The second session of the 34th Alaska Legislature concluded on Wednesday (5/20/2026) night. In addition to passing the operating and capital budgets, the Legislature passed a flurry of bills on the last day of session. The next day the second special session of the 34th Alaska Legislature gaveled in. Governor Mike Dunleavy (R – Alaska) called the special session after he and the Legislature failed to reach a deal on a gasline bill. The June 1 filing deadline is just eight days away. Many candidates for governor have still not chosen a running mate and many legislative races are still open. And Governor Dunleavy was joined by Interior Secretary Doug Burgum at his Alaska Sustainable Energy Conference in Anchorage.
I hope everyone is enjoying the holiday weekend. It was an extremely long week in Juneau with the end of session. I came down with a bad cold on the last day of session and have been laying down and taking it easy since. I was supposed to fly back to Anchorage on Friday night but was too sick. I am finally starting to feel better. I am flying back to Anchorage tomorrow night.
A friendly message and reminder to all our readers. The Landmine is made possible by myself and a team of awesome Alaskans. I have been covering the legislative session in Juneau for the last seven years and just finished my eighth session. We will be covering all the 2026 Alaska elections in-depth. If you enjoy the content we provide, please consider making a one time or recurring monthly donation. You can click here to donate. We have a system that makes it super easy. We would really appreciate it. And thanks to everyone who has been supportive.
Check out the eighth episode of Governor Peninsula! In this episode, we take a glimpse into the home lives of some of the Den members. And make sure to tell us what you think.
Legislature passes operating and capital budgets, vetoes looming
The following is an excerpt from this week’s edition of the Alaska Political Report. You can click here for more information about the Political Report. A subscription is $1,299/year per organization. Discounted pricing is available for non-profits and government entities. Our coverage of the budget starts with the governor’s proposed budget, and we track everything in detail through the entire process. If you have any questions or would like to subscribe, please email jeff@akpoliticalreport.com.
Yesterday evening, the Legislature completed it’s work for the 2026 regular legislative session. They adopted the conference committee report on the operating budget and the Senate concurred with the changes made by the House to the capital budget. The budget passed by the Legislature reduces overall spending by $910 million Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) and eliminates the $1.1 billion deficit in Gov. Dunleavy’s proposed budget.
The Legislature made significant use of FY2026 surplus to fund education and Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) payments in FY2027. They reduced the Governor’s large, $3,700 PFD, to $1,200 per person. This saved $1.5 billion UGF and allowed them to make investments in school maintenance, state infrastructure, vocational training, and community assistance. For more detail see our in depth reporting on the conference committee and capital budgets from the past two editions.
Next Steps
Once the budget is transmitted to the Governor, he will either have either 15 or 20 days days, less Sundays, to make his veto determinations. (The Alaska Constitution gives the governor 15 days, less Sundays, to act on a bill when it is transmitted during session and 20 days, less Sundays, to act on a bill when a bill is transmitted not during session.) It can take up to a few weeks to transmit the enrolled copy of the budget to the Governor. Part of that delay comes from the need to have legal review followed by ‘wet’ signatures from the presiding officer of each body.
Given that the Legislature is now in special session, that process may move faster. If they expedite transmittal and send the budget bills to Dunleavy while they are still in special session, the 15 day rule would apply. Doing so would force Dunleavy to act on the budget while the Legislature is still in session reviewing his priority gasline legislation. Depending on the transmittal date, it could allow them to take up veto overrides during the special session. Note that an appropriation veto override requires a three-fourths vote, or 45 votes, a difficult bar to reach. The budget must go into effect by July 1, the start of the fiscal year, to avoid a government shutdown.
Generally, veto review is limited to items added by the Legislature over the Governor’s proposal. This year the Legislature made significant additions in areas that have frequently been vetoed by Dunleavy in the past. Expenditures like K-12 funding, school maintenance, and assistance to communities are likely to be scrutinized during the veto review process. If, or how, the Governor attempts to leverage these decisions against his gasline legislation remains to be seen.
We are tracking things closely and will have updates as they we learn them.
Other Happenings
After the Legislature and Dunleavy failed to reach an agreement on the gasline bill and pension bill, Dunleavy vetoed the pension bill (House Bill 78) on Monday (5/18/2026) night. The next day the Legislature failed to override the veto by seven votes. Dunleavy then issued a proclamation for a 30-day special session starting on May 21. The House and Senate both adjourned sine die from the regular session on Wednesday (5/20/2026) night.
