House Intelligence Committee Draft Impeachment Report

Discussion in 'The Water Cooler' started by IUclover, Dec 3, 2019.

  1. DrHoops

    DrHoops Hall of Famer
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2001
    Messages:
    17,041
    Likes Received:
    3,526
    Not only do 90% of Republicans approve of the reality show host in the office, according to this Economist poll, 53% of Republicans think he's better than Abraham Lincoln!

    What log do these people live under?


     
    Ohio Guy, sglowrider and meridian like this.
  2. DrHoops

    DrHoops Hall of Famer
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2001
    Messages:
    17,041
    Likes Received:
    3,526
    Wrong.
    • The Democrats are moving forward with impeachment because Donald Trump pressured a foreign government to interfere with the 2020 US presidential election on his behalf and held back desperately needed funding to Ukraine, an ally, who is currently at war with Russia, an enemy. Trump admitted it himself multiple times. Mulvaney admitted it. Trump stood on the White House lawn and asked China and Ukraine to investigate "The Bidens" in front of the entire press pool.
    • He told the Russian Foreign Minister in the Oval Office that he knew Russia interfered in the 2016 election and he was fine with it.
    • He threatens to reveal the identity of a whistle blower and threatens witnesses while they are testifying in front of congress.
    • He funnels government business to his personal properties. He attempted to hold the G7 Summit at his own failing (of course it's failing) golf course.
    • He has his personal attorney essentially running a shadow State Department.
    He wipes his pasty fat ass with the US Constitution on a daily basis. Trump's entire presidency is an impeachable offense.


     
  3. iu_a_att

    iu_a_att All-American
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2001
    Messages:
    7,865
    Likes Received:
    2,103
  4. bawlmer

    bawlmer All-Big Ten
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2010
    Messages:
    4,068
    Likes Received:
    2,346
    Except when said clown is enthusiastically supported by the majority of Republicans. Thus, the Constitutional accountability afforded by impeachment, to protect the country from ruling factions willing to ignore the abuses of their leaders.
     
    sglowrider likes this.
  5. CO. Hoosier

    CO. Hoosier Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    32,173
    Likes Received:
    4,851
    The purpose of impeachment is a worthwhile discussion. I have no idea what you mean by "constitutional accountability" so I am at a disadvantage here.

    I'd like to focus "abuses of their leaders" portion of your post.

    First of all, can we agree that all politicians abuse their authority? In my view this happens regularly at all levels of government. I've always seen elections as the remedy for abuses. Many municipalities are run by those who abuse their power and authority. Some argue that these kinds of abuses are necessary to operate a city. I'm not so sure. Many cities, or areas of cities, are dangerous and not fit for human habitation.

    In my view, abusing authority is not the same as violating the law. In many circumstances our public servants take legal actions but abuse their authority through overreaching or refusing responsibility through unwise delegation of authority. Congress does this all the time. Yet we have no means to impeach congress or its leadership. We rely on checks and balances and the ballot box to fix congressional abuses. Except it isn't working. The ballot box for different reasons, including gerrymandering and a politically activist press, is largely ineffective. The judicial check has neutered itself by all the misguided precedent (Imo) about congressional delegation and expansive constitutional interpretation of federal authority.

    For it's part, the judiciary has abused its authority by allowing itself to decide important policy and political matters under the pretense of constitutional questions. In theory whenever a politically active trial judge issues an injunction which has been reversed has abused judicial authority.

    For POTUS's part, abuse of authority is particularly troubling cause for impeachment. All holders of the office have stretched the authority of the office. "Abuse" of authority depends on whether one agrees with a particular action. Most all legal scholars agree that impeachment is a political process, not a legal one. Reasons for impeachment, as well as the processes of impeachment, are totally, and absolutely, in the hands of congress. This lack of standards is an open invitation for congress to abuse its impeachment authority. It's an open invitation for removal from office because congress could impeach POTUS simply for taking disagreeable actions. In Trump's case, calls for his impeachment came before he took any action.

    I tend to view impeachment very narrowly and as a rare circumstance. I thought WJC's was a mistake. "Abuse of Power" is not enough of a reason. I'd leave the antidote for abuse of power in the hands of the judiciary, congress though the legislative process, the press, and the voters. Impeachment is more appropriate in those cases where there is common ground for the reasons and the effort is truly a bipartisan congressional effort.
     
