For more than a year, Donald Trump’s Republican-majority, rubber-stamp Congress has threatened to ban the TikTok app in the United States unless its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, sold its U.S. operations to American investors.

And since that law was passed in April 2024, Trump has granted extensions each time the deadline neared without a sale having been finalized. Because that’s what he does when he doesn’t get his way: he refuses to give up on what he wants. And what he wants in this case is not to ban TikTok’s U.S. operation, but to own it.

His justification for these actions is a not-irrational concern that Beijing might access the personal data of the app’s 170 million American users. And if anyone is going to have access to that information, it’s going to be Donald Trump, not Xi Jinping.

So, when Trump said in a Fox News interview yesterday that he had spoken to Xi earlier in the week and that they were making good progress on a deal, it was not big news. But when he revealed the names of the probable investors involved, there were a couple of major surprises.

He told Fox’s The Sunday Briefing that “they’re very well-known people” who would be able to raise a “tremendous amount” of money. Then he named Oracle head Larry Ellison — currently the world’s richest or second-richest man, depending on how his and Elon Musk’s respective fortunes are doing at any given moment. And there was also Michael Dell, CEO of Dell Technologies (whose net worth is estimated at a meager $140 billion). [Ben Hatton, BBC, September 21, 2025.]

So yes, they certainly could be expected to raise a significant amount of money.

But the surprise came when Trump added:

“I hate to tell you this, but a man named Lachlan is involved. Do you know who Lachlan is? And Rupert is probably going to be in the group.” [Id.]

So, do you know who Lachlan and Rupert are? I do. They’re the Murdochs — son and father, respectively — who collectively own Fox Corp. and News Corp.: a media empire that includes, in addition to the Fox conglomerate, the likes of The Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, The Times (UK), HarperCollins Publishing, and Dow Jones & Company digital media.

And now — despite the fact that Trump is suing The Wall Street Journal over articles published about the Jeffrey Epstein scandal that shine an unflattering light on Trump’s past association with Epstein — the Murdochs’ Fox Corp. might add to their holdings a part ownership in TikTok.

All of these potential investors are, of course, right-wing Republicans and close associates of Donald Trump. So, while neither Trump nor (presumably) any member of his family would actually be involved in the deal, consummation of the transaction would be one more giant step along Trump’s march toward control of the country’s media.

And what does the Chinese side have to say about it? According to official state news agency Xinhua, President Xi has said that Beijing “welcomes negotiations.” And the Chinese Commerce Ministry issued the following statement:

“China’s position on TikTok is clear: The Chinese government respects the wishes of the enterprise, and welcomes it to carry out commercial negotiations in accordance with market rules to reach a solution compliant with China’s laws and regulations, and strikes a balance of interests.” [Id.]

In other words, all of the recent talks between Trump and Xi seem to have led to some sort of tit-for-tat arrangement. It’s not yet known what may have been promised to China; but it is apparent that TikTok — or at least its U.S. operation — is about to be passed from one repressive master to another.

And once again, the billionaires win, while the American public loses.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
9/22/25

How did that happen? I thought I’d left those days in my rear-view mirror long ago.

But generations breed new generations, and now there’s another one in the family. This beautiful little girl is Anneliese, a ten-month-old bundle of crawling, snooping, poking, prodding, red-headed curiosity . . . who has decided she hates me.

She lives at the other end of the state and hasn’t seen me in several months, so she doesn’t remember me. And for some reason, she finds me scary. But her mom says she’s shy of all strangers, so I’m trying not to take it personally when she stares at me for a full five minutes, then screws up her little face and wails like a banshee.

In my younger days, I sometimes elicited that kind of reaction from the men I dated; but for the most part, babies and animals have always loved me. Her mom tells me Anneliese is wary of all strangers, though; so again, I’m not going to take offense.

However, my patience is finite, so I’m putting her on notice:

“You’re here for the next four days, kid . . . and that’s exactly how much time you have to get used to me. Don’t make me have to report you to Santa.”

“Hmm . . . naughty or nice?”

