Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Jared kushners 2 billion dollars

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Starlight View Post
    Correct I don't like the Daily Mail. Other people here, specifically including MM who I was replying to, tend to cite it. So when I was looking at the different variations on that article published by various outlets and choosing which one to cite for MM, I chose the one from the source he prefers rather than one of the sources I would prefer.

    He often claims to be well-informed, yet here he was expressing a complete lack of knowledge about a story that a source he commonly cites had run.
    And then followed his lack of knowledge on it up by declaring Khashoggi was killed in Saudi Arabia, whilst calling me a dope for not "knowing" that, because apparently Turkey became part of Saudi Arabia and none of us but the mighty and well-informed @Mountain_Man knew about it!

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
      And then followed his lack of knowledge on it up by declaring Khashoggi was killed in Saudi Arabia, whilst calling me a dope for not "knowing" that, because apparently Turkey became part of Saudi Arabia and none of us but the mighty and well-informed @Mountain_Man knew about it!
      They're both a part of the Muddle East in MM's brain.
      "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
      "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
      "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

        Um no, perhaps you should do even a modicum of research before telling someone else that they are a dope, you utter braindead twit. It happened in Istanbul, Turkey, and was carried out by Saudi agents from Saudi Arabia (which, for the geographically challened morons like yourself, is not part of Turkey) who came there to abduct and assassinate someone in a foreign country, who had crossed Saudi Arabia.

        So, again, I answer: Because they saw what happened to a fellow journalist and long-term US resident (with two children who are US Citizens) who crossed the Saudis. Try reading.
        The point, of course, is that it didn't happen in the US, and the chances of a US journalist being killed by Saudi agents on US soil is slim to none, so there was no reason for US media not to report on this, especially since it would have reflected negatively on President Trump.
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Ronson View Post

          My guess is the "sources" refused to go on the record for fear of being killed, so that left the mainstream media in a situation of having to reference The Daily Mail as a "source," and they didn't want to do that. If the original report had come out in the NYT, then they would all report on it and reference the NYT as "the source." They don't seem to have any problem risking their reputations for the NYT.
          The media has never been shy about using "sources say" or "those familiar with the situation" to cover a lack of credible sourcing, especially when it's a story that has the potential to make Trump look bad. Gond's suggestion that they were all collectively fearing for their lives is just another one of his paranoid conspiracy theories.
          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

            The media has never been shy about using "sources say" or "those familiar with the situation" to cover a lack of credible sourcing, especially when it's a story that has the potential to make Trump look bad. Gond's suggestion that they were all collectively fearing for their lives is just another one of his paranoid conspiracy theories.
            A foundational article often uses unnamed sources these days, because if the publisher is called out on it or sued they do have the names somewhere in their back pocket to protect themselves. The NYT famously does it all the time.

            So, what we're looking at here are secondary articles where publishers wouldn't have names of the "unnamed sources." For some bizarre reason, secondary publishers have no problem citing NYT as a source when they don't have source materials for themselves. My only guess is that if anyone gets sued because of a NYT article, the lawsuit will eventually land on NYT's doorstep. But they don't want to publish same when The Daily Mail is the primary source.

            Anyway, these big publishers aren't afraid of Salman having them killed. The unnamed sources would be, though.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

              The point, of course, is that it didn't happen in the US, and the chances of a US journalist being killed by Saudi agents on US soil is slim to none, so there was no reason for US media not to report on this, especially since it would have reflected negatively on President Trump.
              The point, of course, is that you declared me a dolt despite not having the first clue about the case in question, or you thought that Turkey was in Saudi Arabia apparently.

              The other point, of course, is they got to see Saudi agents willing to murder and butcher journalists who cross the Prince, even in another country.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Juvenal View Post

                Because it keeps coming up, there's news from Earth 1 y'all should finally take on board.

                Hunter Biden joined the Burisma board in April 2014, the same month the UK seized $23 million in Zlochevsky's assets.

                This is from eight years ago, really old news.
                .
                “In the case of former Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, the U.K. authorities had seized $23 million in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people,” Mr. Pyatt said. Officials at the prosecutor general’s office, he added, were asked by the United Kingdom “to send documents supporting the seizure. Instead they sent letters to Zlochevsky’s attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result, the money was freed by the U.K. court, and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus.”

                In February 2015, at the time Shokin replaced Yarema, the Ukrainian Prosecutor General's office was bought and paid for by Burisma. Payoffs from Burisma and similarly placed corrupt oligarchs were a perk of the job. Everybody knew this. The Ukrainians knew it. There were street protests demanding Shokin's resignation. There is no reality in which Zlochevsky would want Shokin fired.