The House and Senate both gaveled in for the special session on Thursday (5/21/2026) morning. Both bodies passed resolutions exempting themselves from having to meet every three days. They both gaveled out to June 4. Both finance committees will continue their work on the gasline bill during the special session. The House Finance Committee held a hearing on Thursday in Juneau. They are scheduled to hold a hearing at the Anchorage LIO on Tuesday (5/26/2026). The Senate Finance Committee is scheduled to start holding hearings on Wednesday (5/27/2026) in Juneau. If a deal is reached, members will need to return for a few days so both bodies can pass a bill.
Several bills were passed on Wednesday before the House and Senate adjourned sine die. Two bills of note are House Bill 280 and House Bill 16. HB 280, a House Rules Committee bill, is the digital tax bill. This is similar to a bill Dunleavy vetoed last September. HB 16, a bill from Representative Calvin Schrage (I – Anchorage), imposes campaign contribution limits. The Senate version made the effective date after this election cycle. But the House failed to get the 27 votes needed for the effective date, meaning the bill would go into effect in 90 days – during the current election cycle. Dunleavy is likely to veto both of these bills. Neither bill has been transmitted yet.
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum was in Alaska this week. He was pushing the gasline hard at the Alaska Sustainable Energy Conference.
Damn. @SecretaryBurgum lighting up the #akleg for what happened last night with the gasline debacle. @GovDunleavy is standing beside him. Burgum, a former governor, should come to Juneau and work with the Legislature. Maybe he can make a deal! pic.twitter.com/yYymogqm4e
— The Alaska Landmine (@alaskalandmine) May 20, 2026
Several people reached out about the sheer number of bizarre bills that were passed at the end of session. One Landmine reader suggested a “Nobody Asked for this Bill” award after seeing these kind of bills passed in the waning days of session: naming the giant cabbage the state vegetable, a bill about classic cars, a bill about betting on when it snows, a resolution making May myositis awareness month, just to name a few. There should be a rule setting a date for unimportant bills to be passed, say by April 30. If not, the bill is dead. And there should be a rule if a bill has not passed the originating body by a certain date, it’s dead. And there should also be a rule not allowing stuffing bills into other bills at the end of session, especially ones that have had few public hearings.
It will be interesting to see what happens with the omnibus crime bill that passed the Legislature, especially after this spicy letter from Representative Sarah Vance (R – Homer) to Governor Dunleavy!
OMG. The Landmine just obtained this strongly worded letter Rep. Vance sent to @GovDunleavy about the crime bill and the Alaska Public Media story earlier. She really blows up Dunleavy’s legislative director Jordan Shilling. She urges Dunleavy not to veto the bill. #akleg https://t.co/4IfCMXsn3a pic.twitter.com/Fbux4ulI7D
— The Alaska Landmine (@alaskalandmine) May 21, 2026
Representative Kevin McCabe’s (R – Big Lake) just got interesting with Republican Doug Massie entering.
Wow. It looks like Doug Massie decided to run against Rep. Kevin McCabe (R). He filed a letter of intent last June but would not say if he was running for the House or Senate. #akleg pic.twitter.com/j4ZFTcnvlN
— The Alaska Landmine (@alaskalandmine) May 25, 2026
Representative DeLena Johnson (R – Palmer) picked up a running mate, Republican Michael Bowles. He serves on the Mat-Su Borough Assembly.
Republican Michael Bowles filed to run against Rep. DeLena Johnson (R). He is a member of the Mat-Su Borough Assembly. #akleg pic.twitter.com/DGwPqdhIeN
— The Alaska Landmine (@alaskalandmine) May 22, 2026
Please tell me her given name is not MyGina. I can’t wait to see how Representative Jeremy Bynum (R – Alaska) reacts when they say her name at a debate or forum.
Democrat MyGina McAboy (Yes, we looked her up in the voter database and that is a real first name) filed to run against Rep. Jeremy Bynum (R). #akleg pic.twitter.com/yxEbAsDa1i
— The Alaska Landmine (@alaskalandmine) May 25, 2026
There is a lot of of chatter that Democrat Tom Begich’s running mate may be Democrat Julia Hnilicka. She unsuccessfully ran for the House in 2020 against Representative Mike Cronk (R – Tok) and served as state director for USDA when Joe Biden was president. He is making the announcement on Thursday (5/28/2026) in Anchorage. I was really hoping it would be Senator Cathy Giessel (R – Anchorage)! But she made it clear to me it’s not her when I asked her in the Capitol this week. Oh, and what a weird graphic. It shows a woman racing a man who is missing a foot.
