Jump to content
gottaplan

The Trump Presidency

Recommended Posts

DID RUSSIA INSTALL DONALD TRUMP AS THE NEXT U.S. PRESIDENT?

http://www.newsweek.com/did-russia-install-donald-trump-next-us-president-520272

 

If that's a legitimate question, the answer is obviously "no".  But that's the nature of media today.  Headlines state an alarming question "Is Hillary a Lesbian?"  When the answer is obvious, the question itself is ridiculous and the article is probably baseless, but in our quick-click, scan-link media, the point is made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If that's a legitimate question, the answer is obviously "no".  But that's the nature of media today.  Headlines state an alarming question "Is Hillary a Lesbian?"  When the answer is obvious, the question itself is ridiculous and the article is probably baseless, but in our quick-click, scan-link media, the point is made.

 

Install? No, of course not. But the article isn't baseless. Americans have a right to know the extent of Russia's role in this election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Melania and Baron are not moving to the White House?    I wonder how the Obama-haters who were worried about the costs of his occasional golf trips will react to the BILLIONS that are about to be spent over the next 4 years in Midtown Manhattan protecting Trump's "staycation" home?

 

http://nypost.com/2016/11/20/melania-and-barron-trump-wont-be-moving-to-the-white-house/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ The fact you're missing is that they won't move until the end of the school year, according to Trump. They will move then. That's a very respectable decision - upending and moving a kid in the middle of a school year is never easy, and if you have the choice and resources to avoid doing that, it is almost always the better choice for the child.

 

DID RUSSIA INSTALL DONALD TRUMP AS THE NEXT U.S. PRESIDENT?

http://www.newsweek.com/did-russia-install-donald-trump-next-us-president-520272

 

If that's a legitimate question, the answer is obviously "no".  But that's the nature of media today.  Headlines state an alarming question "Is Hillary a Lesbian?"  When the answer is obvious, the question itself is ridiculous and the article is probably baseless, but in our quick-click, scan-link media, the point is made.

 

Newsweek has a name that was once respectable, but don’t forget they were bought out by a tabloid style blog (Daily Beast) and have the same dumb click-bait titles that are so pervasive these days. It’s not a legitimate question to ask, it’s a crappy tabloid headline that probably wouldn’t make it past the editors at the National Enquirer or Globe’s editors, and the article itself wouldn’t be fit for printing on their pages. It’s a shame the Newsweek name has fallen so far, but the fact that this is what they’re doing now is a good sign as to why they aren’t in print anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm obviously no Trump fan, and he's certainly not worth sacrificing oneself over....

 

Man, 69, sets himself on fire in Highland Square moments after ranting about President-elect Trump

http://www.ohio.com/news/local/man-69-sets-himself-on-fire-in-highland-square-moments-after-ranting-about-president-elect-trump-1.728435#.WDIRYOlO7vl.facebook

 

lol...dude that's hilarious

 

I think I would have just kept the camera rolling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another all too common reminder that although Trump won the election, the media is still not giving him a fair shake. There's bias, and then there's outright lies. This is the latter, via NBC:

 

NBC News under fire for misleading tweets about Trump chief of staff's answer on Muslim registry

 

http://uk.businessinsider.com/nbc-criticism-trump-tweet-muslim-registry-reince-2016-11?r=US&IR=T

 

NBC News came under fire Sunday morning for two tweets that removed context from an answer Reince Priebus, President-elect Donald Trump's pick for White House chief of staff, offered on the idea of a Muslim registry.

 

Priebus appeared "Meet the Press" and was asked by host Chuck Todd whether he could rule out the idea of placing Muslims on a registry.

 

Here was the exchange:

 

TODD: Can you equivocally rule out a registry for Muslims?

 

PRIEBUS: Look, I’m not going to rule out anything. But, we are not going to have a registry based on religion.

 

The public relations account for NBC News tweeted out the exchange twice but left out the second part of Priebus' response:

 

"Can you rule out a registry for Muslims?" asks @ChuckTodd.

 

"I'm not going to rule out anything..." says @Reince on @MeetThePress #MTP

 

Elipses are meant to leave out less relevent information, not information that completely changes the entire meaning of the quote. Someone should be fired for these Tweets - but they won't and NBC will keep doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ The fact you're missing is that they won't move until the end of the school year, according to Trump. They will move then. That's a very respectable decision - upending and moving a kid in the middle of a school year is never easy, and if you have the choice and resources to avoid doing that, it is almost always the better choice for the child.