                Burisma and similar cases were why the US administration, the EU, the World Bank, and the IMF were all calling for Shokin's replacement.

                Do you think maybe Joe Biden influenced all of them, too?

                Joe Biden bragged about getting rid of Shokin (in what amounted to an exaggeration), and y'all can't figure that means he was shouldering in for credit on a job everyone wanted done. Utterly unsurpsingly, five years of investigation by Weiss uncovered no evidence of corrupt influence in Ukraine by Hunter Biden, or his dad.

                It's time to let it go, rouge.

                There is no there there.
                One of the problems with your narrative here is that we now know that Ukraine (which nobody argues doesn't have a corruption problem) had made strives combatting it -- enough so that an inter-government agency assessment determined they had done enough to warrant getting the billion dollars.

                Second, there was no hue and cry from other Western countries to fire Shokin as old Joe claimed.

                Despite Biden’s claim, Europeans WEREN’T trying to oust Ukraine prosecutor targeting Hunter’s firm
                The European Commission praised Ukraine’s Prosecutor-General Viktor Shokin for his efforts to fight corruption in a December 2015 progress report published nine days after then-VP Joe Biden demanded his ouster.

                The report flies in the face of Biden’s claims that the European Union joined his demands that Shokin be removed for being corrupt and obstructing anti-corruption reforms.

                In fact, the Dec. 18, 2015, progress report, obtained by the New York Post, says that the European Union was satisfied that Ukraine had achieved “noteworthy” progress, including in “preventing and fighting corruption,” and thus was eligible for visa-free travel in Europe.

                The European Commission noted that Shokin had just appointed the head of a specialized anti-corruption prosecution office, which it described as “an indispensable component of an effective and independent institutional framework for combating high-level corruption.”


                Old Joe declared that Shokin wasn't doing his job. That he wasn't going after corruption. But thanks to Devon Archer's testimony we know that was not the case. The problem was that he was going after Burisma.

                Shokin had just got a court order against the owner of Burisma, Nikolai Zlochevsky, allowing him to seize assets including a house, some cars, and a couple properties. Zlochevsky went ballistic, frantically demanding the Hunter use that "Washington access" that he was being paid for. A month later old Joe was in Ukraine demanding that Shokin be fired.

                In reality it was the duffer who was obstructing anti-corruption reforms in Ukraine because he didn't want that cash cow that was making the Biden Clan rich to dry up.

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

                  The point, of course, is that you declared me a dolt despite not having the first clue about the case in question, or you thought that Turkey was in Saudi Arabia apparently.

                  The other point, of course, is they got to see Saudi agents willing to murder and butcher journalists who cross the Prince, even in another country.
                  I remember he was killed by Saudis, so I assumed it happened in their own country, but that is obviously incorrect. Hey, even the best of us can make mistakes.

                  But that still doesn't give any credence to your conspiracy theory that journalists safely on US soil ignored the story because they were collectively fearing for their lives.
                  Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                  But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                  Than a fool in the eyes of God


                  From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                    I remember he was killed by Saudis, so I assumed it happened in their own country, but that is obviously incorrect.
                    well you at least made one out of yourself by talking right out of your own and then having the gall to call ME the dope.

                    Hey, even the best of us can make mistakes.

                    But that still doesn't give any credence to your conspiracy theory that journalists safely on US soil ignored the story because they were collectively fearing for their lives.
                    Not sure how it was a conspiracy theory. They saw someone killed on soil other than Saudi Arabian soil, by the saudis for reporting on MBS. I noted thay eas probably one reason not much reporting of this occurred, especially if Kushner was indeed involved in the Khashoggi stuff like it appears he was. As to being "safely on US soil", well, a whole lot of Americans in 9/11/01 thought they were "safely on US soil", and the Saudis showed otherwise quite vividly that day. Norbwould I say the story was "ignored", given that it's been reported on since 2018. Certainly it hasn't been given a wide front page status like many others surrounding Trump but to say it has been ignored by everyone shows further that you have no clue what you're even talking about.
                    Last edited by Gondwanaland; 09-25-2023, 11:22 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
                      well you at least made one out of yourself by talking right out of your own and then having the gall to call ME the dope.