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
9/22/25

At least they haven’t changed in China for the past 76 years. On this date, September 21st, Mao Zedong announced at the opening of the 1949 Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference in Peking (now Beijing) that the new Chinese government would thereafter be “under the leadership of the Communist Party of China.” [“This Day In History,” History.com, September 21, 2025.]

Since the 1920s, Mao and his communist supporters had been fighting to wrest control from what he called the corrupt and decadent Nationalist Chinese government. Despite U.S. support for the Nationalists, Mao’s forces finally claimed victory in 1949, and the Nationalist government was driven out of China onto the island of Taiwan.

Yes, that is the same Taiwan that today’s Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, claims is the rightful property of his country and threatens to take by force. So, other than 76 years of technological and economic advancement, not much else has changed in China.

Amidst much flag-waving and cannon-firing, Mao vowed on that autumn day in 1949 to establish a constitutional and governmental framework to protect the so-called “people’s revolution,” announcing:

“Our state system of the People’s Democratic Dictatorship is a powerful weapon for safeguarding the fruits of victory of the people’s revolution and for opposing plots of foreign and domestic enemies to stage a comeback. We must firmly grasp this weapon. The era in which the Chinese were regarded as uncivilized is now over. We will emerge in the world as a highly civilized nation.” [Id.]

He labeled those who opposed the communist government as “imperialistic and domestic reactionaries,” and said that in the future, China would foster the friendship of “the Soviet Union and the new democratic countries.” [Id.]

For China, this is old news, ancient history. What is disturbing, however, is the echo of his words that we are hearing today — three-quarters of a century later — right here in the United States: “plots of foreign and domestic enemies” . . . “imperialistic and domestic reactionaries” . . . “We will emerge in the world as a highly civilized nation.”

In 1949, it was Mao “making China great again.” And we all know how that has turned out.

*. *. *

“Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.”

How many times have we heard that? Truisms become truisms, not simply because they are repeated, but because they prove themselves over time to be true.

We cannot afford to forget today’s history lesson; we are already seeing it repeated . . . but on this side of the Pacific.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
9/21/25

And with it go the hopes of thousands, perhaps millions, of aspiring refugees seeking what was once the American dream for themselves and their children. Because that dream has also vanished.

A portion of Emma Lazarus’ sonnet, “The New Colossus,” is inscribed on a bronze plaque on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty:

Perhaps it should be replaced with a new plaque reading:

“Give me your White, your straight,
Your wealthy masses who can pay the fee.”

Because now — in addition to his mad frenzy of deporting, not only the “worst of the worst” as he describes them, but also the best of the best if they happen to be Hispanic, Latino, Middle Eastern, African, Asian, or Mediterranean — Donald Trump has signed an executive order mandating that even educated, highly-skilled foreign workers who manage to meet his racist standards will only be applicable for H-1B work visas upon payment of a $100,000 annual fee by their prospective employers.

According to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, the fee would only apply to new requests, but the companies would be obligated to pay the same amount for each applicant annually for six years. In his words:

“The company needs to decide … is the person valuable enough to have a $100,000-a-year payment to the government, or they should head home, and they should go hire an American. All of the big companies are on board.” [Bernd Debusmann, Jr. and Danielle Kaye, BBC, September 20, 2025.]

However, White House Press Secretary What’s-Her-Name issued a correction on social media, stating that the $100,000 fee would actually be a one-time payment. Apparently, as the order was signed over the weekend and goes into effect immediately (today), Secretary Lutnick hasn’t had time to familiarize himself with a program for which he is responsible.

Another fine example of our tax dollars at work.

In a separate order, Trump also established a new “gold card” to fast-track visas for certain wealthy immigrants in exchange for fees beginning at the low, low cost of One Million Dollars. That’s $1,000,000 — with six zeros — to be paid by the individual, or $2,000,000 if sponsored by a corporation.

All right, so a one-time fee sounds a bit better. But it still prices out of the market those smaller enterprises that now rely on foreign workers to fill jobs for which there is a shortage of American applicants. Even the biggest corporations, like Amazon, Microsoft, Meta, Apple and Google — for whom $100,000 doesn’t seem like a steep price — would be seriously impacted because of the large numbers of H-1B workers they employ. And, contrary to Lutnick’s allegation that “all of the big companies are on board,” they’re not necessarily happy about it.

