Donald Trump

Trump Sparks Weekend Freakout Over How Morally Superior America Is

Trump's awfulness doesn't make US foreign policy less imperfect.

|

Fox News

Fox News' Bill O'Reilly asked President Donald Trump in a Super Bowl pre-game interview whether he "respected" Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump said he did, but also hedged, saying that respect wouldn't necessarily translate to "getting along." O'Reilly pressed him on the respect point, calling Putin a "killer."

"There are a lot of killers," Trump responded in typical Trump fashion. "We've got a lot of killers. What do you think, our country's so innocent?" Trump was accused of "moral relativism," even though his comments didn't amount to much—O'Reilly was baiting him into saying something bellicose about Russia or Putin, and Trump declined to.

O'Reilly's killer comment came after Trump told him he respected "a lot of people" but that it didn't mean they would get a long. "He's a leader of his country, I say it's better to get along with Russia than not," Trump said, pointing to potential cooperation on ISIS. "Will I get along with him? I have no idea."

Despite the myths advanced by commentators like O'Reilly, the U.S. has never had a policy of conducting its foreign affairs based on who was and wasn't a killer. Former President Obama's attempts to acknowledge some of America's failures in supporting murderous regimes was characterized by the same set as an "apology tour." Obama, of course, wasn't blameless either. Despite his lofty rhetoric and Nobel Peace Prize, he nurtured new U.S. relations with murderous regimes, like that of Uganda, and old ones, like the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia, which executes people for things like adultery, atheism, homosexuality, and even witchcraft.

The core of Trump's message—that the U.S. is not innocent and so shouldn't conduct its foreign affairs as if it were—is a solid one, even if the vessel is deeply flawed. On Twitter, Jeremy Scahill said the takeaway from Trump was "not that he is wrong about US engaging in mass killing. It is that he likes it and views it as acceptable, preferable." Trump's comments, in the clips made available, were not specifically about mass killings—O'Reilly did not explain which killings for which Putin was responsible he was referring to, although later on in the exchange, after O'Reilly told Trump he didn't know of any government leaders in the U.S. who were killers, Trump brought up the "mistake" of the war in Iraq. "Mistakes are different," O'Reilly replied. Trump retorted: "OK, but a lot of people were killed, so, a lot of killer around, believe me."

Trump may know this well—Elliot Abrams, who The Nation described as an "American war criminal," is reportedly being considered for the number two spot at State. Among other unsavory points, his long CV of U.S. government service includes advocating for funding for the murderous regime in Guatemala during the Reagan administration.

The idea that Trump views the kind of conduct that makes the U.S. less than innocent as acceptable is not far off—during the campaign, Trump spoke approvingly of taking actions that would be considered war crimes, like killing the families of terrorists punitively. He said he believed torture worked (although said he would defer to Defense Secretary James Mattis in a welcome precedent of a president deferring to the judgement of people who know better than him instead of assuming he's the smartest person in the room).

The controversy continued on Sunday morning when Vice President Mike Pence declined to answer whether he believed the U.S. was "morally superior" to Russia, a ridiculous exercise that has the potential only for negative foreign policy outcomes. Many of America's greatest foreign policy disasters were built on foundations of moral superiority, going back more than a century at this point. After giving a diplomatic answer, CBS News' John Dickerson pressed Pence again. "Shouldn't we be able to just say yes to that question," Dickerson asked, "that America is morally superior to Russia?" Pence finally relented, offering a blanket statement for Dickerson: "I think it is without question, John, that American ideals are superior to countries all across the world."

Such discussions are not just pointless, they can be counterproductive. Whether American ideals are "superior" to others doesn't matter as much as exactly what American ideals are. Trump is at least the third consecutive president to insist that his first job is to "keep Americans safe," as opposed to keeping Americans free. For too many politicians, commentators, and voters, American ideals are whatever the U.S. government is doing. But government's actions are rarely "morally superior" to anything—they are often self-serving and highly partisan. American ideals of freedom, liberty, and equality under the law, could be morally superior. But even then, their moral superiority is far less relevant than what their actual state currently is in this country. There's little value in feeling morally superior about something you can no longer enjoy.