                      Not sure how it was a conspiracy theory. They saw someone killed on soil other than Saudi Arabian soil, by the saudis for reporting on MBS. I noted thay eas probably one reason not much reporting of this occurred, especially if Kushner was indeed involved in the Khashoggi stuff like it appears he was. As to being "safely on US soil", well, a whole lot of Americans in 9/11/01 thought they were "safely on US soil", and the Saudis showed otherwise quite vividly that day. Norbwould I say the story was "ignored", given that it's been reported on since 2018. Certainly it hasn't been given a wide front page status like many others surrounding Trump but to say it has been ignored by everyone shows further that you have no clue what you're even talking about.
                      "Ignored" in the sense that for all intents and purposes, the story was swept under the rug by the US media. And, yes, you are promoting a conspiracy theory suggesting that every US journalists chose to give the story a wide berth because they feared for their lives. Do you have any evidence to support this, or is it just your idle speculation that it must be so?
                      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                      Than a fool in the eyes of God


                      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                        "Ignored" in the sense that for all intents and purposes, the story was swept under the rug by the US media. And, yes, you are promoting a conspiracy theory suggesting that every US journalists chose to give the story a wide berth because they feared for their lives. Do you have any evidence to support this, or is it just your idle speculation that it must be so?
                        Again, it was not ignored. You appear to be the one with the conspiracy theory that every US journalist ignored it despite the fact that they did not. And no, my suggestion of a possible reason that some did not touch on it and potentially left it out of breaking headline coverage, is not a conspiracy theory but rather logical deduction. Something that you are clearly incapable of.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          One of the problems with your narrative here is that we now know that Ukraine (which nobody argues doesn't have a corruption problem) had made strives combatting it -- enough so that an inter-government agency assessment determined they had done enough to warrant getting the billion dollars.
                          Despite protestations from your cited partisan opinion piece hilariously labeled News by Murdoch's NY Post, there were no problems with the standard narrative uncoverable by Weiss in five years of investigation.

                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          Second, there was no hue and cry from other Western countries to fire Shokin as old Joe claimed.

                          Despite Biden’s claim, Europeans WEREN’T trying to oust Ukraine prosecutor targeting Hunter’s firm
                          The European Commission praised Ukraine’s Prosecutor-General Viktor Shokin for his efforts to fight corruption in a December 2015 progress report published nine days after then-VP Joe Biden demanded his ouster.

                          The report flies in the face of Biden’s claims that the European Union joined his demands that Shokin be removed for being corrupt and obstructing anti-corruption reforms.

                          In fact, the Dec. 18, 2015, progress report, obtained by the New York Post, says that the European Union was satisfied that Ukraine had achieved “noteworthy” progress, including in “preventing and fighting corruption,” and thus was eligible for visa-free travel in Europe.

                          The European Commission noted that Shokin had just appointed the head of a specialized anti-corruption prosecution office, which it described as “an indispensable component of an effective and independent institutional framework for combating high-level corruption.”


                          Old Joe declared that Shokin wasn't doing his job. That he wasn't going after corruption. But thanks to Devon Archer's testimony we know that was not the case. The problem was that he was going after Burisma.

                          Shokin had just got a court order against the owner of Burisma, Nikolai Zlochevsky, allowing him to seize assets including a house, some cars, and a couple properties. Zlochevsky went ballistic, frantically demanding the Hunter use that "Washington access" that he was being paid for. A month later old Joe was in Ukraine demanding that Shokin be fired.

                          In reality it was the duffer who was obstructing anti-corruption reforms in Ukraine because he didn't want that cash cow that was making the Biden Clan rich to dry up.
                          EU hails sacking of Ukraine’s prosecutor Viktor Shokin
                          .
                          The European Union has welcomed the dismissal of Ukraine's scandal-ridden prosecutor general and called for a crackdown on corruption, even as the country's political crisis deepened over efforts to form a new ruling coalition and appoint a new prime minister.

                          Ukraine's parliament voted overwhelmingly to fire Viktor Shokin, ridding the beleaguered prosecutor's office of a figure who is accused of blocking major cases against allies and influential figures and stymying moves to root out graft.

                          "This decision creates an opportunity to make a fresh start in the prosecutor general's office. I hope that the new prosecutor general will ensure that [his] office . . . becomes independent from political influence and pressure and enjoys public trust," said Jan Tombinski, the EU's envoy to Ukraine.

                          “There is still a lack of tangible results of investigations into serious cases . . . as well as investigations of high-level officials within the prosecutor general’s office,” he added.

                          Ukraine Ousts Viktor Shokin, Top Prosecutor, and Political Stability Hangs in the Balance
                          .
                          MOSCOW — Bowing to pressure from international donors, the Ukrainian Parliament voted on Tuesday to remove a prosecutor general who had clung to power for months despite visible signs of corruption.