    165 CO. Hoosier, Dec 8, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2019
  6. hoosboot

    hoosboot Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2001
    Messages:
    11,820
    Likes Received:
    1,853
    I sincerely disagree with your assessment of this impeachment.
    • Highly contrived in the way the whistle blower blew and how he was handled by Schiff and his staff.
    The whistle blower followed relevant rules and IG Atkinson found the complaint to be "credible" and "of urgent concern". The response by the Trump Administration was to try to bury it. It was handled by Schiff and his staff in the appropriate way and far from contrived. If you'd like to see contrived, tune in to Rudy's "documentary" work in Ukraine.
    • Highly dishonest with Schiff's "parody" of the triggering phone call.
    The impeachment process has been handled in an extremely honest and thorough manner following established rules and an orderly process despite attempts by some members of the GOP to turn it into a partisan circus. The investigative process brought forward highly respected, non-partisan testimony that brought to light significant abuses of the power of the Presidency by the President.
    • Highly P.R. managed with the Democrats using focus groups to set language to be used when talking about it.
    Politicians using language they feel will resonate with their constituents? Uh-huh. You know someone is grasping at straws when they turn to this as a defense.
    • Highly partisan by excluding the GOP from meaningful input into process.
    Again, the impeachment process has followed established and long-standing processes. The GOP called witnesses and their own witnesses provided damning testimony. Moreover, the President has declined to participate in the process or to allow those around him to participate in the process. That participation would be meaningful, but the President does not appear to be interested in meaningful participation. The biggest reason for a highly partisan atmosphere is the response to a sincere whistleblower complaint by the GOP.
    • Highly insincere given that the impeachment movement began within hours of Trump's inauguration and it never let up.
    This impeachment inquiry was a direct and sincere response to specific actions taken by the President. Those actions were concerning enough that IG Atkinson found them credible and of urgent concern. They were concerning enough that the President's team sought to diminish the impact of those actions immediately. They were disturbing enough that members of the Administration's own foreign policy team came forward to express their concerns about those actions. That's not "highly insincere". That's the height of sincere concern.
    • Highly disingenuous given that we are now way down the impeachment road without the House of Representatives ever voting to even consider the issue; the only vote being about process.
    All there is to vote about so far is process. That's because what's come so far is an investigative process. Voting about additional matters is forthcoming. There's nothing disingenuous about that.

    Your complaints about the impeachment process are insubstantial and inaccurate. Once again, you are focused upon insignificant and inaccurate elements of something that is an important moment in American political history that deserves more thoughtful consideration.
     
  7. bawlmer

    bawlmer All-Big Ten
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2010
    Messages:
    4,068
    Likes Received:
    2,346
    Until this Ukraine mess I have not been an impeachment advocate. Trump was a known quantity before the election for anyone paying attention. Best to give the electorate the chance to fix its mistake.

    But when the abuse of the power of the office was for the purpose of influencing the election, then impeachment as alternative to an election is appropriate to consider (this is what I called Constitutional accountability). Reasonable people can disagree whether Trump has achieved that level of abuse, and apparently you and I are an example of that point.

    But that reasonable disagreement is why bipartisan support is likely harder to accomplish when the abuse is to keep in power a President who is widely-supported by their party. Sure, there is the risk the opposition party will itself abuse its power in pursuing impeachment.

    Ultimately, the voters are the jury for the entire process. I must say, however, that brings me less comfort today than it used to.
     
  8. CO. Hoosier

    CO. Hoosier Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    32,173
    Likes Received:
    4,851
    Thanks for taking the time for this thoughtful post. My response is brief. When the impeachment language is so vague that we need to test it with focus groups, as if a political campaign is being designed; or we need “experts” to advise that certain conduct is impeachable conduct, we trivialize the importance of this action. As we contemplate throwing a president out of office, the reasons need to be substantial, clear, obvious, well understood, and most importantly, seen as justifying expulsion from office on a bipartisan basis.

    This impeachment is none of those things. It’s a blatantly political shot.
     
    76-1 and stollcpa like this.
  9. Cream&Crimson

    Cream&Crimson All-Big Ten
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    1,711
    Hmm. How about bribery of a head of state of another country to advance the POTUS' own personal political status? How about obstruction of justice and obstruction of Congress? Would you view those as adequately serious offenses to justify impeachment? Hypothetically speaking, of course...

     
  10. Cream&Crimson

    Cream&Crimson All-Big Ten
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    1,711
    This impeachment is clearly all of those things I applied bold to above. Granted it will not be conducted on a bipartisan basis, because that is not possible given the fact that the GOP will not consider any articles of impeachment, no matter the evidence or the gravity of the charges.
     