Democrat Tom Begich says he’s announcing his running mate on May 28 in Anchorage. #akleg pic.twitter.com/z4z0eTYacd
— The Alaska Landmine (@alaskalandmine) May 22, 2026
This Week’s Loose Unit
This week’s designee is a multi-way tie. This week’s Loose Unit is all the gubernational candidates who have yet to name a running mate. I know several people who have been asked by various candidates and said no. The deadline is on June 1, just eight days away. If any of the candidates fail to find a running mate, they are disqualified. That would be super loose. What is likely to happen is several of them, including the worst of the worst like Crooked Adam Crum, are going to end up with a nobody or whack job. Because anyone with an ounce of sense would not be Crooked’s running mate, or many of the others.
Here is a list of the candidates actively campaigning who have yet to name a running mate:
- Lieutenant Governor Nancy Dahlstrom (R – Alaska)
- Senator Matt Claman (D – Anchorage)
- Democrat Tom Begich (says he will announce on May 28)
- Republican Treg Taylor
- Democrat Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
- Republican Matt Heilala
- Republican Crooked Adam Crum
- Republican Edna DeVries, Mat-Su Borough mayor
My bet is some of them drop out or combine tickets because they can’t find a running mate. Maximum loose.
If you have a nomination for this week’s Loose Unit, or if you have any political news, stories or gossip (or any old pics of politicians or public officials) please email me at jeff@alaskalandmine.com.
Free food from El Senor Moose ?
I am so there !
“………..The budget passed by the Legislature reduces overall spending by $910 million Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) and eliminates the $1.1 billion deficit in Gov. Dunleavy’s proposed budget. The Legislature made significant use of FY2026 surplus to fund education and Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) payments in FY2027. They reduced the Governor’s large, $3,700 PFD, to $1,200 per person. This saved $1.5 billion UGF and allowed them to make investments in school maintenance, state infrastructure, vocational training, and community assistance……….” I’m impressed that the Legislature was able to pass such a budget during the regular session with all the PFD pressure alone, not to… Read more »
Ripping over 67% of the statutory formula PFD away from eligible Alaskans still equates to the most regressive state tax in the nation. Ignoring a problem doesn’t solve it.
“Regressive”. Interesting word. Let’s review its definition:
“………Regressive means returning to an earlier, less advanced state or moving backward…….”
Do you agree or disagree, and is that truly what you meant?
Tell us you have a mail-order degree without saying the words.
One doesn’t need a degree to read a dictionary.
Say some words that mean something.
By ignoring the issue while spending more money than they would otherwise have, the Legislator shows that it clearly does not know how to deal with the BS of their own making. If they actually did their job and addressed the issue they wouldn’t have to deal with it every year. Unless and until the Legislature actually deals with the problem that Walker created and they continue to abuse, spending will continue to be higher than it should and the results will remain the same.
“……… If they actually did their job and addressed the issue they wouldn’t have to deal with it every year………”
If the state was to pay a statutory PFD, which would amount to $3892 instead of $1000, they’d have to find another $2.5 billion dollars, they’d have to cut that amount from the budget, or they’d have to go into debt.
Please explain how you would do that, Steve. Give me some detail, please.
Steve, just for an illustration: The largest single expenditure in the 2025 operating budget is Medicaid. It amounts to $2.5 billion, which is precisely what you need to pay the rest of a “statutory” PFD. See here: https://gov.alaska.gov/fy25-proposed-budget/ So you’d have to cut Medicaid completely to pay the remaining “statutory” amount above and beyond what the state is now going to pay $1000). The problem with that is that the feds pays 75% to 78% of that cost, so cutting it doesn’t pay for more PFD. Each dollar you cut means you only cut $0.22-$0.25. And imagine the outrage. The… Read more »
How fantastic, you responded tou yourself here and in so doing displayed my exact point that I was responding to you about. Well done Reg, well done indeed!
Thank you, Steve. Facts. Use them, or die.
