Site Content

---

Please don't host any events for well him.  True to talk a familiar for the world to exclaim it's about he was former and true.   What came out of budget as true for parties.      Can the former president deny it.  Well it's not out so the climb to enforce his own history to party with use of USA tax dollars won't get true to admit it his own way:.   He has fourteen parties to dismiss as unrecognized meant to well go forward and not bring it to attention for morals isn't a key political debate about religion equality or equal to that.  How own morals weigh it in, himself, his own true words that won't be harmed by lack of media for all of the parties that shouldn't get covered ti avoid talking about it or even that one means to ovstruct any past participation is in mental health limbo for such a weight to silence and making even that one a us political figure or former one, that silent, the participation went well how many more partied?   No it's true to use the TV as if that was one key element to keeping the start hush.   The party list stemmed from 2011 which got three, 2012 got four, all the way to 2010 which to go out resembled a part The key will not be to use tax dollars for it, even extreme for parties to specify the classification as extreme will not happen for to downplay it, it meant to ignore for awhile so to downplay it's same concept 

They have celebrities from the era , not today it's previous political figures own m.o. invite four charities, including an actor, for four months of quality party.    Where didn't this debt show 

The chase and catch it wasn't a tag you're it for them, it meant to find out was for.... The future party mount.    To have permission wouldn't happen it must be true to do a show and even surprise placed value in the US federal government but presumed that going out of normal work order, didn't take tax dollars to do.   It would require value for authorized from inside own federal agency who uses tax dollars to experience travel, occured, it wasn't real work, and laid a foundation for how to control the travel debt, being to party more and avoid stating that they did that for what, it happened now it's true they partied like that.    Who they are just quit and shouldn't have employment?   Just based on tax dollars no, that's to avoid the talk.   The foundation for it, a party had two after parties it was so good, is realistic.   The surreal or extreme volume of parties next, suggest suspended from current active federal employment, for just the first party participants, to see why political figures were who host is a requirement to uphold ethical spending, quality service and that's for federal USA government true.    The impact to play for one week, can mental health off set consistency.   Party number 1 included chasing and hunting it down, procuring debt doesn't matter, it's how to play This wasn't true, to the disclosure,  wouldn't impact political involvement honesty based on the federal employees maintaining own work with the first party own history.   Bye bye to that, the USA government justice department encouraging political silence from actual acts using public funds, that's how to party, yes it occured and true, isn't but, the federal law enforcement who did it, 

C o n t  n u e d

It was more like a hole in one to cover for tv to see the genuine work break.    That's who political hosted to coincide a party, no.   It was more like 21.   Some adult content allowed.   It was porn some, but yes tax dollars true to use it, they have like 26 who eye witness to the active period of it, who are employees of USA federal government today, and won't swear by it, or hasn't as it was very old, and should not be working for the eye witness wasn't to disclose it

To under air such extreme parties, would be true, to explain it's for quiet, they were talked to about silencing the parties   It was a talk and wasn't to scuddle honesty, genuine, or even for them people, to know, traits or responsibilities of politics or even some who participated for federal law enforcement was second, to a talk to quiet any formal talking about it actually occured at all, again uses tax dollars, exchanging confidence in honesty or genuine about the USA federal government to avoid that one content for extreme party is wanted instead.   We don't carry extreme party in this house, wouldn't have asked, is fired for allocating use of party, and even follow up to say to silence it, to avoid original permission request.... Is possible,    To say it isn't, could be a result, of lack of showing to discuss, for any party using tax dollars, when it was actual true occurrence.    This might be , to question the original pact or order for the next party, another group of federal employees who might be still employees, for it was a very long time ago, would be subject to suspended for status, for the criminal aspects of effort to cover up, not getting questioned as if that task, could cost, and bear any benefit to personal nature as some parties may.

Sue that one political figure for that on the public for a plot came out of party number five, a little later for the first few parties.   The plot was to have political figures use the federal funded parties celebrity invites, for private campaign promotion, no that wasnt the result to review, this is very old, move forward and don't look back took approach from political figures.   The plot was not unearthed in party number five it took party 8-10 some to have political figures get sued by using them celebrities to, it wasn't a rap battle for it, truly not, and get followed up with political figures who make the party ok, and even can be who is in control for the actual scheme or plot was to get them sued, they were getting political leads true participation 

To sway for learning this still wasn't party number 8 a house party went well it's to do go inside that one a civilians own home just to play practice for that a political rival to conjoin.    The home owner thought the teenager had that party?   It's hard to believe polititions might not swear that they had ever before done such a 

The tv wouldn't show it, it meant to deny, isn't even to concern, for the actual silence of it occured effort was extreme but tax dollars are It that so it's not for everyone true to know    It created pressure for political figures to be honest no way.   The tax dollars invested wouldn't outplay the actual civilian household where the actual home owner wasn't alert in advance for such a part to host it in their home, whose debt just for that one party, well went to the denial effort, as parties some can cost