    Digressions likes this.
  11. hoosboot

    hoosboot Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2001
    Messages:
    11,820
    Likes Received:
    1,853
    I respectfully disagree with your assessment. There is nothing vague about this impeachment process. The actions in question are clear and straightforward. The President tried to use appropriated funds as leverage to convince a foreign government to do him a personal favor outside the scope of his official duties. That this personal favor is also part of the President's reelection campaign only deepens the seriousness of the act. It's very clear and simple.

    Impeachment is a political process and it only becomes bipartisan when politics force it to do so. Even after the Saturday Night Massacre, the Judiciary Committee was split along party lines in consideration of impeachment. Along the way, Nixon's supporters derided the process as a "partisan witch hunt" and the Judiciary Committee proceedings as "a kangaroo court". It wasn't until politics forced GOP congressmen to support it that they considered voting against Nixon. So, I'm not particularly swayed by your calls for gentile bipartisanship. Given the way they've belittled and attacked even their own who have testified in the proceedings, I've seen little evidence to suggest it is something that the GOP is remotely interested in.
     
  12. iu_a_att

    iu_a_att All-American
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2001
    Messages:
    7,865
    Likes Received:
    2,103
    The seven outright falsehoods in the GOP response to impeachment.
    It is tiresome to have to answer such bad faith actions by the GOP but it is entirely necessary to do so. Here are the falsehoods listed. Read the article for the discussion:
    1. “Although the security assistance was paused in July, it is not unusual for U.S. foreign assistance to become delayed.”
    (Minority at 32)
    2. “The President’s initial hesitation [ ] to provide U.S. taxpayer-funded security assistance to Ukraine without thoughtful review is entirely prudent.” (Minority at ii)
    3. “President Trump was reluctant to meet with President Zelensky for a different reason—Ukraine’s long history of pervasive corruption and uncertainty about whether President Zelensky would break from this history and live up to his anti-corruption campaign platform.” (Minority at 14)
    4. “The security assistance was ultimately disbursed to Ukraine in September 2019 without any Ukrainian action to investigate President Trump’s political rival.” (Minority at 64)
    5. “The Ukrainian government denied any awareness of a linkage between U.S. security assistance and investigations” (Minority at 52)
    6. “Although subsequent reporting has connoted a connection between “Burisma” and the Bidens, the Democrats’ witnesses testified that they did not have that understanding while working with the Ukrainian government about a potential statement.” (Minority at 57)
    7. “Indisputable evidence shows that senior Ukrainian government officials sought to influence the 2016 election in favor of Secretary Clinton and against then-candidate Trump.” (Minority at 86)
     
  13. zeke4ahs

    zeke4ahs Hall of Famer
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    32,305
    Likes Received:
    8,964
    It can’t be bipartisan, because as Justin Amash can attest, anyone not in lock step with Trump gets booted from the party.
     
    Cream&Crimson likes this.
  14. CO. Hoosier

    CO. Hoosier Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    32,173
    Likes Received:
    4,851
    Jerry Nadler:

    "The integrity of our next election is at stake," Nadler said. "Nothing could be more urgent." Impeachment is so pressing, Nadler said, because the president represents "a continuing risk to the country."
    The chairman of the house judiciary committee, the committee charged with drafting the impeachment resolution, believes that impeachment is proper for conduct which might or might not happen months from now.

    This whole thing is decidedly unserious.
     
    Spartans9312 and stollcpa like this.
  15. UncleMark

    UncleMark Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2001
    Messages:
    12,988
    Likes Received:
    9,302
    How do you propose we deal with a President who is actively coercing a foreign government to aid him politically?
     
  16. CO. Hoosier

    CO. Hoosier Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    32,173
    Likes Received:
    4,851
    For openers, let’s make sure POTUS doesn’t have access to a private unmarked jet and pallets of cash in small bills to be delivered to a foreign enemy for legacy-building purposes.
     
    stollcpa, 76-1 and Spartans9312 like this.
  17. Cream&Crimson

    Cream&Crimson All-Big Ten
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    1,711
    No, he's saying he believes impeachment is proper for a rogue POTUS who has already demonstrably abused the power of his office to attempt to coerce the head of state of other country for his own political gain and through his current behavior, shows no sign that he will stop such behavior going forward. I don't know where you get the "conduct which might or might not happen months from now" bit.
     
  18. TheOriginalHappyGoat

    Moderator
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    51,538
    Likes Received:
    23,905
    Location:
    Margaritaville
    CO knows what he is actually saying. He just doesn't care.
     
