Past 5 GOP Presidents Fraud & Treason to Electoral Victory

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Past 5 GOP Presidents Fraud & Treason to Electoral Victory

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Nov 13, 2017 5:14 pm

THE RIGHT WING

The Past 5 GOP Presidents Have Used Fraud and Treason to Steer Themselves to Electoral Victory
The deception started long before Donald Trump.
By Thom Hartmann / AlterNet July 28, 2017, 1:49 PM GMT


People are wondering out loud about the parallels between today’s Republican Party and organized crime, and whether “Teflon Don” Trump will remain unscathed through his many scandals, ranging from interactions with foreign oligarchs to killing tens of thousands of Americans by denying them healthcare to stepping up the destruction of our environment and public lands.

History suggests – even if treason can be demonstrated – that, as long as he holds onto the Republican Party (and Fox News), he’ll survive it intact. And he won’t be the first Republican president to commit high crimes to get and stay in office.

In fact, Eisenhower was the last legitimately elected Republican president we’ve had in this country.

Since Dwight Eisenhower left the presidency in 1961, six different Republicans have occupied the Oval Office.

And every single one of them - from Richard Nixon to Donald Trump - have been illegitimate - ascending to the highest office in the land not through small-D democratic elections - but instead through fraud and treason.

(And today’s GOP-controlled Congress is arguably just as corrupt and illegitimate, acting almost entirely within the boundaries set by an organized group of billionaires.)

Let’s start at the beginning with Richard Nixon.

In 1968 - President Lyndon Johnson was desperately trying to end the Vietnam war.

But Richard Nixon knew that if the war continued - it would tarnish Democrat (and Vice President) Hubert Humphrey’s chances of winning the 1968 election.

So Nixon sent envoys from his campaign to talk to South Vietnamese leaders to encourage them not to attend an upcoming peace talk in Paris.

Nixon promised South Vietnam’s corrupt politicians that he would give them a richer deal when he was President than LBJ could give them then.

LBJ found out about this political maneuver to prolong the Vietnam war just 3 days before the 1968 election. He phoned the Republican Senate leader Everett Dirksen – here’s an excerpt (you can listen to the entire conversation here):

President Johnson:
Some of our folks, including some of the old China lobby, are going to the Vietnamese embassy and saying please notify the [South Vietnamese] president that if he'll hold out 'til November the second they could get a better deal. Now, I'm reading their hand, Everett. I don't want to get this in the campaign.

And they oughtn't to be doin' this. This is treason.

Sen. Dirksen: I know.

Those tapes were only released by the LBJ library in the past decade, and that’s Richard Nixon that Lyndon Johnson was accusing of treason.

But by then - Nixon’s plan had worked.

South Vietnam boycotted the peace talks - the war continued - and Nixon won the White House thanks to it. As a result, additional tens of thousands of American soldiers, and hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese civilians, died as a result of Nixon’s treason.

And Nixon was never held to account for it.

Gerald Ford was the next Republican.

After Nixon left office the same way he entered it - by virtue of breaking the law - Gerald Ford took over.

Ford was never elected to the White House (he was appointed to replace VP Spiro Agnew, after Agnew was indicted for decades of taking bribes), and thus would never have been President had it not been for Richard Nixon’s treason.

The third was Ronald Reagan, elected in 1980.

He won thanks to a little something called the October Surprise - when his people sabotaged then-President Jimmy Carter’s negotiations to release American hostages in Iran.

According to Iran’s then-president, Reagan’s people promised the Iranians that if they held off on releasing the American hostages until just after the election - then Reagan would give them a sweet weapons deal.

In 1980 Carter thought he had reached a deal with newly-elected Iranian President Abdolhassan Bani-Sadr over the release of the fifty-two hostages held by radical students at the American Embassy in Tehran.