Attorney Tahmina Watson of Watson Immigration Law told the BBC that this ruling might be a “nail in the coffin” for many of her small-business and start-up clients:

“Almost everyone’s going to be priced out. This $100,000 as an entry point is going to have a devastating impact,” . . . as many small or medium-sized companies . . . “will tell you they actually can’t find workers to do the job. When employers sponsor foreign talent, more often than not, they’re doing that because they have not been able to fulfil [sic] those positions.” [Id.]

Trump claims that his goal is to open up more job opportunities for U.S. citizens. But if those citizens are not applying for the positions now — likely because they lack the specific requisite education and skills — what makes him think they’re going to be qualified to apply for them later? Does he have some sort of massive, government-financed training program in mind? And how long would it take to train someone like . . . oh, say, me . . . to develop AI technology, or design next year’s Tesla, or perform surgery?

Trump should ask himself where the U.S. space program would have been without Wernher von Braun. Or the study of modern physics without Albert Einstein. Is he convinced the next Einstein or von Braun is hiding somewhere in a small midwestern town just waiting for a job opening? Or does he plan to re-educate his Proud Boys and other MAGA followers?

Does he really believe that people can simply be retrofitted to serve any need? Perhaps he’d like to try his own hand at quantum mechanics. I’d pay to see that.

The largest beneficiaries of H-1B visas last year were India and China, accounting for 71% and 11.7%, respectively, of total approved applications. Nasscom — India’s leading non-governmental trade association and advocacy group — has said that it is concerned by the order, and that the one-day deadline creates “considerable uncertainty for businesses, professionals, and students across the world.” [Id.]

Even the world’s richest man — former Trump BFF Elon Musk — has long supported the existing H-1B visa program, arguing that it allows the United States to attract top talent from around the world (much like himself, in fact). Perhaps Trump isn’t aware that those visas are issued to well-educated, highly-skilled scientists, engineers, medical practitioners and the like, who have firm job offers in place before coming to the U.S. Maybe he’s thinking in terms of laborers, food service workers, and nannies . . . who, by the way, are every bit as essential to our economy and our society as any Einstein or Musk.

And he obviously hasn’t thought far enough ahead to envision the effect his brainstorm will have on the country as a whole. As Jorge Lopez, chairman of the immigration and global mobility practice group at Littler Mendelson PC, said:

“[A $100,000 fee] will put the brakes on American competitiveness in the tech sector and all industries.” [Id.]

This whole idea has clearly not been well thought out by the stable genius in the White House — that is, unless it is actually his intention to turn the United States into a third-world country.

In which case, he’s doing a great job.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
9/21/25

Well-known French cyclist and filmmaker Sofiane Sehili has been arrested and placed in pretrial detention in Russia’s Far East as he was nearing the end of his 13,000-km. bicycle tour through Eurasia, from Lisbon to Vladivostok, aiming for the world speed record.

Sehili is awaiting a hearing on charges of illegally crossing the Russian border from China — an infraction that is punishable by a fine of up to $2,400 (200,000 rubles), up to two years of compulsory labor, or up to two years in prison.

Vladimir Naidin, an official of the Primorsky region’s prison monitoring organization, told the French AFP news agency that Sehili did have a Russian e-visa, but that he had “tried to cross the border on foot at a checkpoint only accessible for Russian and Chinese citizens.” [RFE/RL, September 19, 2025.]

“Then he went to another crossing, where it is forbidden to cross on a bike, you need to go on train or bus,” Naidin said. He added that Sehili is in good health, but is having difficulty communicating with the detention center’s officials due to the language barrier. [Id.]

Sehili’s route had taken him into Russia earlier, when he crossed the border from Georgia. He then left Russia in the Astrakhan region, traveling through Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Mongolia and China before attempting to re-enter Russia on the last 400-km. stretch of his journey.

But, despite holding a legal visa, he was stymied by the conflicting regulations at different border crossings and arrested, rather than being redirected to a viable entry point . . . making him the newest addition to Vladimir Putin’s collection of human collateral.