    Cortez88 likes this.
  19. Cream&Crimson

    Cream&Crimson All-Big Ten
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    1,711
    Right, but he still needs to be called on it when he says stupid stuff like that.
     
  20. UncleMark

    UncleMark Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2001
    Messages:
    12,988
    Likes Received:
    9,302
    A dishonest, non-sequitur yabbut.

    Trifecta.
     
  21. Harry Hondo

    Harry Hondo Senior
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2015
    Messages:
    2,612
    Likes Received:
    2,131
    What odds you gonna give Trump that he keeps his nose clean from now until the election?

    Given his past history my bet is he’ll do something stupid involving a foreign head of state. As soon as the Senate exonerates him he’ll “celebrate“ by exercising his perceived absolute power. Much like he did a week after he thought the Mueller Report exonerated him.

    Republicans would be foolish to think this was the last time ol’ Tricky Trump got in hot water. You guys are gonna be dealing with his shit until he’s gone from office. And there’s no reason to think he’ll leave willfully if he loses the 2020 election. In his mind, he has the SCOTUS and the Senate on his side and they will fight for him to retain office. After all, the election was rigged. Not to mention, the entire MSM and all of those “never Trumpers” plotting against him!

    Oh yeah, this MF has a lot more havoc to reign on us before it’s over. Buckle up.
     
    Timmy! and Bill4411 like this.
  22. CO. Hoosier

    CO. Hoosier Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    32,173
    Likes Received:
    4,851
    Nadler pisses away the traditional tools for checks on executive power such as legislation, judicial review, and the ballot box. Nadler and the Democrats are totally consumed by RESIST! and Trump has them totally flummoxed.

    The Nadler quote I posted above is a clear validation of my point of a few days ago that the impeachment is moving forward only to manipulate the 2020 campaign because the Dems have no candidate, no message, and no hope.
     
    HillzHoozier and stollcpa like this.
  23. CO. Hoosier

    CO. Hoosier Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    32,173
    Likes Received:
    4,851
    I
    if you don’t want an answer, don’t ask the question.
     
  24. T.M.P.

    T.M.P. Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2014
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    11,688
    Please quit spreading lies and Russian propaganda.

    Thanks.
     
    Bill4411 and Digressions like this.
  25. Cream&Crimson

    Cream&Crimson All-Big Ten
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    1,711
    So, the Framers wasted ink on adding the stuff about Impeachment to the Constitution then. Gotcha.

    It's really not, but whatever.
     
  26. IUclover

    IUclover Benchwarmer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2015
    Messages:
    365
    Likes Received:
    289
    So a president who has already publicly endorsed foreign election interference is not a problem? So you think Democrats (and the country) should be accepting that the president is already trying to interfere with the election? Do you not see why it's urgent? The president and his republican schmucks in the hearings are actively interfering with democracy and the upcoming election. I have to assume you don't care that Nunes has been implicated and your crew tried to protect him today when there are phone records clearly implicating him.

    As a fellow Coloradan, I can only assume you're one of those drivers with way too many obnoxious bumper stickers? I know you're not this blind. We're talking about a guy who has a history of fraud and I'm probably half your age and can see through the repub BS presented. They have no arguments so they just scream and obstruct like children.

    Also, why hasn't the WH cooperated? If they have nothing to hide, what's the risk?
     
    Bill4411 and Digressions like this.
  27. CO. Hoosier

    CO. Hoosier Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    32,173
    Likes Received:
    4,851
    where do you live in Colorado?
     
  28. Circlejoe

    Circlejoe All-Big Ten
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2001
    Messages:
    3,112
    Likes Received:
    429
    Yeah, and where’s his birth certificate too! You tell ‘me CO!
     
    UncleMark likes this.
  29. Marvin the Martian

    Marvin the Martian Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2001
    Messages:
    24,003
    Likes Received:
    6,671
    You seem to think resist is a big deal. Google "Tea Party no compromise" and see how many hits you find. No compromise is the functional equivalent of resist. Yet I never recall you complaining about the Tea Party.
     
    dahldc, Digressions and Rockfish1 like this.
  30. UncleMark

    UncleMark Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2001
    Messages:
    12,988
    Likes Received:
    9,302
    That's different.
     
  31. Marvin the Martian

    Marvin the Martian Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2001
    Messages:
    24,003
    Likes Received:
    6,671
    I think you are right, no compromise didn't come with an exclamation point.