Watch the interview excerpt below:

The rest of the interview airs tonight and tomorrow night on Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor.

NEXT: Neil Gorsuch Sympathizes With Drug Dealers

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Remember the “reset button”? Remember all the hand-wringing about diplomatic relations with a murderous ex-KGB thug then? Yeah, me neither.

    1. Lefties always yell about they hate you and want to punch their ideological enemies in the face.

      Maybe a better tactic would be to not tell your adversary much about your plan on how you will treat them. You know, Sun Tzu and all that.

      1. I think most lefties are too big of pussies to have read The Art Of War. I cannot say the same about myself. It’s an amazing book. Trump definitely has the “formless and inscrutable” down. Nobody can figure out WTF is going on. LOL

        Honestly I think some of the games he is playing are in fact exactly that. He is literally applying power business/political maneuvers to all his affairs, but a lot of people can’t see how it is beneficial to bust another countries balls to set the bar low, or threaten to pull out of “a deal” etc. These are the things one does if one has testicles between their legs and wants to play hard ball and get their way. It works when you’re the one with the upper hand, as the USA is in almost every single respect.

        1. nah, he’s just an emotional idiot. nothing grand or calculated. a few more reverses as the trailer parks of America come into contact with United States and this will end not with a bang but a whimper on Breitbart.

        2. “I think most lefties are too big of pussies …”

          So what are you – a small pussy? Be polite, and people will be polite back. That may not be in Sun Tzu, but it’s good tactics.

    2. My last month paycheck was for 11000 dollars… All i did was simple online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the internet and they paid me for it 95 bucks every hour… This is what I do

      =========================== http://www.4dayjobs.com

    3. My last month paycheck was for 11000 dollars… All i did was simple online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the internet and they paid me for it 95 bucks every hour… This is what I do

      =========================== http://www.4dayjobs.com

  2. American ideals of freedom, liberty, and equality under the law, could be morally superior. But even then, their moral superiority is far less relevant than what their actual state currently is in this country. There’s little value in feeling morally superior about something you can no longer enjoy.

    Pretty good moral high ground Ed.

    I always thought one of the shining lights of America was the overall desire to treat people of the World well. Some other countries just do not care and they have been making the same mistakes century after century.

    I just hope America moves toward more Liberty and treating people of World well.

  3. Oh, FFS! Look, this isn’t really very difficult. The United States doesn’t own the world. No one wants us exerting our authority to assume control of the world. And I’m fine with that. But, what that means is that we’re not responsible for the world. Do we do business with some unsavory characters? Yes. They’re the leaders of sovereign nations. Doing business with those leaders means doing business with those unsavory characters. Do you want to take a position of principled non-interventionism, as so many writers here insist we must? Fine. But that means that some of the leaders of some of the sovereign nations America is going to have to deal with aren’t going to be the sorts you’d want invited to your next cocktail party.

    1. Self-correction: Doing business with those leaders sovereign nations means doing business with those unsavory characters

  4. The fantasy of the USA’s imagined moral supremacy evaporated long ago and Trump did the the correct thing by pushing back. He was dead right here and it’s actually nice to have a political leader who doesn’t spew platitudes when stuff like this comes up.

    1. But we’ve never done anything questionable! Not even morally suspect!

      The outrage over this is enlightening. It shows who the jingoists are.

      1. Obama’s drone strikes were much more refined, paired with arugula salad.

      2. Many of those same people are also the ones who take anything the CIA says at face value. The CIA, of course, having a long record of moral superior actions and honest, trustworthy behaviour.

        1. I’d almost be willing to allow them their shady behavior if they were competent.

          1. Well, where does shady stop and murderous begin?

    2. “The fantasy of the USA’s imagined moral supremacy evaporated long ago”

      You are historically illiterate and untraveled if you truly believe the USA doesn’t top the world in morality and freedom. It’s not a fantasy, its a reality.

