War Room Co-Host Natalie Winters Discusses Illegal Voters, Election Fraud, Calls Out Jack Smith’s Lawfare Against Trump (VIDEO)

War Room Co-Host Natalie Winters Discusses Illegal Voters, Election Fraud, Calls Out Jack Smith’s Lawfare Against Trump (VIDEO)

War Room Co-Host Natalie Winters Discusses Illegal Voters, Election Fraud, Calls Out Jack Smith’s Lawfare Against Trump (VIDEO)
October 8, 2024

War Room co-host Natalie Winters comments on illegal voters and election fraud on October 7th, 2024

** Please keep our friend and political prisoner Steve Bannon – the founder of The War Room – in your thoughts and prayers during this time.

War Room co-host Natalie Winters discussed Jack Smith, illegal voters, and election fraud this past Monday.

“I took the time over this weekend to read the 165-page filing that Jack Smith dropped, the legal hatchet man of the Biden regime. Something really stuck out to me, not just the glowing review of War Room, shall I say, but what was a key point that they kept trying to make throughout that filing which then in turn MSNBC, and all the mainstream media wanted to pick up, they sort of pointed to the smoking gun of the whole filing was the issue of non-citizens voting,” Winters said.

“MSNBC ran with their own take on it,” Winters said.

“Media Matters had their own meltdown over it,” Winters continued.

Winters also said that Jack Smith was trying to prevent any dissent to his narrative.

“I think that Jack Smith, this filing, they are trying to intimidate us from talking about the issue of non-citizens voting, right, in the same vein that in 2020, they overwhelmed the system by flooding the zone with mail-in ballots with no chain of custody. They have taken a similar, but slightly different approach I think in 2024, which is flooding the zone with people in the form of what, 10 million plus illegal migrants,” Winters said.

Winters also pointed out that War Room has been targeted by Jack Smith because they consistently call out election fraud and illegals voting.

“If you read the indictment, you see they talk about War Room and the messaging on this show quite a lot. I say it’s actually a glowing review because it says that we are the only show that is actually courageous enough to build the narratives and be ahead of the curve when it comes to talking about election fraud,” Winters said.

She also boldly and courageously called out Jack Smith saying that War Room will devote even more time to this issue.

“So, Jack Smith, if you think you’re 165-page filing is going to intimidate this audience from not talking about election fraud or non-citizens voting, you are severely mistaken, severely mistaken. Cause I’ll do episodes where the only thing will focus on will be non-citizen voting,” Winters declared.

Winters also said that the term election interference is an understatement. She described it more accurately as something that doesn’t even look like an election.

“I’d call it election obstruction, but that still implies that it’s actually an election. And with the actions that they have taken or not taken, whether it is non-citizens voting, universal vote by mail, they are doing every single damn thing in their power to make sure that this election doesn’t resemble anything deserving of the word election,” Winters said.

Watch:

Thank you for reading. Please check back for more War Room stories.

The post War Room Co-Host Natalie Winters Discusses Illegal Voters, Election Fraud, Calls Out Jack Smith’s Lawfare Against Trump (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go to Source
Author: David Greyson

Kamala Harris Doesn’t Rule Out Leaving the Country When She Loses Election in Dumpster Fire Interview with Howard Stern (AUDIO)

Kamala Harris Doesn’t Rule Out Leaving the Country When She Loses Election in Dumpster Fire Interview with Howard Stern (AUDIO)

Kamala Harris Doesn’t Rule Out Leaving the Country When She Loses Election in Dumpster Fire Interview with Howard Stern (AUDIO)
October 8, 2024

This is why Kamala Harris didn’t do any interviews for 45 days after she stole all of Joe Biden’s delegates.

Kamala Harris agreed to an interview with shock jock Howard Stern after she interviewed with the vulgar sex podcast “Call Her Daddy.”

Harris is spiraling after Tuesday’s media blitz.

“If [Trump] wins God forbid, would you feel safe in this country? Would you stay in this country?” Howard Stern asked Kamala Harris.

Harris didn’t rule out leaving if she lost the election.

This is after she oversaw an invasion of more than 15 million illegal aliens – mainly criminal, military-age men.

“Howard, I’m doing everything I can to make sure he does not win,” Harris said.