*. *. *

And — as the U.S. Congress works on the passage of a bipartisan bill that would declare Russia to be a state sponsor of terrorism due to the forced removal and “rehoming” of some 19,500 Ukrainian children since the start of its “special military operation” in February 2022 — I have added those unnamed young people to the list of known hostages.

They have been stolen from their homes and their families. taken to a strange country, and are being “educated” — i.e., brainwashed — to become obedient Russian citizens and future military conscripts. Because of their ages, they are the most vulnerable of all of Putin’s political prisoners, and must not be allowed to remain in his grip any longer.

*. *. *

And, yet again, here is the list of political hostages I know of:

Immigrant Detainees in Russia:

Migrants from the Central Asian nations of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan

Prisoners of War:

The 19,500 Kidnapped Ukrainian Children
The People of Ukraine
The Azov 12

Endangered Exiles:

Mikita Losik
Yulia Navalnaya
Countless Journalists and Other Dissidents

Political Prisoners:

In Azerbaijan:

The “Azerbaijan 7”:
— Farid Mehralizada
— Ulvi Hasanli
— Sevinj Abbasova (Vagifqiai)
— Mahammad Kekalov
— Hafiz Babali
— Nargiz Absalamova
— Elnara Gasimova

In Belarus:

Ales Bialiatski
Andrei Chapiuk
Marya Kalesnikava
Uladzimir Labkovich
Marfa Rabkova
Valiantsin Stafanovic
Yuras Zyankovich

In China:

Chenyue Mao (American)

In Russia:

David Barnes (American)
Gordon Black (American)
Antonina Favorskaya
Konstantin Gabov
Robert Gilman (American)
Stephen James Hubbard (American)
Sergey Karelin
Timur Kishukov
Vadim Kobzev
Darya Kozyreva
Artyom Kriger
Michael Travis Leake (American)
Aleksei Liptser
Grigory Melkonyants
Nika Novak
Nadezhda Rossinskaya (a.k.a. Nadin Geisler)
Sofiane Sehili (French)
Igor Sergunin
Dmitry Shatresov
Robert Shonov
Grigory Skvortsov
Eugene Spector (American)
Laurent Vinatier
Robert Romanov Woodland (American)

*. *. *

And for the 89th time, here’s wishing each and every one of you a safe — and early — return home.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
9/21/25

It doesn’t change a thing; but it does reinforce what we already know about Vladimir Putin, which is that he is a tyrant, a mass murderer, and a war criminal.

So what is different? Simply that the Russian State Duma has now passed a formal bill withdrawing from the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture — a treaty of the Council of Europe that is an international commitment to maintain human rights.

Not that the Convention, to which Russia has been a signatory since 1997, has meant anything to Putin in any case. Complaints of torture and maltreatment in Russian police stations, detention centers and prisons are legion, and have only increased since the passage of more onerous and restrictive laws following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

Yevgeny Smirnov, a lawyer with human rights group Department One, said in August:

“In practice, tearing up this agreement will have no consequences. Russia has already stopped implementing anything connected with [the convention] … in fact, no conventions that Russia has signed in previous decades are actually working.” [RFE/RL, September 18, 2025.]

In February 1996, Russia joined the Council of Europe, but was blocked from participation in Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment following Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Initially suspended, Russia was later expelled from the Council . . . although the Kremlin claimed they were withdrawing of their own volition. No surprise there.

Ukrainian prisoners of war who have been released in exchanges have also told terrifying stories of torture while in captivity in Russia. Smirnov said that:

“They have none of the guaranteed rights which Russian law (formally) provides for. They are not allowed to see human rights activists, observer missions, lawyers, or relatives. The convention wasn’t being observed and will continue to not be observed for these people.” [Id.]

So it’s business as usual for Putin . . . a clear sign that he has every intention of continuing to pursue his goal of re-creating the repressive, totalitarian society that he misses so much, as he so bluntly announced to the Federal Assembly in 2005 when he described the breakup of the Soviet Union as “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.”

It doesn’t get much clearer than that.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
9//20/25

It isn’t often that I find a reason to praise either house of the United States Congress these days. But it appears that the Senate is presently on the right track with a bill — a bipartisan bill, no less — that involves a matter near and dear to my heart: a swift return of the kidnapped children of Ukraine.