      Moral supremacy does not require perfection and the USA has made huge mistakes over the years and many worthy of harsh condemnation. But the key word here is “supremacy”…and yes, the USA is supreme on the global stage for the totality of conduct and contributions. There is no country that has contributed more to societal freedom, individual liberty, and fought to secure the same for those outside its borders. Yeh, you can point to small countries of outstanding morality and freedom, but every single one of them exists and maintains due to the presence of the US.

      Criticize the flawed actions, improve the global interactions, but recognize the myriad of positives.

      1. TheUSA tops the world in morality and freedom? Give me a fucking break and spare me the outrage. I’d accuse you of ignorance and luncacy but it’s obvious we just disagree. Have a good one.

        1. “The USA tops the world in morality and freedom?”

          Why yes, yes it does. Travel more. Read history. Look behind the propaganda of other countries….oh,wait, you think the US is the only country that publishes propaganda?

          Sure, there are small countries that are currently bastions of freedom, but they are historic anomalies that only exist because of the USA global policing and umbrella of stability.

          That’s not to say there aren’t huge areas of criticism for US policy and actions. There are aplenty.

          1. I’ve traveled plenty and I know history but people who have similar knowledge bases can draw different conclusions based on that knowledge. In my estimation we’ve done a lot of good and if this was 1946 my opinion would be different but what we have done as a nation since then has been a disaster, particularly when it comes to international affairs.

            It’s just my opinion that we no longer can claim the moral high ground because of those actions. Obviously you disagree, which is fine.

            1. I believe if one HAD to pick a #1 in the world we would still be it. But if we were going off of objective standards I think we would fail as a nation… That says more about how horrid everybody else has been than how awesome we’ve been though.

              But most of that is indeed post WWII insanity. We did have our shitty dealings in the 1800s of course too, but I feel like a lot of those were more justified in the time (which is the only way to judge historical things IMO) than the dumb shit we’ve done post WWII. That’s just my 2 cents. That said we shouldn’t stop trying to be better!

              1. “That we shouldn’t stop trying to be better!”

                Agreed, and the best way to do that is to not look at our actions through rose colored glasses. Reclaiming the moral high ground isn’t out of the question but we need some work.

                1. Reclaiming the moral high ground isn’t out of the question but we need some work.

                  I think the “moral high ground” in foreign relations is to stay out of other people’s business unless we are directly threatened.

                  1. I couldn’t agree more.

                  2. “I think the “moral high ground” in foreign relations is to stay out of other people’s business unless we are directly threatened.”

                    Yup. Aside from the fact that it’s usually the best policy period for the world at large, it’s certainly better for the United States, and our nations bank account. Almost all of our attempts at spreading democracy through firepower have failed. The few that sorta worked out (Maybe South Korea?) were exceptions to the rule, and frankly probably would have worked themselves out eventually anyway.

                    All these recent excursions in the middle east were doomed to failure from the start, and anyone with a brain should have seen that.

            2. It’s just my opinion that we no longer can claim the moral high ground because of those actions. Obviously you disagree, which is fine.

              It is my opinion that you’re applying a meaningless yardstick of morality to foreign relations. US foreign policy should be primarily aimed at protecting Americans, not at democratizing or enriching other nations.

              The error we see crop up from time to time is the misguided notion that we can create democracies and that doing so is good for the US.

              The US should lead by example and by encouraging unconditional free trade. The US should not use power or force attempting to impose liberal democracy, or anything else for that matter, on other nations.

          2. Could you list a few of those areas of criticism? Hint: Maybe you could start with a list of democratically elected governments the US has overthrown.

        2. The fact that the US gives the greatest protection to free speech and self defense of any nation means they unequivocally top the world in the freedom category. Morality is a different issue, but MikeP2 has a decent case when he is comparing the US to just the other nations of consequence.

          1. I’d certainly agree with those two specific points-most other nations are terrible when it comes to individual self-defense and free speech. I’ll concede those for sure.