 

Agreed, but Trump refused to confirm that they will "move then".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it isn't a fireable offense at all obviously. Mere hours later to parse this silliness more, various people in the new admin were quoted as saying that islam is not a real religion.  So in fact, that would allow them to do a registry since they do not deem it to be a religion.  So NBC is absolutely correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it isn't a fireable offense at all obviously. Mere hours later to parse this silliness more, various people in the new admin were quoted as saying that islam is not a real religion.  So in fact, that would allow them to do a registry since they do not deem it to be a religion.  So NBC is absolutely correct.

 

They aren't.  Because they left out what Priebius said.

 

Who "in the new administration" said that.  Keep in mind no one is really "in it" yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that's a legitimate question, the answer is obviously "no".  But that's the nature of media today.  Headlines state an alarming question "Is Hillary a Lesbian?"  When the answer is obvious, the question itself is ridiculous and the article is probably baseless, but in our quick-click, scan-link media, the point is made.

 

Install? No, of course not. But the article isn't baseless. Americans have a right to know the extent of Russia's role in this election.

 

I agree, and I said a week ago earlier in this thread that I'd be in favor of the FBI looking into his relations with Russia to see if there's any actual harmful relationships.  So far, lots of allegations but no smoking gun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it isn't a fireable offense at all obviously. Mere hours later to parse this silliness more, various people in the new admin were quoted as saying that islam is not a real religion.  So in fact, that would allow them to do a registry since they do not deem it to be a religion.  So NBC is absolutely correct.

 

They chopped a quote down in a manner that made it mean the exact opposite of what it originally meant. They literally couldn't be more wrong than that - short of fabricating the quote altogether.

 

^ The fact you're missing is that they won't move until the end of the school year, according to Trump. They will move then. That's a very respectable decision - upending and moving a kid in the middle of a school year is never easy, and if you have the choice and resources to avoid doing that, it is almost always the better choice for the child.

 

Agreed, but Trump refused to confirm that they will "move then".

 

He didn't swear on the bible or anything but he did say they will move after the school year.

 

Trump spoke Sunday to reporters gathered at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, during a day of private meetings with potential administration officials. He said he will live in the White House and wife Melania Trump and 10-year-old son Barron will move “right after he finishes school.”

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-wife-son-will-move-to-white-house-after-school-year/2016/11/20/6fff70e0-af66-11e6-bc2d-19b3d759cfe7_story.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it rich that you are upset that a news orgnization learned how to use clickbait to get people to actually check out what was said in its entirety.

  If you believe that islam is not a religion then it totally is true. They have all options available to them including registering muslims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it isn't a fireable offense at all obviously. Mere hours later to parse this silliness more, various people in the new admin were quoted as saying that islam is not a real religion.  So in fact, that would allow them to do a registry since they do not deem it to be a religion.  So NBC is absolutely correct.

 

They chopped a quote down in a manner that made it mean the exact opposite of what it originally meant. They literally couldn't be more wrong than that - short of fabricating the quote altogether.

 

Let's go over this quote again.

 

TODD: Can you equivocally rule out a registry for Muslims?

 

PRIEBUS: Look, I’m not going to rule out anything. But, we are not going to have a registry based on religion.

 

Priebus has literally just said nothing.  He said he can't rule anything out and he also said that they won't have a registry.  How can he claim that there won't be a registry if he can't rule anything out?  The bottom line is that we'll have to wait and see what this administration proposes, but the fact that we even need to have these discussions is pretty depressing to me.  The leader of a country founded on religious freedom appears to be looking for a way to discriminate against an entire religion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it isn't a fireable offense at all obviously. Mere hours later to parse this silliness more, various people in the new admin were quoted as saying that islam is not a real religion.  So in fact, that would allow them to do a registry since they do not deem it to be a religion.  So NBC is absolutely correct.

 

They chopped a quote down in a manner that made it mean the exact opposite of what it originally meant. They literally couldn't be more wrong than that - short of fabricating the quote altogether.

 

Let's go over this quote again.

 

TODD: Can you equivocally rule out a registry for Muslims?

 

PRIEBUS: Look, I’m not going to rule out anything. But, we are not going to have a registry based on religion.

 

Priebus has literally just said nothing.  He said he can't rule anything out and he also said that they won't have a registry.  How can he claim that there won't be a registry if he can't rule anything out?  The bottom line is that we'll have to wait and see what this administration proposes, but the fact that we even need to have these discussions is pretty depressing to me.  The leader of a country founded on religious freedom appears to be looking for a way to discriminate against an entire religion. 

 

There is no way in Hell, Hades, or Jannaham that the United States of America is going to declare that Islam is not a legitimate religion. 