Senators Richard Blumenthal (Democrat, Connecticut) and Lindsey Graham (Republican, South Carolina) are advancing a bill to label Russia a state sponsor of terrorism due to the forced removal and “rehoming” in Russia of an estimated 19,500 Ukrainian children since the start of the war in 2022.

Only four countries — Iran, North Korea, Syria and Cuba — currently bear the designation of state sponsors of terrorism. This is the second time Congress has proposed adding Russia to the list since its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, and is prompted by U.S. lawmakers’ growing frustration with Vladimir Putin’s stalled peace negotiations and the increased number and ferocity of his military’s attacks on Ukraine.

The new bill — titled “Designating the Russian Federation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism Act” — would, if adopted, require that the U.S. Secretary of State submit a report to Congress within 60 days, certifying that children “who were kidnapped, deported, or forcibly removed from Ukrainian territory,” including Russian-occupied areas, had been safely reunited with their families or guardians and that their full reintegration into Ukrainian society was underway. [Todd Prince, RFE/RL, September 19, 2025.]

I can’t think of an issue more compelling than the lives of nearly 20,000 children. But even if the bill passes smoothly through Congress, will it be approved by the White House?

Adoption of the bill would make it “very difficult for [anyone] to do any above-board business with Russia,” Senator Graham said. It would also make it more difficult for the U.S. to lift or ease sanctions already imposed on Russia — something Donald Trump has said he would want to do if a peace agreement were reached. [Id.]

So in a sense, those innocent children are not only being held hostage by Vladimir Putin; they may also become collateral in Trump’s efforts to negotiate lucrative trade deals with Putin while still appearing to the world to be holding his adversary’s feet to the fire in relation to Ukraine.

It’s quite a balancing act. And in the meantime, those vulnerable children are being indoctrinated into Russian life, and prepared for Russian military service. If we wait too long, we may be too late.

So please keep fighting, Senators. Do something you can be proud of.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
9/20/25

The Russian Foreign Ministry denies that their military intentionally deployed drones into Poland and Romania during the last two weeks. Of course, they do.

As of this writing, there has been no comment from Moscow regarding the three MIG-31 fighter jets that were rapidly intercepted by NATO defense units this morning over Estonia. Will the Kremlin remain silent, or will they conjure up some lame excuse for this event as well? We shall see.

But denials and silence cannot mask a clear pattern emerging from these blatantly aggressive and increasingly frequent actions on Russia’s part. First aiming directly west into Poland, then southwest to Romania, and now northwest to Estonia, Vladimir Putin has been testing — without causing any actual casualties — NATO’s defensive capabilities and willingness to defend its member states as well as allied non-member Ukraine.

Is Putin actually hoping to incite NATO into firing a first shot, thus precipitating a “defensive” response from Russia? Let’s hope not . . . although where Putin is concerned, one can never be 100% certain. More likely, though, he is using the fear factor to induce NATO’s members to retreat from their active defense of Ukraine, and to accede to more of Moscow’s demands for a settlement of its “special military operation” in the country they baselessly claim as theirs.

And keep an eye on the Suwalki Gap — that strategic little strip of land marking the border between Poland and Lithuania, which also happens to be the only direct route between Russia’s puppet state of Belarus and the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad. (See my post of 9/15/25: “The Suwalki Gap: The Most Important Strip of Land You Probably Never Heard Of .”)

Formerly part of German East Prussia and known then as Koenigsberg, it was annexed by the Soviet Union following World War II and is now a vital military outpost containing nuclear-capable missiles and hosting Russia’s Baltic Fleet. Its importance to Russia cannot be understated.

*. *. *

The incursion into Estonian airspace lasted for 12 minutes. Estonia’s Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna said:

“Russia has already violated Estonia’s airspace four times this year, which in itself is unacceptable. But today’s incursion, involving three fighter aircraft entering our airspace, is unprecedentedly brazen.” [Ray Furlong and Rikard Jozwiak, RFE/RL, September 19, 2025.]