Because of Kamala Harris, illegal aliens are murdering and raping innocent Americans but she will flee the country if Trump wins.

AUDIO:

Kamala Harris told Howard Stern this election is about “fighting to bring the cost of living down of working families.”

This is why Americans want change. Four years of Biden-Harris has destroyed middle class families.

AUDIO:

Kamala Harris projected her weakness on Trump when it comes to Russia and Ukraine.

This was unbelievable.

AUDIO:

Harris fell apart during an appearance on “The View” when she said that she couldn’t think of anything she would have done differently than Biden during the past four years.

She also crashed during an interview with CBS News.

The post Kamala Harris Doesn’t Rule Out Leaving the Country When She Loses Election in Dumpster Fire Interview with Howard Stern (AUDIO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go to Source
Author: Cristina Laila

Dairy Farmer Makes it Clear: ’There’s No Question Our Four Years Under Trump Management Was Much Better”  (Video)

Dairy Farmer Makes it Clear: ’There’s No Question Our Four Years Under Trump Management Was Much Better” (Video)

Dairy Farmer Makes it Clear: ’There’s No Question Our Four Years Under Trump Management Was Much Better” (Video)
October 8, 2024

A dairy farmer shares why President Trump is better for farmers./Image: Video screenshot/Fox News.

A dairy farmer from Wisconsin spoke with Fox News and made it clear that there is “no question” that President Trump was “much better.”

It is a refreshing change to hear an American citizen’s perspective rather than one of the endless talking heads.

In a candid interview he shared, “We’ve been decided for a long time, yes. We’re Republican. We’re conservative. Yeah, there’s no question in our mind that our four years under Trump management was much better than the three and a half years under Biden management or whoever is… That’s a great mystery is who is actually running the government right now.”

“It’s pretty obvious, hey, he’s a nice old guy, but he’s lost it. And it bothers the heck out of me that we’re thinking about electing a person that just six weeks ago, or I don’t know how many weeks, told us, ‘Oh, Biden’s on top of it. He’s really aggressive and really knows what he’s doing’.” Well, we all seen that in the debate. He’s passed his time.”

As a farmer, what have you seen under this administation compared to under Trump?

“Inflation. I mean, we’ve been ate alive by inflation. We don’t set our prices, and our prices tend to run a couple of years behind everybody else. So while we’re paying twice as much for tires and fuell and feed and everything else, our milk price stays the same until just now in the last month that it finally came up. But inflation has ate us alive.”

Trump has gone into the bluest areas of Wisconsin, do you think folks in those counties might be receptive to hearing from him when he goes there?

“I think that’s the sign of a leader, that you’re not afraid to go into the other camp and tell them what your ideas are. I don’t know. I think I can get in this election. And I guess, almost everybody knows who they’re going to vote for. And we’re just all fighting over that, what, 10 % of the people that don’t know what they want to do. And I’m amazed that there’s anybody that’s undecided because to me, for the first time, have we ever had an election where both candidates had shown us their thing?”

“Trump was President for four years. Harris was vice president for three and a half years. We’ve seen it. There’s no doubt which one we want.”

What are the biggest issues for you when thinking about the election?

“On the national level, well, yeah, I’m not sure how I’d rank them, but inflation is certainly the biggie. And then the Southern border thing. I’m all for immigration. Like everybody else in America, I’m a son of immigrants, but we got to have some control. You don’t just open the floodgates up and let people in. And I’m scared to death of some of the people that are coming across.”

How do you feel about the argument that if they stop illegal immigration, there will be less farm workers?

“I think that’s baloney. We got plenty of people to do the farm work…”

“But legal immigration. You have legal immigration, not just opening the floodgates up. And nobody that I know of is talking just sealing the border, nobody else can come into America. That would be a disaster.”

“Yeah. The whole town of Whitewater, 35 minutes away. Suddenly, They got… It’s a town of what, 15,000 people, and all of a sudden, they got a thousand new immigrants. How do you handle that? I don’t know. Do the math in New York City. I mean, they got a couple of million people. If they had that one for 15 people show up on the doorstep, how do you handle that many people?”

Did you know from the start of the 2024 election cycle that you were going to support Trump?