 

Trump said a lot of off the wall stuff while he was a candidate.  But there’s solid signs that he didn’t mean quite a bit of it.  For example, the leading candidate for Defense Secretary is a retired Marine General who supports the Ukranians versus the Russians, has criticized both Obama and Trump for dismissing the value of allies, and while in command in the Middle East took great pains to ensure his troops were sensitive to local (Muslim) concerns. 

 

Even if he listened to his true believers from the wading section of the gene pool long enough to try such a thing, the courts would strike it down very quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ There's no need to go over the quote again. I've gone over it several times and I keep seeing the part where he said "we are not going to have a registry based on religion," the key part that was absent from NBC's series of Tweets and headlines.

 

The previous sentence was just reality. He can't rule anything out because he is employed at the discretion of the president.

 

The truth of the matter (and you're right in saying it's depressing) is that we have little to no current infrastructure in place to combat the spread of radicalization, neither in the middle east nor our own country. That's something I'm hopeful Trump will put into place, as our current president has done an abysmal job at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of what I've seen bandied about about the registry is some kind of reinstatement of NSEERS.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Entry-Exit_Registration_System

 

Obama discontinued it (and replaced it with the US-VISIT program), but Trump could reinstate it, and he wouldn't be reaching deep into unprecedented territory, since it's a registry of immigrants and visa holders by country (which of course were predominantly Muslim, but still, by country and applicable only to non-US citizens).  By contrast, if he demands a registry of native-born U.S. citizens who happen to be Muslim, that would definitely be unprecedented (and would be nearly certain to go to the Supreme Court, quite possibly before Trump could name more than one nominee to it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely believe they intend to "decide" that being Muslim is not a religion and thus allow a "loophole" to create a registry for a "dangerous ideology." When someone in politics says they can't rule something out, that means that's exactly what they're going to do.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ There's no need to go over the quote again. I've gone over it several times and I keep seeing the part where he said "we are not going to have a registry based on religion," the key part that was absent from NBC's series of Tweets and headlines.

 

The previous sentence was just reality. He can't rule anything out because he is employed at the discretion of the president.

 

I absolutely love this.  He very clearly made two contradictory statements because he knows that people will hear what they want to hear.  If you are someone that wants to see a Muslim registry he just told you that there will be one because it's up to his boss who has very clearly advocated for it.  If you are against a registry you just heard him say that there won't be one even though the sentence before that he told you it's not up to him.  It's actually good politics on Priebus' part.

 

The truth of the matter (and you're right in saying it's depressing) is that we have little to no current infrastructure in place to combat the spread of radicalization, neither in the middle east nor our own country. That's something I'm hopeful Trump will put into place, as our current president has done an abysmal job at it.

 

What infrastructure should be in place to combat radicalization in the US?  The Obama administration has worked on outreach toward Muslim American communities to prevent radicalization before it starts.  What else can really be done without threatening the the constitutionally protected freedoms of US citizens?  How much freedom is the Trump adminstration willing to sacrafice in the name of security?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/15/obama-administration-american-muslims-radicalization

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely believe they intend to "decide" that being Muslim is not a religion and thus allow a "loophole" to create a registry for a "dangerous ideology." When someone in politics says they can't rule something out, that means that's exactly what they're going to do.

 

Whether they call it a religion or not, I think they'd have the same First Amendment problems that they'd have if they conceded it was a religion, and opponents of the registry would still have the same arguments available to them under the Constitution.  Consider, for example, whether they could enforce a registry of all atheists.

 

Note that the government can, most likely, make its own list based on people's public professions of their faith or ideology, just like Google makes stunningly granular profiles of your commercial, political, and probably even sexual interests based on your search history.  Therefore, if you come out and openly declare yourself to be Muslim, or atheist, or Catholic, or Third Christ Almighty Baptist Superchurch of Texas, the government is generally not required to close its eyes and respect a right of "privacy" in information that you volunteered to the world.  But that is different than compelling speech (compelling profession of an ideology), much less compelling conduct based on it (e.g., presenting oneself for periodic inspection, let alone of course internment).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will likely be NSEERS on steroids, which is horrible policy regardless of principle. There were very good reasons that system was abandoned, most notably that it wasn't only ineffective, it was counterproductive. It's pouring gasoline on a fire while also aiming the nearest water hose down the drain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Video: At alt-right conference in DC, Trump’s victor met with cheers & Nazi salutes https://t.co/92AWRUpKNl

 

Restaurant apologizes for hosting alt-right meeting, will donate profits to Jewish group

https://t.co/AyCpZS7vEB


"Nearly every problem that we have in the USA -- unaffordable health care, prison overpopulation, hyper militarization, climate change, racism, gun violence, poverty, poor education, urban sprawl and others -- cannot be positively addressed because bribery and conflicts of interest are legal under campaign finance laws which protect the uber-wealthy and the narrow self-interests who grossly benefit from our afflictions."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More conflict of interest?