      2. You are historically illiterate and untraveled if you truly believe the USA doesn’t top the world in morality and freedom. It’s not a fantasy, its a reality.

        It does, domestically.

        There is no country that has contributed more to societal freedom, individual liberty, and fought to secure the same for those outside its borders.

        True. But that shouldn’t be a US policy objective. Trump got it right when he said that we should lead by example there, instead of trying to impose our form of government on others.

        Concretely, when it come to Putin, we should deal with him and respect him, just we have done with Saudi Arabia and many other non-democratic countries, if it is in our interest. Democratizing Russia isn’t our job.

      3. As recently as 2000 we were ranked as #2 nation on the freedom index (Hong Kong was #1). At this point we’re down to #16 and I don’t see any reason to believe that trend is likely to reverse itself any time soon.

      4. ”You are historically illiterate and untraveled if you truly believe the USA doesn’t top the world in morality and freedom.”

        You’re a deluded fkn idiot. That is all.

  5. Trump’s awfulness doesn’t make US foreign policy less imperfect.

    The core of Trump’s message?that the U.S. is not innocent and so shouldn’t conduct its foreign affairs as if it were?is a solid one, even if the vessel is deeply flawed.

    I want to like you, Ed. The article is ok. But if you could leave the virtue signaling bs out, that would be great.

    1. Throwing multiple virtue signals into every article about the man demonstrates who the writers fear, and it ain’t the “dictator” Trump.

    2. Sorry, I should’ve identified him as perfect and morally superior instead. This is an important point: his flaws don’t change the value of the messages he articulates, something a lot of his opponents insist on.

      1. That’s the last straw. I’m quitting this leftist rag!

      2. I should’ve identified him as perfect and morally superior instead.

        No, you should not have. I suppose I’m just tired of hyperbolic nonsense about Trump’s “unique” awfulness. And I don’t recall Reason going the extra length to be sure that everyone knew how flawed they thought the vessel of the message was when Barry was the Criminal in Chief.

        his flaws don’t change the value of the messages he articulates, something a lot of his opponents insist on.

        I agree.

      3. Overall the article is fine, as is…

        I don’t think you needed the “flawed vessel” qualifier. A period after “solid one” would’ve worked – without anyone thinking you were a Trumpkin.

        As it is, the qualifier reads only as a minor “pants-sharting” compared to some of the other writers, so you’re probly still okay, Ed.

      4. Oh come on, you think you deserve points for agreeing with Trump when he makes moral relativism arguments cutting the US down? (yeah it “wasn’t much” but that’s what it was).

        “Sorry, I should’ve identified him as perfect and morally superior instead.”

        ^^ false dichotomy. There’s more options in the middle.

        In fairness, while I rolled my eyes like others at the time in that line, I did feel the article later got into explaining why this was said, rather than it just being a snobby sucker punch as others usually do. However, the evidence made later rather made the case that Trump was an excellent representative of the argument about the US’s self-interest-and-politics-over-morals foreign policy, not that he was a flawed vessel for this argument.

    3. OMG Ed you called Trump a “deeply flawed” vessel! How dare you be so unfair to our Dear Leader! LEAVE TRUMP ALONE!

      1. The bit about the deeply flawed vessel was superfluous. It’s not like we don’t’ already understand that Trump is awful (especially since he just said as much in the preceding sentence). But this was a damn good article and I just kinda rolled my eyes at the extra jab.

  6. Ed, that article was too level-headed and wasn’t pro-Trump enough. You’re on “cuck” warning now.

  7. Welp, of all things I didn’t expect Trump to be an IR realist.

    The core of Trump’s message?that the U.S. is not innocent and so shouldn’t conduct its foreign affairs as if it were?is a solid one, even if the vessel is deeply flawed. On Twitter, Jeremy Scahill said the takeaway from Trump was “not that he is wrong about US engaging in mass killing. It is that he likes it and views it as acceptable, preferable.”

    And that’s reflective of Scahill being a dishonest scumbag.

