because, to Bobby's point, hyper-bureaucratic "solutions" like the CFPB are right up her alley...and it's restructure would mean yet another piece of Obama's legacy would be essentially scraped and rebuilt, and you won't see Warren let that happen without a fight, even if completely warranted. ...not to mention that she played a fairly significant role in getting it set up. Let's not forget that. In a sense she's trying to defend her own baby even though said baby has completely failed the American public and costs us more than it is worth by every conceivable measure. She's simply too close to it to be objectively critical. And if we are talking about "real arguments", look at hers. She spends more time going after Mulvaney and playing on people's emotions than countering the actually criticism being levied against the CFPB. What does that tell you? And if unfamiliar with some of the issues that have plagued the CFPB since it's inception, here's some material to get you up to speed. And believe me when I say there's a LOT more where that came from: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/consumers-harmed-consumer-protection-bureau-again/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/10/03/the-consumer-financial-protection-bureau-is-plagued-by-internal-problems/#3cd1cc891b30 https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-constitutional-issues-in-the-cfpb-conflict https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/ken-blackwell/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-isnt-protecting-consumers https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/court-rules-consumer-financial-protection-bureaus-structure-is-unconstitutional/503660/ ...so you tell me - based on all that, do you see a reason for the CFPB to continue to operate as it has? ...and how's THAT for a better example of what "the other side can come up with"?
ChrisInAVan (6 months ago)
Ignorant namecalling instead of making a real argument. Why am I not surprised that this is all the other side can come up with?
Life Adventures (6 months ago)
mick mulvaney is a low life scum bag that take candy from a baby.