                          But in a be-careful-what-you-wish-for moment, veteran observers of Ukrainian politics said that the prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, had played an important role in balancing competing political interests, helping maintain stability during a treacherous era in the divided country’s history.

                          The United States and other Western nations had for months called for the ousting of Mr. Shokin, who was widely criticized for turning a blind eye to corrupt practices and for defending the interests of a venal and entrenched elite. He was one of several political figures in Kiev whom reformers and Western diplomats saw as a worrying indicator of a return to past corrupt practices, two years after a revolution that was supposed to put a stop to self-dealing by those in power.

                          ...

                          In one high-profile example, known in Ukraine as the case of the “diamond prosecutors,” troves of diamonds, cash and other valuables were found in the homes of two of Mr. Shokin’s subordinates, suggesting that they had been taking bribes.

                          But the case became bogged down, with no reasons given. When a department in Mr. Shokin’s office tried to bring it to trial, the prosecutors were fired or resigned. The perpetrators seemed destined to get off with claims that the stones were not worth very much.

                          Why Was Ukraine's Top Prosecutor Fired? The Issue At The Heart Of The Dispute Gripping Washington
                          .
                          KYIV -- When Viktor Shokin was fired as Ukraine's prosecutor-general in March 2016, after less than 14 months in the post, it was seen as a crucial development in a country under pressure to curb corruption and get serious about reforms. Now Shokin’s dismissal, and Ukraine itself, are at the center of a political whirlwind in Washington that is buffeting Donald Trump's presidency and playing into the 2020 White House race.

                          Here is a look at the arguments, facts, and evidence in the dispute pitting Trump against former Vice President Joe Biden, a front-runner for the Democratic nomination to challenge the incumbent in the election next year.

                          Bidens in Ukraine: An Explainer
                          .
                          The owner of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky, has been under the scrutiny of prosecutors. A minister of natural resources until 2012, Mr. Zlochevsky was accused of improperly granting gas extraction licenses to firms affiliated with him, and at times was investigated for alleged abuse of power, illegal enrichment and money laundering. Mr. Zlochevsky was never convicted of any crimes and denied any wrongdoing. His lawyer also denied that Mr. Zlochevsky ever benefited from his position in government.

                          Mr. Shokin had dragged his feet on those investigations, Western diplomats said, and effectively squashed one in London by failing to cooperate with U.K. authorities, who had frozen $23.5 million of Mr. Zlochevsky’s assets. In a speech in 2015, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, called the Ukrainian prosecutor “an obstacle” to anticorruption efforts, and mentioned the U.K. case, which he said led to the escape of illicit assets.

                          Reforming Ukraine After the Revolutions
                          .
                          By last fall, public dissatisfaction with Poroshenko had crystallized around his choice for General Prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, a veteran politician who had known Poroshenko for years. At first, Shokin advanced several corruption cases against former associates of Yanukovych. But when parliament lifted the immunity of Serhiy Klyuyev, a lawmaker and former close associate of Yanukovych who was charged with corruption, the General Prosecutor’s office stalled on issuing an arrest warrant, giving Klyuyev time to slip out of the country. Shokin also hindered the investigation of two men known as the “diamond prosecutors,” high-ranking state prosecutors who were arrested on suspicion of corruption; raids on their homes turned up a Kalashnikov, four hundred thousand dollars, and sixty-five diamonds. Even more discouraging, not a single person suspected of killing protesters on Maidan was brought to trial.

                          ...

                          After initially supporting Shokin, U.S. and E.U. officials soured on him. To pressure Poroshenko into removing him, the Obama Administration withheld a billion dollars in loan guarantees. (Ukrainians began calling Shokin “the billion-dollar man.”) A senior official in the White House told me that Vice-President Joe Biden spoke to Poroshenko by phone every few weeks and made it clear that, as far as additional loan guarantees were concerned, “you can meet every single other condition, but until you replace this guy you are not getting this money.” At a protest in Kiev, Leshchenko called on parliament to vote on removing Shokin from office. His fellow-deputies, he said, had to decide “whether they are with the people or with the corrupt officials.” Finally, in February, 2016, Shokin announced his resignation—though not before, in his final hours in office, firing a reform-minded deputy who had pursued the diamond-prosecutors case.

                          It's not that the truth wasn't readily available, it's that you don't care about the truth.

                          The only interest Shokin had in investigating anyone was to shake them down.