“Yeah, just like I say, because we already had a road test. Yeah. Four years of Trump, three years of Biden, there ain’t no doubt.”

You can watch to full interview here:

The post Dairy Farmer Makes it Clear: ’There’s No Question Our Four Years Under Trump Management Was Much Better” (Video) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go to Source
Author: Margaret Flavin

Judge in Former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters Summary Remarks Before Sentencing Sends a Chilling Message to Election Officials and Election Integrity Activists

Judge in Former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters Summary Remarks Before Sentencing Sends a Chilling Message to Election Officials and Election Integrity Activists

Judge in Former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters Summary Remarks Before Sentencing Sends a Chilling Message to Election Officials and Election Integrity Activists
October 8, 2024

Former Mesa Co Clerk Tina Peters and CO Sec. of State Jena Griswold

Trial Summary

Last week, The Gateway Pundit reported that former Mesa County, CO clerk Tina Peters was sentenced to a total of nine years in prison over her actions following a 2021 municipal election in the small Colorado county.  Tina Peters had been told that there was to be a “Trusted Build” performed on the Dominion Voting equipment in her custody as the elected official in charge of elections for the county.

Prior to the “Trusted Build,” Peters had sought to perform an imaging of the voting system prior to any updates, as the system contained election records that were to be maintained by both State and Federal for 25 months (52 USC 20701 requires 22 months retentino).  It is a fairly standard process prior to conducting any updates on systems that require preservation.

During her trial in August, it was learned that her IT Department in Mesa County had refused to conduct the system back-up prior to the “Trusted Build” because they were unfamiliar with the systems.  So Peters took it up on herself to obtain an outside expert.  The criminal charges revolved around whether or not Peters lied to State officials during the “Trusted Build” process by having her expert, Conan Hayes, anonymously present in the room.  Hayes had used the key card of another individual, Gerald Wood, who was originally screened by Peters’ office.

During the trial, Wood claimed he was unaware that his ‘identity’ was being ‘stolen’ to allow Hayes access to the systems.  However, during the testimony of Sherronna Bishop, a close associate of Peters, it was discovered that there was a conversation through an encrypted messaging app known as Signal in which Wood acknowledged the use of his key card to enter the facilities.  It was quite shocking that this exculpatory evidence was discovered since all of the individuals privy to the conversation had their devices confiscated by authorities.  One device that was party to the conversation, however, survived the confiscation.  There did not seem to be any concern from the judge, Judge Michael Barrett, about why this evidence was withheld not just from Peters’ defense, but from the State’s investigator as well.

Throughout the trial, Judge Barrett refused to allow almost any evidence that would suggest vulnerabilities in the voting machines or the deletion of records through the “Trusted Build.”  For example, former Elbert County Recorder (now a Commissioner) Dallas Schroeder testified during the trial, but his testimony was so limited that most of his 30 minutes of testimony was spent in a side-bar with the judge after Schroeder was asked about a June 17, 2021 “rule change” by the Secretary of State’s Office.  The rule change is believed to pertain to the number of people allowed in the “Trusted Build” on behalf of the county clerk, but he was not permitted to answer that question following an objection and a 20-minute sidebar.

After seven days of trial, Peters was found guilty on 7 out of 10 charges.  Here is a summary of the judgements:

 

Judge’s Sentencing Remarks

During the sentencing last week, several witnesses both for the defendant and the prosecution made comments to the judge prior to his decision.  But the most concerning portion.  The judge alluded to several claims he presented as fact despite no findings of such.  Any allusion to impropriety in the elections or election systems in Mesa County and Colorado in general were shot down during the trial.

The judge’s remarks started off with a harsh condemnation of Peters by calling here ‘privileged.’

Judge Barrett remarked:

“You don’t have those histories of drug and alcohol abuse…there’s no lifetime of trauma, not even close to the type of mitigating circumstances that I would see from folks who sit in that chair.  No, to the contrary Ms. Peters, you are a ‘privileged’ person.  You are as ‘privileged’ as they come.  And you used that privilege to obtain power, a following, and fame.  And to be sure there’s no doubt in my mind that it is exactly what you wanted.  And it defies all sense of common sense to believe when you suggested to me a few moments ago that you didn’t want this attention.  No, no you crave it, ma’am.  And there is no one in this courtroom who would consider that to be anything other than the absolute truth.”