Bani-Sadr was a moderate and, as he explained in an editorial for The Christian Science Monitor earlier this year, had successfully run for President on the popular position of releasing the hostages:

"I openly opposed the hostage-taking throughout the election campaign.... I won the election with over 76 percent of the vote.... Other candidates also were openly against hostage-taking, and overall, 96 percent of votes in that election were given to candidates who were against it [hostage-taking]."

Carter was confident that with Bani-Sadr's help, he could end the embarrassing hostage crisis that had been a thorn in his political side ever since it began in November of 1979. But Carter underestimated the lengths his opponent in the 1980 Presidential election, California Governor Ronald Reagan, would go to win an election.

Behind Carter's back, the Reagan campaign worked out a deal with the leader of Iran's radical faction - Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini - to keep the hostages in captivity until after the 1980 Presidential election.

This was nothing short of treason. The Reagan campaign's secret negotiations with Khomeini - the so-called "October Surprise" - sabotaged Carter and Bani-Sadr's attempts to free the hostages. And as Bani-Sadr told The Christian Science Monitor in March of 2013:

After arriving in France [in 1981], I told a BBC reporter that I had left Iran to expose the symbiotic relationship between Khomeinism and Reaganism.

Ayatollah Khomeini and Ronald Reagan had organized a clandestine negotiation, later known as the “October Surprise,” which prevented the attempts by myself and then-US President Jimmy Carter to free the hostages before the 1980 US presidential election took place. The fact that they were not released tipped the results of the election in favor of Reagan.

And Reagan’s treason - just like Nixon’s treason - worked perfectly.

The Iran hostage crisis continued and torpedoed Jimmy Carter's re-election hopes.

And the same day Reagan took the oath of office - almost to the minute, by way of Iran’s acknowledging the deal - the American hostages in Iran were released.

And for that, Reagan began selling the Iranians weapons and spare parts in 1981, and continued until he was busted for it in 1986, producing the so-called "Iran Contra" scandal.

But, like Nixon, Reagan was never held to account for the criminal and treasonous actions that brought him to office.

After Reagan - Bush senior was elected - but like Gerry Ford - Bush was really only President because he served as Vice President under Reagan.

If the October Surprise hadn’t hoodwinked voters in 1980 - you can bet Bush senior would never have been elected in 1988. That's four illegitimate Republican presidents.

And that brings us to George W. Bush, the man who was given the White House by five right-wing justices on the Supreme Court.

In the Bush v. Gore Supreme Court decision in 2000 that stopped the Florida recount and thus handed George W. Bush the presidency - Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in his opinion:

"The counting of votes ... does in my view threaten irreparable harm to petitioner [George W. Bush], and to the country, by casting a cloud upon what he [Bush] claims to be the legitimacy of his election."

Apparently, denying the presidency to Al Gore, the guy who actually won the most votes in Florida, did not constitute "irreparable harm" to Scalia or the media.

And apparently it wasn't important that Scalia’s son worked for the law firm that was defending George W. Bush before the high court (thus no Scalia recusal).

Just like it wasn't important to mention that Justice Clarence Thomas's wife worked on the Bush transition team and was busy accepting resumes from people who would serve in the Bush White House if her husband stopped the recount in Florida...which he did. (No Thomas recusal, either.)

And more than a year after the election - a consortium of newspapers including The Washington Post, The New York Times, and USA Today did their own recount in Florida - manually counting every vote in a process that took almost a year - and concluded that Al Gore did indeed win the presidency in 2000.

As the November 12th, 2001 article in The New York Times read:

“If all the ballots had been reviewed under any of seven single standards and combined with the results of an examination of overvotes, Mr. Gore would have won.”

That little bit of info was slipped into the seventeenth paragraph of the Times story on purpose so that it would attract as little attention as possible around the nation.

Why? because the 9/11 attacks had just happened - and journalists feared that burdening Americans with the plain truth that George W. Bush actually lost the election would further hurt a nation that was already in crisis.