    After many years of being told the greatest danger to America lay in street signs and kids not being able to buy muffins at school, I should clearly see how calling a foreign leader to investigate a member of the other party is a nothingburger. I have evidently been a poor learner.

    I will note that we have been told for a couple years the FISA warrant was clearly illegal, and yet no one has brought up the IG report since it was released. The IG report contains texts of FBI agents with a very pro-Trump bias. Anyone want to suggest the over/under on that getting called out as unacceptable by people investigating Trump?
     
  32. stollcpa

    stollcpa Hall of Famer
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    10,688
    Likes Received:
    8,660
    Are you really okay with what was done?

    https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/stat...rr-inspector-generals-report-review-four-fisa
     
  33. Marvin the Martian

    Marvin the Martian Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2001
    Messages:
    24,003
    Likes Received:
    6,671
    The IG, who is independent, said there were problems. So no, I am not OK. The problems need corrected structurally and Ohr investigated and charged if deemed appropriate. But read the IG report, the IG found the FISA warrant itself to be valid. Quoting Barr, who is as far from independent as is logically possible, isn't really going to move a needle. It is like quoting Bill Belichick on whether or not the Patriots cheat. That isn't really fair, Belichick is at least good at what he does. OK, maybe it is fair as Barr is obviously good at defending Trump over you know, supporting America.

    It turns out Steele was friends with a Trump. So even the idea he had some extraordinary animus on Trump doesn't hunt.

    From a Fox story:

    Specifically, the report concluded that investigators found no intentional misconduct or political bias surrounding the probe's launch and efforts to seek a controversial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to monitor former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page in the early months of the investigation.​
     
    Digressions likes this.
  34. Rockfish1

    Rockfish1 Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2001
    Messages:
    35,695
    Likes Received:
    5,869
    Too much nuance.
     
    UncleMark and Marvin the Martian like this.
  35. stollcpa

    stollcpa Hall of Famer
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    10,688
    Likes Received:
    8,660
    This guy will have final say if anyone is charged.

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katie...nto-trump-officials-started-n2557706?amp=true
     
  36. Marvin the Martian

    Marvin the Martian Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2001
    Messages:
    24,003
    Likes Received:
    6,671
    Yes, he will have a say. The fact he was appointed by a blind loyalist to Trump combined with his opining on a different investigation makes one wonder if his loyalties are to America or to Trump. You do realize the two loyalties are different. I have no idea why he decided he had to immediately criticize the IG report, but I do not believe that is standard operating procedure in Justice. How often do we get one area of justice immediately criticizing a report of another? If Durham wants to be seen as an independent investigator, that was a pathetic start.

    I once worked at a place that had Arthur Anderson come in to do some consulting. It turned out AA agreed entirely with what the leadership wanted to do. It was no surprise, the joke was that in the initial meeting AA said, "we are here to conduct an independent review to independently reach the same conclusion you have". Durham should be more careful to avoid that joke being about him.
     
  37. stollcpa

    stollcpa Hall of Famer
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    10,688
    Likes Received:
    8,660
    I am guessing Durham will avoid any joke being on him. The IG report definitely didn’t exonerate the FBI. Carter Page is owed because of the abuse perpetrated on him.

    BTW AA paid a dear price for trying to wear too many hats for clients. I owe my wife. I was offered a job by AA in Indy coming out of IU. My wife insisted she wasn’t moving to Indy. Would have been hell to invest your life in the place and lose everything after Enron.
     
    Marvin the Martian likes this.
  38. iu_a_att

    iu_a_att All-American
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2001
    Messages:
    7,865
    Likes Received:
    2,103
    I greatly appreciate your taking the time to respond so thoughtfully and thoroughly. It is work that needs to be done I suppose if only to create some kind of record.
     
  39. Marvin the Martian

    Marvin the Martian Hall of Famer
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2001
    Messages:
    24,003
    Likes Received:
    6,671
    It didn't exonerate the FBI, I agree with that part. It found errors, which doesn't particularly surprise me. I bet any large scale investigation has errors. And yes, we should clean up those errors. But again, the report found no bias or improper motivation in launching the investigation. That hasn't been the mantra of Trump.

    By all means fix the errors. I am betting Carter Page isn't the only American to run afoul of FBI procedural errors. On behalf of all Americans, the errors need corrected.
     
    stollcpa likes this.
  40. iu_a_att

    iu_a_att All-American
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2001
    Messages:
    7,865
    Likes Received:
    2,103
    I credit Marvin with an abundance of good faith.
     

Share This Page