The judge essentially compared, as tragic as it may be, self-inflicted ‘traumas’ such as alcohol and drug abuse with losing her son (during her campaign) during his service to this country as a Navy SEAL and then losing her husband under controversial circumstances during this persecution.  It is worth noting that her son’s death also raises eyebrows as he died during a parachuting accident when both his primary and back up chutes failed to deploy.  Peters revealed during the trial that her son had been working with officials in his capacity as a SEAL to thwart human-trafficking.

“Privileged.”  Sympathy for drug addicts and alcoholics while casting sheer disdain at a gold-star widow.

Watch the judge’s remarks here:

He wasn’t done.  In the next clip below, Judge Barrett starts out stating,

“…ultimately, it was a belief that the echo-chamber in which you live couldn’t be wrong, among other things, that led you to do what you did here.  This thought process unfortunately seems to consume so many in our country, regardless of race, gender, political affiliation or the like, that what it is we hear and think can’t possibly be wrong.  There are many things in my mind that are crystal clear about this case.  You are no hero.  You abused your position.  And you’re a charlatan who used and is still using your prior position in office to pedal a snake-oil that’s been proven to be junk time and time again.  In your world, it’s all about you.”

Once again, Tina Peters has never been afforded the opportunity to present the facts in a court of law regarding her findings, her beliefs, or her claims.  But the judge took it upon himself to label them “snake-oil.”  Remarkable.

Peters may have gone about the method she used to get her cyber expert access to the systems, although even the investigator admitted it is not identity theft if you give permission of someone to use your identity (the example given was a hotel key card knowingly used by someone other than the occupant of the room).  However, what Peters did was essential to not only standard accounting and auditing practices, but also was required for preservation of records under state and federal law.  And most importantly, evidence presented showed that the “victim” of the identity theft was in fact aware of the use of his key card by Peters’ expert.

Lastly, and perhaps most concerning, the judge scolded Peters that “you have no respect for the checks and balances of government, you have no respect for this court, you have no respect for law enforcement, and you don’t have respect for your fellow colleagues when you are a clerk and recorder who weren’t lockstep in your beliefs.”

Orwell just rolled over in his grave.

Tina Peters actions on that day ensured checks and balances.  It ensured that election records were properly and adequately preserved prior to an outside private corporation performing a “Trusted Build.”  The ensuing Mesa Reports from an analysis of those images she made were not permitted in court.

The judge ruled those reports “irrelevant” and then in his summary remarks before sentencing claimed Peters sold “snake oil” that’s been “proven to be junk time and time again.”

Below is the entirety of the remarks during Tina Peters’ sentencing last week:

 

The post Judge in Former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters Summary Remarks Before Sentencing Sends a Chilling Message to Election Officials and Election Integrity Activists appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go to Source
Author: Brian Lupo

Harris Defends Her Family Life as Controversies Swirl, Says ‘This Is Not the 1950s’

Harris Defends Her Family Life as Controversies Swirl, Says ‘This Is Not the 1950s’

Harris Defends Her Family Life as Controversies Swirl, Says ‘This Is Not the 1950s’
October 8, 2024

The last thing that Vice President Kamala Harris should probably be making bold clapback statements to — at the moment — is criticism of her family life. Which means, of course, that’s exactly what she’s doing.

In an interview on the “Call Her Daddy” podcast published Sunday, Harris implied that criticism of her family life was the result of conservative prudishness, saying that “this is not the 1950s,” according to The Hill.

Now, it’s worth noting the context of the remarks, which had to do with comments from GOP Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

Sanders, a former White House press secretary under Donald Trump, said during a town hall with the again-GOP nominee that Harris “doesn’t have anything keeping her humble” because she hasn’t had children of her own, noting that children of your own are a “permanent reminder of what’s important.”

A little bit of a below-the-belt dig? Perhaps, especially since Harris is a stepmother to her husband Doug Emhoff’s children. Sanders also went on to clarify that she “would never criticize a woman for not having children, the point I was making and that Kamala Harris confirmed by her own admission is that she doesn’t believe our leaders should be humble, which explains her arrogant claim that she alone can fix our nation’s problems after spending the last four years making them worse.”