And none of that even considered that Bush could only have gotten as close to Gore as he did because his brother, Florida Governor Jeb Bush, had ordered his Secretary of State, Kathrine Harris, to purge at least 57,000 mostly-Black voters from the state’s rolls just before the election.

So for the third time in 4 decades - Republicans took the White House under illegitimate electoral circumstances. Even President Carter was shocked by the brazenness of that one.

And Jeb Bush and the GOP were never held to account for that crime against democracy.

Most recently, in 2016, Kris Kobach and Republican Secretaries of State across the nation used Interstate Crosscheck to purge millions of legitimate voters – most people of color – from the voting rolls just in time for the Clinton/Trump election.

Millions of otherwise valid American voters were denied their right to vote because they didn’t own the requisite ID – a modern-day poll-tax that’s spread across every Republican state with any consequential black, elderly, urban, or college-student population (all groups less likely to have a passport or drivers’ license).

Donald Trump still lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes, but came to power through an electoral college designed to keep slavery safe in colonial America.

You can only wonder how much better off America would be if 6 Republican Presidents hadn't stolen or inherited a stolen White House.

In fact - the last legitimate Republican President - Dwight Eisenhower - was unlike any other Republican president since.

He ran for the White House on a platform of peace - that he would end the Korean War.

This from one of his TV campaign ads:

“The nation, haunted by the stalemate in Korea, looks to Eisenhower. Eisenhower knows how to deal with the Russians. He has met Europe leaders, has got them working with us. Elect the number one man for the number one job of our time. November 4th vote for peace. Vote for Eisenhower.”

Two of his campaign slogans were "I like Ike" and "Vote For Peace, Vote For Eisenhower".

Ike was a moderate Republican who stood up for working people - who kept tax rates on the rich at 91 percent - and made sure that the middle class in America was protected by FDR's New Deal policies.

As he told his brother Edgar in 1954 in a letter:

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history."

And Eisenhower was right - the only way Republicans have been able to win the presidency since he left office in 1961 has been by outright treason, a criminal fraud involving conflicted members of the Supreme Court, or by being vice-president under an already-illegitimate president.

And that's where we are today, dealing with the aftermath of all these Republican crimes and six illegitimate Republican presidents stacking the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary.

And this doesn’t even begin to tell the story of how the Republican majority in the senate represents 36 million fewer Americans than do the Democrats. Or how in most elections in past decades, Democrats have gotten more votes for the House of Representatives, but Republicans have controlled it because of gerrymandering.

This raises serious questions about the legitimacy of the modern Republican Party itself.

They work hand-in-glove with a group of right-wing billionaires and billionaire-owned or dominated media outlets like Fox and “conservative” TV and radio outlets across the nation, along with a very well-funded network of rightwing websites.

The Koch Network’s various groups, for example, have more money, more offices, and more staff than the Republican Party itself. Three times more employees and twice the budget, in fact. Which raises the question: which is the dog, and which is the tail?

And, as we’ve seen so vividly in the “debate” about healthcare this year, the Republicans, like Richard Nixon, are not encumbered by the need to tell the truth.

Whether it’s ending trade deals, bringing home jobs, protecting Social Security and Medicaid, or saving our public lands and environment – virtually every promise that Trump ran and won on is being broken. Meanwhile, the oligarchs continue to pressure Republican senators to vote their way.

Meanwhile, a public trust that has taken 240 years to build is being destroyed, as public lands, regulatory agencies, and our courts are handed off to oligarchs and transnational corporations to exploit or destroy.

The Trump and Republican campaign of 2016, Americans are now discovering, was nearly all lies, well-supported by a vast right-wing media machine and a timid, profit-obsessed “mainstream” corporate media. Meanwhile, it seemed that all the Democrats could say was, “The children are watching!”

Fraud, treason, and lies have worked well for the GOP for half a century.

Thus, the Democrats are right to now fine-tune their message to the people. But in addition to “A Better Deal,” they may want to consider adding to their agenda a solid RICO investigation into the GOP and the oligarchs who fund it.