Reggie, As you know the Legislature currently takes the money that is already assigned a statutory line item, since they chose to ignore the law and spend it elsewhere I’d suggest they look what they are spending that money on. I’ve always enjoyed the give a detail remark by those who find government spending to be sacrosanct because there is no correct answer for those kinds of people…just spend more all the time and never question spending. Want more detail, go back to before Walker and the Legislature started their misappropriation of funds and see where we are at. More… Read more »
“………How about a 20% across the board cut, not enough detail for you, how about 20.014%……..” Alaska’s total FY 2025 expenditures were $15.8 billion (again, including federal kick-in funds). If you’re going to go with a simple “across the board” cut, 20.014% would be too large to produce the $2.5 billion for your desired PFD. You’d only need a 15.8% “across the board” cut. Peanuts when considering how desperately you need your dividend. Thanks for demonstrating that you really don’t have a handle on the math. Ten figure numbers is a lot. But you seem serious, so maybe you ought to… Read more »
Like I said there is no correct answer for the kind of people who find government spending to be sacrosanct. Since none of the options I provided meet your liking, why don’t you name some cuts, details or not since we both know you’re not serious about anything but more spending and if you called for cuts anywhere it would only be to support spending elsewhere…as evidence by what you said yourself “20.014% would be too large to produce the $2.5 billion…You’d only need a 15.8%” The 20.014% just displays how you think any amount is too much to cut.… Read more »
“……..there is no correct answer for the kind of people who find government spending to be sacrosanct……….”
The PFD is government spending, Steve, and your correct answer is different than the correct answer of somebody on Medicare or a school administrator in the Bush.
“…….. Since none of the options I provided meet your liking……..”
You suggested only one: an “across the board” cut of 20%, then 20.014%. I have no like or dislike of it, but it won’t fly. Then I suggested that you run for a legislative seat to get it done.
Facts, Steve.
“You suggested only one”
1. “go back to before Walker and the Legislature started their misappropriation of funds”
2. “Let’s go back to before the Legislature decided to triple spending in a few short years while oil prices were at historic highs”
3. “Let’s start spending at levels similar to other states of the same size with similar revenue”
4. “How about a 20% across the board cut, not enough detail for you, how about 20.014%”
One, four…what’s the difference huh Reg?
“……..One, four…what’s the difference huh Reg?……….” Numbers 1 & 3 are not suggestions of how to balance the budget and provide a huge dividend. If it’s just “go back in time”, why not go back to 1980 when the state population was less than half what it is today and oil production was four times higher? Suggestion #3 Okay. Spending levels of other states of the same size with similar revenue do not give away billions of dollars in a dividend, so let’s get rid of it. Suggestion four I acknowledged as your only legitimate suggestion, which will not fly,… Read more »
“……..why don’t you name some cuts………”
Zero funding for the PFD. No more free cash. I’ve been naming that for years, Steve. This year alone it would reduce spending by $740 million and build state savings (instead of blowing it on consumer junk).
“………you can’t even possibly imagine people who don’t need it fighting for it because they believe that government already spends too much so they don’t need more to spend……….”
I don’t need to “imagine” it, Steve. It’s on full display right now in a legislative special session, which is nothing more than a fight over the taxing level on a potential gas pipeline builder. They’ll probably end up with nothing.
“…….. You just need government to have more to spend, no matter where it comes from, just feed the beast………”
The beast is overpowering. At this point, I just prefer feeding it with PF earnings so it stays out of my pocket, and I damned sure don’t want to hear people talk about it eating PF earnings AND start taxing my income or purchases so you can get your free check.
Except they are taking it out of your pocket, and the pockets of every Alaskan man, woman, and child.
They’re taking it out of PF earnings BEFORE it gets to my pocket from the very source that’s taking it. That’s fine. I don’t want them taking it out of my pocket after I get it from another source altogether, then sending it to you and those like you who demand it.
The word fungible comes to mind.
Where do you think that I ever demanded a PFD? I’ve simply pointed out what the law actually says, not what you want it to say or what you think it says, but what it actually says.
“……… I’ve simply pointed out what the law actually says, not what you want it to say or what you think it says, but what it actually says………”
You have also attacked the Wielechowski v Alaska decision, which makes the law meaningless, repeatedly and rabidly. It is quite obvious that you demand a “full” PFD, because that is exactly what you have done repeatedly, and you use the moot law as a basis for your demand.
“…….. Or they could remove the statutory language and be honest for a change………”
Thanks for that wonderful suggestion. I agree fully. Remove the statute completely.
Hey, Steve, how about this for a thought:
The annual transfer from the Alaska Permanent Fund to the state treasury accounted for the majority of the revenue, and provided $3.7 billion in the 2025 fiscal year. If you get half for your dividend, and the state gets half for operating this state, that would give you a share of $2500. Could you live with that?