Any intelligent Democrat would realize the media would do the heavy lifting for her on this one and just, to quote one of the veep’s more famous supporters, shake it off. Instead, Harris decided to give America an ugly reminder about just what her values really are.

“Family comes in many forms, and I think that, increasingly, you know, all of us understand that, you know, this is not the 1950s anymore,” she said.

“Families come in all kinds of shapes and forms, and they’re family nonetheless.”

Let’s ignore any debate about the data regarding what type of familial structure sets a child up for success, because — while it’s yet another happy-clappy “Free to Be You and Me” liberal platitude that’s turned out to be a pernicious lie — the first part of the statement is the key here.

This isn’t just a response to a very specific criticism by Sanders about whether Harris has given birth, but rather a blanket indictment that seems to lump all criticism of her private life under the auspices of the kind of people who want to go back to the Lucy-and-Ricky separate-beds era of the American family.

And there’s a bit of subtext here, to boot. The Sunday interview comes just four days after the latest scandal to befall the second couple’s life before they were married. This time dealing with her husband, Doug Emhoff.

According to a report in the U.K.’s Daily Mail, sources say that Emhoff — now 59 — “forcefully slapped” an ex-girlfriend for allegedly flirting with another man after an alcohol-fueled night at the Cannes Film Festival in France in 2012.

The report was based off of three sources close to the former girlfriend, described by the Mail as “a successful New York attorney” they referred to pseudonymously as “Jane.”

One source said “that the woman called him immediately after the incident, sobbing in her cab, and described the alleged assault,” the outlet noted.

“A second friend said Jane, who had been dating Emhoff for three months, also told her about the alleged violence at the time. A third friend told DailyMail.com that Jane first told her in 2014 that she had dated Emhoff, and recounted the full story of his alleged abuse in 2018, when then senator Harris was in the news after grilling Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in a Senate hearing over sexual assault allegations.”

All three sources “shared with DailyMail.com pictures of him and Jane together from 2012, and other documents and communications corroborating elements of the story.”

“It was something like 3 a.m.,” one of the sources said. “They were trying to get out of there, and they both had been drinking. There was a gigantic line for taxis.

“[Jane] went up to one of the valet guys, offered him 100 Euros or whatever, to get to the head of the line. She told me she put her hand on his shoulder.

“Doug apparently thought that she was flirting and came over and slapped her in the face.”

“She put her hand on the valet’s shoulder, and as she was talking to him, Doug comes up,” said another source. “She said he turned her around by her right shoulder, and she was completely caught off guard.

“He hauled up and slapped her so hard she spun around. She said she was in utter shock.”

A day later, a spokesman for Emhoff discreetly released a terse statement to Semafor — a legit outlet, to be sure, but not exactly The New York Times or CNN when it comes to getting your message out there front and center — saying that “this report is untrue” and “any suggestion that he would or has ever hit a woman is false.”

This also comes a few months after a report that Emhoff, while still married to his former wife, impregnated his nanny. There was no denial of that one, just a vague statement that he and his wife “went through some tough times on account of my actions. I took responsibility, and in the years since, we worked through things as a family and have come out stronger on the other side.”

“Tough times?” You don’t say.

Now, adultery and impregnating nannies and drunken partner abuse did happen during the 1950s, yes. I’d like to think we looked less kindly upon certain aspects of that kind of thing back then. But even then, these kinds of things are hurting the Harris-Emhoff brand, as Semafor’s Max Tani noted following the statement from the spokesman: “This is a new campaign front: Emhoff has been a key Harris’ advocate, cast as a relatable, enlightened ‘wife guy’ and father who ‘discussed the feminism of Pearl Jam.’”

And while we’re at this, let’s please not forget Harris’ interesting romantic choices. When she was 29, she was the latest in the string of girlfriends flaunted in public by then-California Assembly speaker and future San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown. He was, at the time, 60 and married — although he and his wife had been separated since the 1980s and had a very San Francisco arrangement in which he basically aired his adulteries in public without shame.

