Blank Discussion Topic

1…1718202223…350

Comments

  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    edited January 2017
    BS44325 said:

    JC29856 said:

    BS44325 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    Halifax2TheMax said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    ledvedderman said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Jesus H, he just threatened to bring "the feds"?!

    No shit. I wonder what the chain of command is for something like that. Would Rahm or our piece of shit Governor Rauner have to make a request for the feds to step in?
    Yes. The governor has to make the request. Think back to Katrina. Bush couldn't send troops until Governor Blanco made the official request.
    Which bring us to multiple scenarios of agencies and government employees not following our new dictators orders. What follows that, and what are the implications? The system runs on a certain level of faith and trust. Trump is effing with that and he has no clue whatsoever.
    No. It doesn't lead to multiple scenerios. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act detail requirements and limitations for a federal government to intervene.
    You're just referring to what trump said about Chicago. But even in that single scenario, trump will interpret those as giving him permission to send "the feds". He will probably be told no, and then it what hapoens after that matters. You seem to be under the impression that trump is educated on anything about the federal government and is willing to respect the limits placed on it.
    He also has a pen and a phone.
    Yawn. Yup, he's just like Obama. Got it.
    With the big difference being that Trump will not tolerate the carnage that is Chicago.
    I wonder how Unsung feels about federal jack booted thugs occupying his city? Maybe he's okay with it seeing how it'll be predominately minority occupied neighborhoods that'll be occupied?
    would
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    When you google censorship of the media...

    Censorship is the suppression of free speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.

    C'mon Kat...you've censored far more people then Trump ever has. Sure this is a forum with rules to be enforced but federal agencies (which include national parks) also have rules with respect to communications and federal employees are expected to follow those rules. If employees of these agencies disagree with the politics of their leaders then they can resign. One has a right to free speech but they don't have the right to operate outside the rules of this forum or outside of the rules of their employer.
    Kat specifically brought up censorship OF THE MEDIA. Totally different, and EXTREMELY dangerous to everyone's freedom.
    Except nobody was concerned when Obama prosecuted members of the media or disparaged media sources on the right.
    when did he do that? did he refuse to answer their questions at pressers?
    I am not surprised that most of you are unfamiliar with Obama's record on press freedom and the prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers but here's a little taste

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html


    oh please. a biased opinion piece. next.
    Here are some unbiased facts for you

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

    But I wouldn't be surprised if you brush this off as well. Press freedom was under assault and nobody made a peep.
    Didn't you see what happened here? Hysterical post after hysterical post, raid fire, then a topic emerges (obama and media) and the evidence doesn't fit the majority narrative, then everyone went to lunch. Phil Collins drum kit!
    Par for the course...

    This also won't fit the narrative

    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/poll-voters-liked-trumps-inaugural-address-234148
    Polls!

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/195542/americans-trust-mass-media-sinks-new-low.aspx

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/197090/majority-voters-think-media-favors-clinton.aspx
  • Spiritual_Chaos
    Spiritual_Chaos Posts: 31,518
    JC29856 said:

    BS44325 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    Halifax2TheMax said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    ledvedderman said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Jesus H, he just threatened to bring "the feds"?!

    No shit. I wonder what the chain of command is for something like that. Would Rahm or our piece of shit Governor Rauner have to make a request for the feds to step in?
    Yes. The governor has to make the request. Think back to Katrina. Bush couldn't send troops until Governor Blanco made the official request.
    Which bring us to multiple scenarios of agencies and government employees not following our new dictators orders. What follows that, and what are the implications? The system runs on a certain level of faith and trust. Trump is effing with that and he has no clue whatsoever.
    No. It doesn't lead to multiple scenerios. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act detail requirements and limitations for a federal government to intervene.
    You're just referring to what trump said about Chicago. But even in that single scenario, trump will interpret those as giving him permission to send "the feds". He will probably be told no, and then it what hapoens after that matters. You seem to be under the impression that trump is educated on anything about the federal government and is willing to respect the limits placed on it.
    He also has a pen and a phone.
    Yawn. Yup, he's just like Obama. Got it.
    With the big difference being that Trump will not tolerate the carnage that is Chicago.
    I wonder how Unsung feels about federal jack booted thugs occupying his city? Maybe he's okay with it seeing how it'll be predominately minority occupied neighborhoods that'll be occupied?
    would
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    When you google censorship of the media...

    Censorship is the suppression of free speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.