    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

    Scahill: OMG guys Orwell totally supports mass murder!

    1. This was one of the best sound bites of the weekend. Trump uses the same line of argument that the left has been spouting for 50+ years, and the left suddenly starts arguing for American exceptionalism–despite the fact that Obama made the exact same arguments all the damn time and received nothing but praise from them.

      Trump’s presidency is nothing if not effective at showing just how hollow and reactionary the left is.

      1. But when Obama said, he was projecting nuance and subtlety mere mortals like us are unable to fathom.

  8. “We’ve got a lot of killers. What do you think, our country’s so innocent?”

    Heads exploding on the left and right.

    1. It’s about as close as I’ve heard any major politician come to saying that war is inherently immoral.

    2. ‘Countries do not have friends,they have interests.’

      1. We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.

        -Henry Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston

        1. A comment that might very well be apropos to libertarians in the context of domestic politics.

        2. Yeah but who are “we”? The global 99%? The global .001%? Or some more manageable group of intermediate size?

  9. Trump is at least the third consecutive president to insist that his first job is to “keep Americans safe,” as opposed to keeping Americans free.

    Leader of the free safe world!

    1. I don’t think it’s the president’s job is to “keep Americans free”. Should that not be the Constitution and SCOTUS’s job?

      SCOTUS maintains the freedom.
      Congress runs the country.
      President protects the country.

      In all seriousness…they have different roles, don’t they? I’m happy to have a POTUS that focuses on the executive’s core responsibilities of national defense and international relations.

      1. Congress doesn’t run the country. Congress sets the rules. The executive branch runs the country. And yes, I want those who run the country to run it with freedom at top of mind. I would not want the president to constantly trample our rights with the rationale “Hey, if it’s illegal the courts will eventually tell me.”

        1. As far as foreign policy is concerned, the issue is exclusively about keeping America safe; American freedom isn’t an issue.

          Unfortunately, since WWII, American presidents have paid lip service to the idea that making the rest of the world free is their job as well, on the idea that a world filled with Democracies is good for the US.

          In reality, attempts to liberalize and democratize other countries have largely been failures, and the same presidents that promoted that idea don’t hesitate to destroy foreign democracies when they fail to serve their purpose.

          Dealing with Putin is no worse than dealing with Saudi Arabia, something both parties have done for a long time. And countries like Germany and France are not our friends; they’d sell us down the river if it served their interests. It’s time our foreign policy acknowledge that.

        2. At best the executive branch “runs” the govt, not the country. And while I also want him to include freedom in his agenda and (honestly!) interpret the constitution himself, the other branches are also supposed to restrain him.

      2. …he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: ? “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

        The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

        He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law.

        Section. 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

        A few edits to keep it under 1500

  10. “O’Reilly told Trump he didn’t know of any government leaders in the U.S. who were killers”

    The national council of drone manufacturers approves this message.

    1. I like O’Reilly a lot sometimes and on certain things… But then other times he says such silly things my head does just want to explode. Come on he forgot who Henry Kissinger is??? Karl Rove doesn’t exist??? He can’t go dissing his buddies like that! LOL

  11. Kremlin says it wants apology from Fox News over Putin comments

    “We consider such words from the Fox TV company to be unacceptable and insulting, and honestly speaking, we would prefer to get an apology from such a respected TV company,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on a conference call.

    1. honestly speaking

      In Russian that phrase has somewhat wider meaning and usage.

      One can say, for example, “honestly speaking, it’s past midnight” implying “you’re too drunk to notice it’s past midnight”.

  12. Trump was on another interview at halftime…. I made a run to the grocery store…. Sorry Ga-ga.

    Anyway, he was pressured to clarify those remarks – specifically asking about moral equivalence.

    He denied the premise, saying he never said any such thing.

    He said he respects a lot of people. He respects the leaders of other countries in the world.