Of course, that would not be “statutory”, but it comes closer to not looking greedy.
Did you know that the statutory language already addresses the 50/50 dividend general fund split? 50ish% has always been available for exessive government spending, by statute. But that wasn’t enough spending so they just stopped following the law and decided to spend whatever they want. AK Stat § 37.13.145 (b) At the end of each fiscal year, the corporation shall transfer from the earnings reserve account to the dividend fund established under AS 43.23.045, 50 percent of the income available for distribution under AS 37.13.140. (e) The legislature may not appropriate from the earnings reserve account to the general fund… Read more »
Alaska’s constitution prohibits dedicated funds, where a law binds the appropriation power of a subsequent legislature.
Yes, that 1982 state statute exists. But it’s an inferior law to our state constitution.
And so the current legislature need not abide by that unconstitutional statute passed by the 1982 legislature.
You surely have been told all this many times. You should listen.
If you believe otherwise, you are free to sue the state in state court. Just be prepared to lose.
Dan, You’re right the AK Constitution prohibits dedicated funds. The AK Constitution was also amended with the passage of the Permanent Fund that specifically exempted it from the anti-dedication clause. Section 7 of Article IX of the AK Constitution says: The proceeds of any state tax or license shall not be dedicated to any special purpose, except as provided in section 15 of this article or when required by the federal government for state participation in federal programs. This provision shall not prohibit the continuance of any dedication for special purposes existing upon the date of ratification of this section… Read more »
“………The Alaska Supreme Court had to ignore the definition of words and take part in all kinds of mental gymnastics to come up with a ruling that simply disregards the intent of the PF Amendment and what the AK Constitution actually says………” Steve, are you a licensed attorney? Did you know that Bill Wielechowski is an attorney, and his suit against the state because of the Walker veto was lost? The veto of an annual budget has nothing to do with the specific constitutional requirement to deposit 25% of annual revenue from all mineral lease rentals, royalties, royalty sale proceeds,… Read more »
Like it or not, the Supreme Court of Alaska has the final say on what Alaska’s laws mean. You need to accept that our supreme court unanimously joined the trial court in rejecting your view (and Treg Taylor’s view) that the dividend program is a a lawful dedicated fund. Every judge disagrees with you: Superior Court Judge Crosby rejected your view. Chief Justice Maassen rejected your view. Justice Carney rejected your view. Justice Henderson rejected your view. Justice Pate rejected your view. Steve-O, you are free to change our constitution to fit your preferred outcome. You wouldn’t be alone in… Read more »
“………Steve-O, you are free to change our constitution to fit your preferred outcome………..”
Actually, he is free to try. It is noteworthy that no attempt has been made thus far. It appears that most have the math figured out. The money just isn’t there.
I acknowledge and accept the AK Supreme Court opinion as being incorrect. It seems like most people who are opposed to the statutory PFD language do not even know what the AK Supreme Court opinion stated…let alone that it was an opinion. The historical record shows that state level and even the US Supreme Court can and have issued completely incorrect opinions. There is nowhere in the United States where a Supreme Court decision is the law because the court system does not make laws, that’s not how the judicial system or our system of government works. The judicial branch… Read more »
“Just having the reading comprehension of a 5th grader should be enough for anyone to read and understand the obvious flaws in the opinion the AK Supreme Court held in this case.”
-Steve-O
You can think that you’re smarter about the law than all five Alaska judges who reviewed this issue.
That’s your right.
But this issue is settled. The statutory PFD law is unconstitutional, and our legislature is right to disregard it when setting our state’s spending priorities.
“The statutory PFD law is unconstitutional” if you took the time to read the AK Supreme Court opinion you’d know that what you wrote is wrong. I may or may not be smarter than all five Alaska judges, but that isn’t pertinent to the conversation. I just happen to think they are wrong and it’s not difficult to show why they are wrong if one actually reads the AK Constitution and the opinion that they issued. You are entitled to remain completely ignorant on the subject, that’s your right, but you should know that there are other people who have… Read more »
“……… I may or may not be smarter than all five Alaska judges, but that isn’t pertinent to the conversation………..”
Very correct. What is pertinent is that they are the Superior and Supreme Court judges and justices, and you are not. Therefore, their decisions are pertinent, and your opinion is not.