 

Argentine media: Trump asked President Macri to help with construction permits for a Trump building in Buenos Aires. https://t.co/YKahSlC3RP https://t.co/K89vu08IzX


"Nearly every problem that we have in the USA -- unaffordable health care, prison overpopulation, hyper militarization, climate change, racism, gun violence, poverty, poor education, urban sprawl and others -- cannot be positively addressed because bribery and conflicts of interest are legal under campaign finance laws which protect the uber-wealthy and the narrow self-interests who grossly benefit from our afflictions."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Video: At alt-right conference in DC, Trump’s victor met with cheers & Nazi salutes https://t.co/92AWRUpKNl

 

Restaurant apologizes for hosting alt-right meeting, will donate profits to Jewish group

https://t.co/AyCpZS7vEB

 

There is a tweet from tila tequilla from the event.  I guess if you fail at porn, you hang out with white supremacist losers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Video: At alt-right conference in DC, Trumps victor met with cheers & Nazi salutes https://t.co/92AWRUpKNl

 

Restaurant apologizes for hosting alt-right meeting, will donate profits to Jewish group

https://t.co/AyCpZS7vEB

 

There is a tweet from tile tequilla from the event.  I guess if you fail at porn, you hang out with white supremacist losers.

 

She was famously pelted and run out of the Gathering of the Juggalos:

http://www.avclub.com/article/when-juggalos-attack-a-firsthand-account-of-the-ti-44221

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are only a few of Trump's action items for his first 100 days in office (plenty of these are 'reach across the aisle' ideas, unlike anything we've seen in the last 8 years):

 

 

On the topic of reaching across the aisle, here's an interesting statement from Tulsi Gabbard after her meeting today with Trump. Gabbard was Bernie's VP choice in California where he was a write-in candidate:

 

http://gabbard.house.gov/index.php/press-releases/655-gabbard-statement-on-meeting-with-president-elect-donald-trump

 

“President-elect Trump and I had a frank and positive conversation in which we discussed a variety of foreign policy issues in depth. I shared with him my grave concerns that escalating the war in Syria by implementing a so-called no fly/safe zone would be disastrous for the Syrian people, our country, and the world. It would lead to more death and suffering, exacerbate the refugee crisis, strengthen ISIS and al-Qaeda, and bring us into a direct conflict with Russia which could result in a nuclear war. We discussed my bill to end our country’s illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government, and the need to focus our precious resources on rebuilding our own country, and on defeating al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other terrorist groups who pose a threat to the American people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Donald Trump’s media summit was a ‘f—ing firing squad’

 

http://nypost.com/2016/11/21/donald-trumps-media-summit-was-a-f-ing-firing-squad/

 

Donald Trump scolded media big shots during an off-the-record Trump Tower sitdown on Monday, sources told The Post.

 

“It was like a f–ing firing squad,” one source said of the encounter.

 

“Trump started with [CNN chief] Jeff Zucker and said ‘I hate your network, everyone at CNN is a liar and you should be ashamed,’ ” the source said.

 

“The meeting was a total disaster. The TV execs and anchors went in there thinking they would be discussing the access they would get to the Trump administration, but instead they got a Trump-style dressing down,” the source added.

 

A second source confirmed the fireworks...

 

Trump spokeswoman Kellyanne Conway told reporters the gathering went well.

 

“Excellent meetings with the top executives of the major networks,” she said during a gaggle in the lobby of Trump Tower. “Pretty unprecedented meeting we put together in two days.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^This does not bode well for the next 4 years.  We now have a President with an axe to grind against the major news networks (essentially everybody except Hannity).  Maybe Trump will start his own government news network.  I'm sure he can ask Putin how best to set that up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it ironic how Trump and his supporters are so easily offended?  Thin skin does not begin to properly describe it.  This is going to be a highly comical four years.... best case scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump always goes on a Twitter tirade to distract everyone from a real scandal.  Today he distracting everyone from his crooked foundation and his violation of the Emolument Clause the day he takes office.

 

Info on crooked Trump foundation:

 

https://t.co/EGUGjxOiZr

 

Lock Him Up!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't understand how the Trump Organization and Trump Foundation are going to continue to operate while he is in office.  Putting them in a blind trust administered by his children won't quell many concerns about conflicts of interest.  That would, at the very least, cause a strong appearance of impropriety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Trump is breaking another campaign promise.