    C'mon Kat...you've censored far more people then Trump ever has. Sure this is a forum with rules to be enforced but federal agencies (which include national parks) also have rules with respect to communications and federal employees are expected to follow those rules. If employees of these agencies disagree with the politics of their leaders then they can resign. One has a right to free speech but they don't have the right to operate outside the rules of this forum or outside of the rules of their employer.
    Kat specifically brought up censorship OF THE MEDIA. Totally different, and EXTREMELY dangerous to everyone's freedom.
    Except nobody was concerned when Obama prosecuted members of the media or disparaged media sources on the right.
    when did he do that? did he refuse to answer their questions at pressers?
    I am not surprised that most of you are unfamiliar with Obama's record on press freedom and the prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers but here's a little taste

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html


    oh please. a biased opinion piece. next.
    Here are some unbiased facts for you

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

    But I wouldn't be surprised if you brush this off as well. Press freedom was under assault and nobody made a peep.
    Didn't you see what happened here? Hysterical post after hysterical post, raid fire, then a topic emerges (obama and media) and the evidence doesn't fit the majority narrative, then everyone went to lunch. Phil Collins drum kit!
    Read through it. Yeah that's shitty.

    But did Obamas administration ever play the "climate change is a chinese hoax" game?
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    BS44325 said:

    JC29856 said:

    BS44325 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    Halifax2TheMax said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    ledvedderman said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Jesus H, he just threatened to bring "the feds"?!

    No shit. I wonder what the chain of command is for something like that. Would Rahm or our piece of shit Governor Rauner have to make a request for the feds to step in?
    Yes. The governor has to make the request. Think back to Katrina. Bush couldn't send troops until Governor Blanco made the official request.
    Which bring us to multiple scenarios of agencies and government employees not following our new dictators orders. What follows that, and what are the implications? The system runs on a certain level of faith and trust. Trump is effing with that and he has no clue whatsoever.
    No. It doesn't lead to multiple scenerios. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act detail requirements and limitations for a federal government to intervene.
    You're just referring to what trump said about Chicago. But even in that single scenario, trump will interpret those as giving him permission to send "the feds". He will probably be told no, and then it what hapoens after that matters. You seem to be under the impression that trump is educated on anything about the federal government and is willing to respect the limits placed on it.
    He also has a pen and a phone.
    Yawn. Yup, he's just like Obama. Got it.
    With the big difference being that Trump will not tolerate the carnage that is Chicago.
    I wonder how Unsung feels about federal jack booted thugs occupying his city? Maybe he's okay with it seeing how it'll be predominately minority occupied neighborhoods that'll be occupied?
    would
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    When you google censorship of the media...

    Censorship is the suppression of free speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.

    C'mon Kat...you've censored far more people then Trump ever has. Sure this is a forum with rules to be enforced but federal agencies (which include national parks) also have rules with respect to communications and federal employees are expected to follow those rules. If employees of these agencies disagree with the politics of their leaders then they can resign. One has a right to free speech but they don't have the right to operate outside the rules of this forum or outside of the rules of their employer.
    Kat specifically brought up censorship OF THE MEDIA. Totally different, and EXTREMELY dangerous to everyone's freedom.
    Except nobody was concerned when Obama prosecuted members of the media or disparaged media sources on the right.
    when did he do that? did he refuse to answer their questions at pressers?
    I am not surprised that most of you are unfamiliar with Obama's record on press freedom and the prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers but here's a little taste

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html


    oh please. a biased opinion piece. next.
    Here are some unbiased facts for you

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

    But I wouldn't be surprised if you brush this off as well. Press freedom was under assault and nobody made a peep.
    Didn't you see what happened here? Hysterical post after hysterical post, raid fire, then a topic emerges (obama and media) and the evidence doesn't fit the majority narrative, then everyone went to lunch. Phil Collins drum kit!
    Par for the course...

    This also won't fit the narrative

    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/poll-voters-liked-trumps-inaugural-address-234148
    Actually, I would say that it's pretty damming that only 46% thought it was "presidential", given that it was a presidential address, and only 44% found it to be inspiring. As his first address as president, there was always going to be a core group of voters that liked it, but approval ratings should have been much higher.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    oftenreading said:

    BS44325 said:

    JC29856 said:

    BS44325 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    Halifax2TheMax said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    ledvedderman said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Jesus H, he just threatened to bring "the feds"?!

    No shit. I wonder what the chain of command is for something like that. Would Rahm or our piece of shit Governor Rauner have to make a request for the feds to step in?
    Yes. The governor has to make the request. Think back to Katrina. Bush couldn't send troops until Governor Blanco made the official request.
    Which bring us to multiple scenarios of agencies and government employees not following our new dictators orders. What follows that, and what are the implications? The system runs on a certain level of faith and trust. Trump is effing with that and he has no clue whatsoever.
    No. It doesn't lead to multiple scenerios. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act detail requirements and limitations for a federal government to intervene.
    You're just referring to what trump said about Chicago. But even in that single scenario, trump will interpret those as giving him permission to send "the feds". He will probably be told no, and then it what hapoens after that matters. You seem to be under the impression that trump is educated on anything about the federal government and is willing to respect the limits placed on it.
    He also has a pen and a phone.
    Yawn. Yup, he's just like Obama. Got it.
    With the big difference being that Trump will not tolerate the carnage that is Chicago.
    I wonder how Unsung feels about federal jack booted thugs occupying his city? Maybe he's okay with it seeing how it'll be predominately minority occupied neighborhoods that'll be occupied?
    would
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    When you google censorship of the media...