It’s way past time to stop the now-routine Republican practice of using treason, lies, and crime to gain and hold political power.

http://www.alternet.org/right-wing/gop- ... nd-treason
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Past 5 GOP Presidents Fraud & Treason to Electoral Victo

Postby minime » Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:42 pm

Well, my word. You don't say, slad. Would you repeat that one more time?
User avatar
minime
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 2:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Past 5 GOP Presidents Fraud & Treason to Electoral Victo

Postby minime » Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:20 pm

"God must have loved the common people, because he made so many of them." - Abraham Lincoln
User avatar
minime
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 2:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Past 5 GOP Presidents Fraud & Treason to Electoral Victo

Postby minime » Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:40 am

Of course they cheat (those that cheat). They're outnumbered, and there's so much at stake. It's their job. And thank God for it. Get over it.
User avatar
minime
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 2:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Past 5 GOP Presidents Fraud & Treason to Electoral Victo

Postby minime » Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:58 am

They do their job because you don't do your job.
User avatar
minime
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 2:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Past 5 GOP Presidents Fraud & Treason to Electoral Victo

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:38 pm

please do not lecture or accuse me of something I do or do not do... you know nothing about my real life NOTHING!

pardon me but I have a good reason for bumping and bringing attention to previous republican presidents


Nasrullah: Saudi has declared war on Lebanon
By Juan Cole | Nov. 11, 2017 |

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –
Al Jazeera Arabic reports that Hassan Nasrullah, the secretary-general of Hizbullah accused Saudi Arabia of declaring war on Lebanon and on his party. He repeated his charge that Riyadh has abducted Lebanese prime minister Saad Hariri and has forced him to announce his resignation in a bid to destabilize his country. He said that Saudi Arabia is instigating the world community against Lebanon, adding that he has evidence that the Saudi government requested Israel to strike Lebanon militarily.
For its part, Saudi Arabia called on all its citizens to leave Lebanon. Shortly thereafter a Saudi national was kidnapped for ransom in Beirut.
In a speech broadcast on television Friday evening, after he accused Saudi Arabia and its officials of declaring war on Lebanon and Hizbullah, he spoke of a Saudi attempt to impose a new president on Lebanon, replacing Hizbullah’s political ally, Michel Aoun. He said that Riyadh is also attempting to take away from Hariri his position of leadership of the Sunni “Future Party” so as to impose a new leader on it.
Nasrullah condemned what he described as an unprecedented naked Saudi intervention in Lebanese internal affairs and said that Saudi Arabia’s treatment of Hariri from the time he arrived at the airport in Riyadh is demeaning to every Lebanese citizen.
He said that Hariri is being held against his will and that he has been prohibited from returning to Lebanon. Nasrullah demanded that he be allowed to come back, and said that his resignation is unconstitutional and without legal force.
The Hizbullah leader said that Saudi Arabia is ready to pay Israel tens of billions of dollars if only Tel Aviv will launch a military strike on Lebanon. He said that in his view, however, a new Israeli war on Lebanon is unlikely. Whatever Saudi Arabia might do, he added, it won’t be able to finish off Hizbullah. He predicted Riyadh will fail in Lebanon, just as it has failed in Yemen. He said defiantly that Saudi pressure would never make Hizbullah change its stance that the Saudis are wrong to intervene against the Houthi rebels in Yemen.
Nasrullah charged that at the end of the Israeli attack on Lebanon in 2006, Saudi Arabia pleaded with Tel Aviv not to halt the war until Hizbullah was wiped out.
He denied taking sides in the Gulf crisis, but did say that the Saudi failure to cow Qatar was of a piece with a string of Saudi foreign policy SNAFUs.
President Michel Aoun, in the meantime, has declined to accept Hariri’s resignation, saying he will wait for the prime minister to return to Beirut and then have him explain his reasons in person. Aoun met Friday with the charge d’affaires of the Saudi embassy in Beirut and informed him that the way Hariri resigned, by telephone from Saudi Arabia, is “unacceptabl.”
https://www.juancole.com/2017/11/nasrul ... banon.html


The Mystery Deepens Over Lebanon’s Prime Minister: Hostage or Free?