While it’s unfair to say that Brown is solely responsible for Harris’ political career — if every one of Willie Brown’s girlfriends had a similar career trajectory, California would have 627 senators, all female — the notoriously patronage-happy politician said in a letter to the San Francisco Chronicle in 2018 that he “may have influenced her career by appointing her to two state commissions when I was Assembly speaker.”

I repeat myself: You don’t say.

Harris was, at the time, so young that one reporter mistook her for Brown’s daughter. No, this isn’t the kind of thing that would have happened in the 1950s. And that’s a reason we would want to go back to the 1950s.

It’s not a particularly salient argument against that decade’s mores. Rather, it’s a reminder we threw a very big baby out with the bathwater sometime during the moral revolution that’s happened in the intervening years. And yes, of course there was a lot of bathwater: Jim Crow. Open bigotry and sexism. Polio. Everything bad that happened in the first few verses of “We Didn’t Start the Fire,” basically.

However, the blanket criticism of the Harris-Emhoff family can’t just be dismissed as mid-20th century WASP-ish moralism for a bevy of reasons.

First, the left has made plenty of hay over Donald Trump’s family life. You’ve heard the jokes: Trump believes in family values so much that he’s had three of them. Oh yes, and Stormy Daniels, too! Meanwhile, I’d never heard “devout Catholic” used so many times in a positive way than during the 2020 campaign when referring to Joe Biden’s religious beliefs. Now we question the dubious romantic entanglements of the couple atop the Democratic ticket, and we’re told not to go back to those old-timey days of believing in Biblical values? Give me a break.

Second, this behavior isn’t just “weird,” as Tim Walz would say. Abusing a woman is illegal. Impregnating your nanny while you’re married is immoral, as is dating a married man who may have kinda sorta helped your career along by appointing you to a few state boards.

These were things that would end your career in the 1950s — or even more recently. They tried to end Donald Trump’s career over less in the not-too-distant past. Now, we’re being told to lighten up and don’t be the double-bed Ricardo types.

If there was ever a worse time for Harris or her campaign to remind America of how things were when marriage and family were venerated institutions, I’m having trouble thinking of it.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post Harris Defends Her Family Life as Controversies Swirl, Says ‘This Is Not the 1950s’ appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go to Source
Author: C. Douglas Golden, The Western Journal

Former CIA and Pentagon Advisor Warns… “The Intel Inside this Book Could Trigger a 50% Stock Market Crash and Dollar Collapse this November”

Former CIA and Pentagon Advisor Warns… “The Intel Inside this Book Could Trigger a 50% Stock Market Crash and Dollar Collapse this November”

Former CIA and Pentagon Advisor Warns… “The Intel Inside this Book Could Trigger a 50% Stock Market Crash and Dollar Collapse this November”
October 8, 2024

(Note: Thank you for supporting businesses like those presenting a sponsored message below and ordering through the links below, which benefits Gateway Pundit. We appreciate your support!)

See the book below?

99.99% of Americans don’t even know it exists.

It’s published by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

According to Former CIA and Pentagon Advisor Jim Rickards, the intel inside this book will play a key role in a coming market meltdown in November.

And every American should pay attention because Jim is a lawyer and economist who’s worked at the highest levels of Wall Street and international finance across five decades.

And he correctly predicted the last two major financial crises in America.

In the summer of 2008, he wrote a letter to top advisors in the presidential campaign saying:
“We can expect another panic spike in October 2008. This financial crisis is not over.”
Three weeks later, Lehman Brothers went bankrupt…

Panic took over and markets crashed across the world, ruining the retirement of millions of Americans.

Fast forward to January 2020.

When most people were not worried about a pandemic, he sent an email to a small group of his readers…

Predicting the pandemic could soon trigger panic in the markets.

Sure enough, three weeks later, everyone began to panic…

And the stock market plunged 30% in what was the fastest crash in history.

Jim Rickards now believes a terrifying new crisis will hit America this coming November.

He’s predicting millions of Americans could be blindsided and suffer catastrophic losses.

And it’s all thanks to the information inside this little-known book you see below.

Jim just posted a new video on his website with all the details, including the 5 steps every American should take right now.

The post Former CIA and Pentagon Advisor Warns… “The Intel Inside this Book Could Trigger a 50% Stock Market Crash and Dollar Collapse this November” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go to Source
Author: Promoted Post