“………I acknowledge and accept the AK Supreme Court opinion as being incorrect……….,”
That was an Alaska Supreme Court decision, not “opinion”. And your “opinion” puts you in quite a tight spot. You are free to comment ht that will not achieve a huge dividend, and it won’t frighten legislators or governor to provide you a huge dividend. Both Svatass and I have suggested that a constitutional amendment is the only way for you to correct the wrong you perceive, and if you check, you’ll find that such an amendment wouldn’t be an easy achievement.
Reg, https://law.justia.com/cases/alaska/supreme-court/2017/s-16558.html Read the opinion it starts by saying: “Notice: This opinion is subject to correction before publication in the PACIFIC REPORTER. Readers are requested to bring errors to the attention of the Clerk of the Appellate Courts, 303 K Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99501, phone (907) 264-0608, fax (907) 264-0878, email corrections@akcourts.us.” On the right hand side of the opinion is literally says “Supreme Court No. S-16558 Superior Court No. 3AN-16-08940 CI O P I N I O N No. 7194 – August 25, 2017” It’s worth noting that where it says “OPINION” in all capital letters it is also… Read more »
“ A constitutional amendment isn’t needed, we just need to follow the one that is already on the books or revise the statutes that were put in place under said amendment.”
Steve-O
Completely wrong.
This argument already failed.
Is Steve-O a Japanese Imperial soldier?
Hiding in Pacific jungles for decades after the war ended,?
Completely unaware the conflict concluded in 1945?
Steve-O needs to accept reality.
The courts have spoken.
He needs to hear them.
“………Is Steve-O a Japanese Imperial soldier? Hiding in Pacific jungles for decades after the war ended,? Completely unaware the conflict concluded in 1945?………” Kinda’, sorta’. It’s the ratchet effect of economics. It’s easy to give people money, but exceedingly difficult to stop. “The war” will carry forth for an era until the next great social conflict, even in insurgency. This is the destiny of socialism. However, Alaska is in a much more fortunate position than, say, California. We have a savage winter every year that motivates people to leave for warmer climes like, say, Las Vegas. All we need to… Read more »
“………This is how the judicial system issues decisions on law, they write their opinion………..”
Your words, Steve. A judicial decision is a formal determination by a court or legal tribunal resolving a dispute. If there is dissent among the minority justices, that would be an opinion.
Keep reading about it, inform yourself…it’s good for you to learn. While others refuse to inform themselves you’ve taken it upon yourself to try and understand something you did not understand before, good on you for that. Keep learning.
“………Did you know that the statutory language already addresses the 50/50 dividend general fund split?……..”
Yup. Sorta’. It’s a complicated formula based on a 5 year average on returns.
Reg,
Sometimes math is hard. But 50% of the net income of the earnings reserve account that is available for distribution isn’t a complicated formula, even if the amount available for distribution is based upon 21% of the net income of the fund for the last five fiscal years.
“……..50% of the net income of the earnings reserve account that is available for distribution isn’t a complicated formula………”
Agreed, but it is most definitely a meaningless one, since the Legislature has no need to calculate it. They can submit any amount they find appropriate for a dividend, and the governor can approve or veto it at his pleasure. It’s sorta’ like the Drake Equation. It really has no practical meaning.
I am not trying to stick up for Adam Crum, and i don’t really know much at all about him, but i am curious as to why he is called crooked in this publication. Can some list the reasons why he is crooked? The only thing i know is that he invested a very small share of some SOA fund in private equity and some people say that that was not a prudent investment. I have not read about any evidence that he got any kickbacks or did anything obviously crooked with regard to this investment, but please correct me… Read more »
The publisher likes namecalling and, not without reason, dislikes Crum.
Do a search in the upper right corner for Crum, there’s lots to consider.
“……..The publisher likes namecalling……….”
I don’t. But, after being called many names repeatedly, I will eventually return in kind, I can be very good at it, and I can enjoy it. It’s like………….warfare.
It won’t matter. There is a guy who goes by the name of “Big Balls” with the ability to take out personal loans in our name to buy bitcoin because Dunleavy gave away all our personal data.
Big Balls doesn’t matter because space aliens have control of everything except you, and they’ll get control of you soon.
Is that what who we’re blaming for the MAGA disorder these days? I thought it was the Murdochs.
Big Balls? Martians in the new UAP files release? Epstein? Dunleavy? Palin? Reggie?
Dunno. Blame them all. Blame me, but it’s damned sure happening, and I doubt a singer/songwriter is going to save us.
always love the Governor Peninsula