    After further pressuring he asked “is it better, or worse, that we get along with Russia? I hope we get along with Russia. I hope we get along with everybody. Is it better, or worse if we get along with China? I hope we get along with China. I hope we get along with Japan…… ”

    Which is pretty hard to find fault with. You have to be pretty partisan to say that the President can’t say he respects the leaders of other countries.

    Particularly after the Obama “apology tour” where he ran around the world telling everyone how terrible the US is. Sure, it got him a Nobel prize, but it certainly doesn’t set a precedent for excoriating the President for asking “do you think the US is so innocent?”

    Trump says a lot of nutty (and to my mind ill-advised) things. But this ain’t one of them. Trying to escalate tensions with our major geopolitical rivals at a time when tensions are already too high would have been the dumb move. (you know, like unilaterally declaring a “no fly zone” in a country where they have a military base and are undertaking military operations to support their ally.)

  13. I think the progs’ biggest horror about Trump is that he is honest in exposing the presidency and government for what it really is about-power. Dems code things in touchy-feely language but are really no different when you get down to it.

  14. The US is pretty much the only liberal democracy left on the planet, flawed as it may be. I really don’t care whether that makes it “morally superior”, I’d simply like it to stay that way. And in order to remain a liberal democracy, we can’t open our borders and we can’t go down the road of the social welfare state or progressive government any further.

    As for Russia, it’s utterly irrelevant to our foreign policy whether they are a democracy or a dictatorship; whether they kill people or not. What matters, as far as the US is concerned, is whether they are a threat and how we can contain that threat. And when it comes to Russia, I prefer that threat to be contained through diplomacy, not war. How Russia conducts itself towards its neighbors isn’t our business. This isn’t the Cold War, and those local conflicts are of no concern to us.

  15. RE: Trump Sparks Weekend Freakout Over How Morally Superior America Is
    Trump’s awfulness doesn’t make US foreign policy less imperfect.

    America morally superior?
    I’d like to have some of the shit Trump is smoking.
    It must be the best in the world.

  16. For fuck’s sake, you trumping asses. Does the US have tons to answer for when it comes to drones, surveillance activities, overthrowing elected governments, assisting dictators, and more? Yes, jesus christ yes.
    But no honest person could possibly compare us to the Russians during the Cold War and find us wanting in comparison. And the same for generalissimo Putin. He jails political opponents, shutters the press, uses assassination regularly, invades his neighbors, and has patriotic summer camps featuring his picture everywhere.
    Trump has done many things I’ve agreed with so far but that statement over the weekend was one of the most objectively moronic things ever uttered and to argue otherwise is equally moronic.

  17. I see what you mean… Jesse `s postlng is neat… on monday I bought a top of the range Jaguar E-type after I been earnin $7477 this-last/4 weeks and-even more than, 10-k last-munth . no-doubt about it, this really is the most comfortable job Ive had . I started this seven months/ago and right away was making more than $73 per-hr . go right here…
    ………….. http://www.cash-review.com

  18. Facebook gives you a great opportunity to earn 98652$ at your home.If you are some intelligent you makemany more Dollars.I am also earning many more, my relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this…You can also make cash i never tell alie you should check this I am sure you shocked to see this amazing offer…I’m Loving it!!!!
    ????????> http://www.moneytime10.com

  19. My best friend’s ex-wife makes Bucks75/hr on the laptop. She has been unemployed for eight months but last month her income with big fat bonus was over Bucks9000 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Read more on this site…..
    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.cash-review.com

  20. My last month paycheck was for 11000 dollars… All i did was simple online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the internet and they paid me for it 95 bucks every hour… This is what I do

    =========================== http://www.4dayjobs.com

  21. I’m making $86 an hour working from home. I was shocked when my neighbor told me she was averaging $95 but I see how it works now. I feel so much freedom now that I’m my own boss. This is what I do>>

    ======== http://www.centerpay70.com

  22. Odd to see a Republican President agreeing with Noam Chomsky.

  23. My last month paycheck was for 11000 dollars… All i did was simple online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the internet and they paid me for it 95 bucks every hour… This is what I do

    =========================== http://www.4dayjobs.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.