 

In an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program, Kellyanne Conway, the former Trump campaign manager and a senior adviser to his transition, said the president-elect wanted to “move beyond the issues of the campaign” and confirmed that Mr. Trump did not want his promised Clinton investigations to take place.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/us/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-investigation.html?_r=0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I sound increasingly tinfoil hat but I think this was about as much of an accident as a celeb suddenly going to a paparazzi-heavy starbucks to show off a new engagement ring (or for someone in a troubled marriage, the suddenly gone wedding ring).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I'm with you. That doesn't seem like an accident to me given what text is visible. It reads like too much of a Trump campaign promise list. It was being widely celebrated by Trump supporters everywhere - particularly this excerpt:

 

"1989 miles planned for rapid construction"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This closed door meeting between Trump and the media is astonishing.  Is he really trying to bully the press into giving him the type of coverage his jock-boy Hannity gives him?  This guy has been around way too many 'yes men' his entire life.  He is in for a rude awakening and a very long four years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This closed door meeting between Trump and the media is astonishing.  Is he really trying to bully the press into giving him the type of coverage his jock-boy Hannity gives him?  This guy has been around way too many 'yes men' his entire life.  He is in for a rude awakening and a very long four years.

 

That's always been the take on him, too many "yes men".  We'll see what his cabinet picks look like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Video: At alt-right conference in DC, Trump’s victor met with cheers & Nazi salutes https://t.co/92AWRUpKNl

 

Restaurant apologizes for hosting alt-right meeting, will donate profits to Jewish group

https://t.co/AyCpZS7vEB

 

There is a tweet from tila tequilla from the event.  I guess if you fail at porn, you hang out with white supremacist losers.

 

Oh okay, that's why the woman doing the salute with a smirk looked familiar.  And very much like she was trolling, which she does.

 

Or maybe she just likes insane clowns....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I sound increasingly tinfoil hat but I think this was about as much of an accident as a celeb suddenly going to a paparazzi-heavy starbucks to show off a new engagement ring (or for someone in a troubled marriage, the suddenly gone wedding ring).

 

Even if it wasn't deliberate, Trump if he chooses could easily spin it that way, and it would be hard to tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This closed door meeting between Trump and the media is astonishing.  Is he really trying to bully the press into giving him the type of coverage his jock-boy Hannity gives him?  This guy has been around way too many 'yes men' his entire life.  He is in for a rude awakening and a very long four years.

 

That's always been the take on him, too many "yes men".  We'll see what his cabinet picks look like.

 

One thing about Trump is he is beating the media at their own game with his Twitter.  He can do his own press and policy announcements if he chooses to

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This closed door meeting between Trump and the media is astonishing.  Is he really trying to bully the press into giving him the type of coverage his jock-boy Hannity gives him?  This guy has been around way too many 'yes men' his entire life.  He is in for a rude awakening and a very long four years.

 

That's always been the take on him, too many "yes men".  We'll see what his cabinet picks look like.

 

One thing about Trump is he is beating the media at their own game with his Twitter.  He can do his own press and policy announcements if he chooses to

 

That would certainly be in keeping with how he rendered them essentially irrelevant and impotent in the campaign (not a single major newspaper endorsed him, for example, including many that had never endorsed a Democrat, or hadn't in generations).  Trump is at least as good or better at new media technologies as most old-line press outlets are, since a lot of them are reluctant to abandon old models, and Trump's thought-free thoughts are perfectly suited to Twitter (though I doubt he has the humor to use a Snapchat filter), and I see he's branching out to YouTube.  But that doesn't mean the old guard media, diminished as they are, have to bow and scrape for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I  wish the media would stop focusing on his whining on Twitter.  He obviously does this when news of his corruption or malfeasance  is about hit the news cycle.  Focus on the real story people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I sound increasingly tinfoil hat but I think this was about as much of an accident as a celeb suddenly going to a paparazzi-heavy starbucks to show off a new engagement ring (or for someone in a troubled marriage, the suddenly gone wedding ring).

 

Even if it wasn't deliberate, Trump if he chooses could easily spin it that way, and it would be hard to tell.

 

I do think he’s doing a certain amount of trolling, putting out a completely unacceptable name as a trial balloon (Bannon as Chief of Staff) then coming up with someone who looks good by comparison.  So yes, that fits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The President elect is trolling?  That's comforting. 

 

Bannon, btw, is essentially the Chief of Staff, I don't care what they call him.  His duties are more comparable to Chief of Staff than anything else they want to call him.  Priebus is more like Deputy Chief of Staff.  Bannon is the one who will be running the show.  Priebus will answer to him and won't have access to Trump without Bannon's say so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...