Just hours earlier, the EC had proposed a 19th package of potentially crippling sanctions on Moscow over its war in Ukraine. Referring to the drone attacks on Poland and Romania, EC President Ursula von der Leyen had this to say:

“Again and again, President Putin has escalated, and in response, Europe is increasing its pressure.” [Id.]

Donald Trump has been pressuring the EU to increase its punitive actions against Russia as a condition to his own escalation of sanctions. Those increased actions on the part of the European allies are in the works; now let’s see what Trump has to offer.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
9/19/25

Earlier this week, Donald Trump announced — on his ironically-named Truth Social platform — that he was designating “Antifa” as a terrorist organization. Once again, either he’s been hallucinating, or he hasn’t done his homework.

You see, the problem is that there is no such organization. “Antifa” is a made-up, cobbled-together, abbreviated word used to describe anyone who is against fascism, or anti-fascist. It’s not a structured group; it has no officers or members or bylaws. Being called “Antifa” is akin to being called “freedom-loving,” or “humanitarian.”

And since Trump himself vehemently denies that he supports fascism — and in fact has hurled that very same epithet at his liberal opponents — is he not then, by definition, “Antifa”? And shouldn’t he be proud of that?

Or does it make him — by his own description — a member of a terrorist organization? He can’t have it both ways. He’s either fascist or anti-fascist; he has to choose.

And until he understands that there’s no “sick, dangerous, radical left disaster . . . major terrorist organization” named Antifa for him to prosecute [Donald Judd, Kevin Liptak, Alayna Treene, CNN, September 17, 2025], there are some real gangs of sickos out there that would more appropriately fit the designation of “terrorists” — like those so-called “Proud Boys” who tried to overthrow our government on January 6, 2021 — that he could set his sights on.

Oh, no . . . wait. They’ve already been tried, convicted, and sentenced by our federal courts. And pardoned. By Trump.

Oops!

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
9/19/25

You may be wondering, “Who on earth is Jerry Greenfield?” But you do know of him — he’s the Jerry in Ben & Jerry’s. Or he was, until he told their parent company, British multinational consumer goods giant Unilever, to go to hell.

Actually, Jerry was much more gentlemanly than that. He simply resigned after nearly half a century with B&J’s, because Unilever had decided to put a stop to the ice cream makers’ well-known social activism.

This was despite an agreement made with Unilever at the time of the two companies’ merger some 25 years ago, which protected B&J’s well-known social mission. They had long been known for their advocacy of numerous social and political justice issues, such as climate change and LGBTQ+ rights.

In a letter shared on social media by Greenfield and co-founder Ben Cohen, Jerry said that leaving the company was “one of the hardest and most painful decisions” he had ever made, but that he could no longer “in good conscience” work for the business now that it had been “silenced” by Unilever. [Peter Hoskins, BBC, September 17, 2025.]

Ben said that “Jerry has a really big heart and this conflict with Unilever was breaking it. My heart leads me to continue to work inside the company to advocate for its independence so that it can actualise the social mission, the values that it was founded on and has maintained for over 40 years.” [Id.]

And Ben added that Unilever “has not been abiding by the terms of the acquisition agreement [and that] they’ve essentially been usurping the power of the independent board of directors which has legal authority over the social mission of the company, and now Magnum* is proceeding in the same fashion. They’ve also been muzzling the company.” [Id.]

* Magnum Ice Cream Company is a spin-off from Unilever, and is taking some of its brands — including Ben & Jerry’s — with it.

A spokesperson for Magnum said:

“We disagree with his [Jerry’s] perspective and have sought to engage both co-founders in a constructive conversation on how to strengthen Ben & Jerry’s powerful values-based position in the world.” [Id.]

In other words, they’ve tried to persuade both Ben and Jerry to change their lifelong core principles to fit Magnum’s.

But Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, each in their own way, aren’t giving in. While Jerry has chosen to leave in protest, Ben is determined to keep up the effort from the inside.

Two strong, principled men being sidelined by the rapidly-spreading scourge of censorship. And I wish them the best of luck.

In the meantime, I’ll miss buying their Cherry Garcia. Consider it my little contribution to their protest.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
9/18/25