                          A blind squirrel could sniff out that partisan opinion piece from Murdoch's NY Post hilariously labeled as News as nuts. It flies in the face of reporting from around the world that says otherwise and has been saying otherwise for a decade. None of the cited documents were either linked, quoted or made available. None of the principals were contacted for reaction. It includes obvious misrepresentations like the claim that Shokin had authority to appoint the head of the unnamed special anti-corruption agency. It's called NABU. The most basic Journalism 101 editorial standards are nowhere to be found in your source.

                          The rot at the heart of News Corp. that has to date cost them a $787.5 million settlement is that they caved to the prejudices of their audience. There's zero possibility you didn't pass by the above stories and more googling for a News Corp. piece that would agree with yours.

                          The only source claiming Shokin was going after Burisma is Shokin himself.

                          And he was corrupt.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            WASHINGTON — Ukrainian prosecutor-general Viktor Shokin, who was fired after then-Vice President Joe Biden threatened to pull $1 billion in US aid, was “a threat” to natural gas company Burisma Holdings, which paid Hunter Biden up to $1 million per year, the first son’s former business partner Devon Archer confirmed in an interview released Friday.

                            “He was a threat. He ended up seizing assets of [Burisma owner] Nikolai [Zlochevsky] — a house, some cars, a couple properties. And Nikolai actually never went back to Ukraine after Shokin seized all of his assets,” Archer told former Fox News host Tucker Carlson.

                            Shokin’s office won a court order to seize Zlochevsky’s property on Feb. 2, 2016, the Kyiv Post reported at the time. Shokin was fired on March 29, purportedly due to his own corruption....


                            https://nypost.com/2023/08/04/viktor...-devon-archer/

                            Difficult to disregard quotes through well poisoning - no matter what one thinks about NYP or Tucker Carlson.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

                              Again, it was not ignored. You appear to be the one with the conspiracy theory that every US journalist ignored it despite the fact that they did not. And no, my suggestion of a possible reason that some did not touch on it and potentially left it out of breaking headline coverage, is not a conspiracy theory but rather logical deduction. Something that you are clearly incapable of.
                              In other words, you have zero evidence to support your conspiracy theory that the story didn't get wide coverage because journalists in the US feared for their safety.
                              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                              Than a fool in the eyes of God


                              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Juvenal View Post

                                Despite protestations from your cited partisan opinion piece hilariously labeled News by Murdoch's NY Post, there were no problems with the standard narrative uncoverable by Weiss in five years of investigation.



                                EU hails sacking of Ukraine’s prosecutor Viktor Shokin
                                .
                                [...]


                                Ukraine Ousts Viktor Shokin, Top Prosecutor, and Political Stability Hangs in the Balance
                                .
                                [...]


                                Why Was Ukraine's Top Prosecutor Fired? The Issue At The Heart Of The Dispute Gripping Washington
                                .
                                [...]


                                Bidens in Ukraine: An Explainer
                                .
                                [...]


                                Reforming Ukraine After the Revolutions
                                .
                                [...]


                                It's not that the truth wasn't readily available, it's that you don't care about the truth.

                                The only interest Shokin had in investigating anyone was to shake them down.

                                A blind squirrel could sniff out that partisan opinion piece from Murdoch's NY Post hilariously labeled as News as nuts. It flies in the face of reporting from around the world that says otherwise and has been saying otherwise for a decade. None of the cited documents were either linked, quoted or made available. None of the principals were contacted for reaction. It includes obvious misrepresentations like the claim that Shokin had authority to appoint the head of the unnamed special anti-corruption agency. It's called NABU. The most basic Journalism 101 editorial standards are nowhere to be found in your source.

                                The rot at the heart of News Corp. that has to date cost them a $787.5 million settlement is that they caved to the prejudices of their audience. There's zero possibility you didn't pass by the above stories and more googling for a News Corp. piece that would agree with yours.

                                The only source claiming Shokin was going after Burisma is Shokin himself.

                                And he was corrupt.
                                It sure is funny how it was only after Shokin was fired that people suddenly came out of the woodwork to declare that they knew he was corrupt all along.
                                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Cow Poke, Today, 09:29 AM
                                0 responses
                                3 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Cow Poke, Today, 09:13 AM
                                0 responses
                                5 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by seer, Yesterday, 06:18 PM
                                0 responses
                                18 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 02:55 PM
                                2 responses
                                54 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Starlight  
                                Started by seer, Yesterday, 02:17 PM
                                16 responses
                                68 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Working...
                                X