By Robin Wright12:04 A.M.

Saad Hariri, who resigned Saturday as the Lebanese Prime Minister, with King Salman, of Saudi Arabia.Photograph Courtesy Saudi Press Agency via AP
The Middle East is consumed with a real-life thriller over the fate of Lebanon’s Prime Minister, Saad Hariri, who abruptly resigned—on a Saudi television station, on November 4th, after being summoned to Riyadh. Hariri cited fears of an assassination attempt and blasted Hezbollah and Iran for meddling in Lebanese affairs. Then, holed up in the kingdom, he went silent, even to his own Future Movement party back in Beirut. For eight days, the news dominated headlines, spawned conspiracy theories, deepened regional tensions, and even triggered fears of yet another war. The front page of a Lebanese tabloid ran a full-page photo of Hariri with the caption “Hostage.”
Hariri’s mysterious disappearance united Lebanon’s ever-squabbling political leaders. The Christian President, Michel Aoun, rejected the resignation unless Hariri, a Sunni Muslim, delivered it in person. In a televised speech, the Shiite leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, said that the resignation was “illegal and unconstitutional” because it “was made under coercion.” Politicians from across Lebanon’s eighteen sects expressed suspicions about the implications for Hariri, the country, and the region. On Sunday, Beirut’s annual marathon turned into a kind of liberation rally for Hariri. Thousands of runners and spectators from different sects carried “Waiting for you” signs. Banners declared “Running for you.” Hariri had run in previous marathons.
Even the Trump Administration got involved. On Saturday, during the President’s Asia tour, the White House took time to issue a statement describing Hariri as “a trusted partner” of the United States. It called on “all states and parties to respect Lebanon’s sovereignty, independence, and constitutional processes.” The statement was widely interpreted as a rebuke of Saudi Arabia, a centerpiece of Trump’s Middle East policy, even as it criticized unnamed militias that “undermine Lebanese government institutions, or use Lebanon as a base from which to threaten others in the region,” an almost certain allusion to Hezbollah.
Hariri’s resignation came amid a sweeping power play by Saudi Arabia’s young Crown Prince, Mohammed bin Salman, to eliminate domestic opposition and strengthen the desert kingdom’s command in the Middle East. As part of the process, the autocratic monarchy has escalated a campaign against theocratic Iran, its regional rival. Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Islam and the guardian of the faith’s holiest sites, in Mecca and Medina, is the centerpiece of the Sunni world. Iran has the world’s largest Shiite population.
As Lebanon’s Prime Minister, Hariri had come to symbolize compromise between the two sectarian adversaries. The son of a former Lebanese Prime Minister, who was assassinated in 2005, Hariri became Prime Minister a year ago, for the second time, in a deal that ended a two-year political crisis during which the country had no President.
In the 2016 deal, Hariri—a Sunni ally of Saudi Arabia, where he was born and his father made billions in construction—became Prime Minister. Aoun—a Maronite Christian, former Army general, and ally of Hezbollah—became President. Shiite Hezbollah, as in the past, won Cabinet seats. Hariri’s ability to navigate the treacherous sectarian map was reflected in the run-up to his resignation in his meetings with Saudi officials in Riyadh and Ali Akbar Velayati, the top foreign-policy adviser to Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, whom Hariri hosted in Beirut. Hariri reportedly came away from the earlier Riyadh meetings feeling comfortable with the kingdom’s acceptance of the talks.
But the political realpolitik may have cost Hariri his job. He had been summoned to Saudi Arabia and then presented with a dictate to resign, senior diplomatic sources told me. The language was prescribed. He was prevented from returning to Beirut and his communications were restricted. Reuters reported that even his cell phone was confiscated.
The Trump statement, on Saturday, may have nudged the situation along. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary James Mattis had spoken with their Saudi counterparts regarding the rapidly evolving crackdown in the kingdom and its regional entanglements, U.S. officials said. The evolving Saudi-Israeli alliance, nurtured by Trump, has been a backdrop to the current crisis. For decades, Lebanon has been a battleground for rival Middle East interests. Local media in Beirut have been rife with concern that Israel, now allied with Saudi Arabia, could confront Hezbollah, Iran’s biggest proxy in the Arab world, in Lebanon.
On Sunday, Hariri called a Lebanese reporter, who was en route to a vacation, to invite her to interview him in Riyadh for his party’s television station. Looking drawn, Hariri claimed that he was “free” to leave Saudi Arabia. “I was silent in order to allow people to absorb and reflect on the resignation and its repercussions,” he said. Hariri added that he might return to Beirut “within days” to fulfill the constitutional requirements of resigning—adding the caveat that “necessary security arrangements” had to be made first. He certainly has legitimate safety concerns. Hariri’s father, Rafiq, a former Prime Minister, was assassinated in a car bombing, in 2005, which launched Lebanon’s Cedar Revolution—a precursor to the start of the Arab Spring, in 2011.
“I am free to travel tomorrow if I wanted to,” Hariri said in the interview “But I have a family. I saw what happened when my father was martyred. I don’t want the same thing to happen to my children.” Hariri denied rampant reports of Saudi manipulation. “King Salman considers me like his son,” he said. “The Crown Prince has all the respect for me. The stability of Lebanon is an essential asset for King Salman and the Crown Prince.” He called his resignation “a positive shock. The danger in Lebanon still exists from several sources,” he added.
But Hariri’s language was vague, and the interview offered intriguing clues, such as the reporter’s note regarding breaking news of a major earthquake in Iraq—intended to show that it was happening in real time. She also asked about his Apple watch. Hariri is known for being a savvy techie. “Where is your Apple watch? You’re not wearing it?” the reported asked. Hariri replied, “It’s still here . . . still here.” At one point, Hariri appeared to be bordering on tears. “We are in the eye of the storm,” he said.
The interview did little to clarify the mystery. Some Lebanese channels refused to air it because of suspicions that the Prime Minister was speaking under duress. Hariri even suggested that he might rethink the resignation, after his possible return and following negotiations with his government peers—and if the government followed a policy of neutrality. The implication was a policy embraced and accepted by Saudi Arabia.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-des ... -interview
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Past 5 GOP Presidents Fraud & Treason to Electoral Victo

Postby minime » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:50 pm

Nothing to do with you...

Unless you want it to be.
User avatar
minime
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 2:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Past 5 GOP Presidents Fraud & Treason to Electoral Victo

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Nov 14, 2017 2:00 pm

oh it seemed you were addressing me, my mistake... it was not clear that you were not addressing me...I don't know who you were talking to

it seemed every post including this one were directed at me

minime » Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:42 pm wrote:Well, my word. You don't say, slad. Would you repeat that one more time?
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Past 5 GOP Presidents Fraud & Treason to Electoral Victo

Postby minime » Tue Nov 14, 2017 2:14 pm

seemslikeadream » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:00 pm wrote:oh it seemed you were addressing me, my mistake... it was not clear that you were not addressing me...I don't know who you were talking to


Not interested in defaming you, or diminishing your contribution--vital to RI, which is on its last legs.

Definitely addressing the community at large. If it doesn't apply to you, so be it; if it does, so be it. What you do, and how you do it, and how that might be augmented, is up to you.

One question is: what is being done by some, for whatever reason, which is not being done by others? More specifically, what service is being performed by Republicans (a certain subset of Republicans), however competently, which is being ignored by a great majority of the rest of us?

Is that two questions?
User avatar
minime
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 2:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Joe Hillshoist and 10 guests