    Censorship is the suppression of free speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.

    C'mon Kat...you've censored far more people then Trump ever has. Sure this is a forum with rules to be enforced but federal agencies (which include national parks) also have rules with respect to communications and federal employees are expected to follow those rules. If employees of these agencies disagree with the politics of their leaders then they can resign. One has a right to free speech but they don't have the right to operate outside the rules of this forum or outside of the rules of their employer.
    Kat specifically brought up censorship OF THE MEDIA. Totally different, and EXTREMELY dangerous to everyone's freedom.
    Except nobody was concerned when Obama prosecuted members of the media or disparaged media sources on the right.
    when did he do that? did he refuse to answer their questions at pressers?
    I am not surprised that most of you are unfamiliar with Obama's record on press freedom and the prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers but here's a little taste

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html


    oh please. a biased opinion piece. next.
    Here are some unbiased facts for you

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

    But I wouldn't be surprised if you brush this off as well. Press freedom was under assault and nobody made a peep.
    Didn't you see what happened here? Hysterical post after hysterical post, raid fire, then a topic emerges (obama and media) and the evidence doesn't fit the majority narrative, then everyone went to lunch. Phil Collins drum kit!
    Par for the course...

    This also won't fit the narrative

    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/poll-voters-liked-trumps-inaugural-address-234148
    Actually, I would say that it's pretty damming that only 46% thought it was "presidential", given that it was a presidential address, and only 44% found it to be inspiring. As his first address as president, there was always going to be a core group of voters that liked it, but approval ratings should have been much higher.
    The racists in the media claimed it was "too dark".
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    oftenreading said:

    BS44325 said:

    JC29856 said:

    BS44325 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    Halifax2TheMax said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    ledvedderman said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Jesus H, he just threatened to bring "the feds"?!

    No shit. I wonder what the chain of command is for something like that. Would Rahm or our piece of shit Governor Rauner have to make a request for the feds to step in?
    Yes. The governor has to make the request. Think back to Katrina. Bush couldn't send troops until Governor Blanco made the official request.
    Which bring us to multiple scenarios of agencies and government employees not following our new dictators orders. What follows that, and what are the implications? The system runs on a certain level of faith and trust. Trump is effing with that and he has no clue whatsoever.
    No. It doesn't lead to multiple scenerios. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act detail requirements and limitations for a federal government to intervene.
    You're just referring to what trump said about Chicago. But even in that single scenario, trump will interpret those as giving him permission to send "the feds". He will probably be told no, and then it what hapoens after that matters. You seem to be under the impression that trump is educated on anything about the federal government and is willing to respect the limits placed on it.
    He also has a pen and a phone.
    Yawn. Yup, he's just like Obama. Got it.
    With the big difference being that Trump will not tolerate the carnage that is Chicago.
    I wonder how Unsung feels about federal jack booted thugs occupying his city? Maybe he's okay with it seeing how it'll be predominately minority occupied neighborhoods that'll be occupied?
    would
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    When you google censorship of the media...

    Censorship is the suppression of free speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.

    C'mon Kat...you've censored far more people then Trump ever has. Sure this is a forum with rules to be enforced but federal agencies (which include national parks) also have rules with respect to communications and federal employees are expected to follow those rules. If employees of these agencies disagree with the politics of their leaders then they can resign. One has a right to free speech but they don't have the right to operate outside the rules of this forum or outside of the rules of their employer.
    Kat specifically brought up censorship OF THE MEDIA. Totally different, and EXTREMELY dangerous to everyone's freedom.
    Except nobody was concerned when Obama prosecuted members of the media or disparaged media sources on the right.
    when did he do that? did he refuse to answer their questions at pressers?
    I am not surprised that most of you are unfamiliar with Obama's record on press freedom and the prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers but here's a little taste

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html


    oh please. a biased opinion piece. next.
    Here are some unbiased facts for you

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

    But I wouldn't be surprised if you brush this off as well. Press freedom was under assault and nobody made a peep.
    Didn't you see what happened here? Hysterical post after hysterical post, raid fire, then a topic emerges (obama and media) and the evidence doesn't fit the majority narrative, then everyone went to lunch. Phil Collins drum kit!
    Par for the course...

    This also won't fit the narrative

    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/poll-voters-liked-trumps-inaugural-address-234148
    Actually, I would say that it's pretty damming that only 46% thought it was "presidential", given that it was a presidential address, and only 44% found it to be inspiring. As his first address as president, there was always going to be a core group of voters that liked it, but approval ratings should have been much higher.
    I don't disagree but I am actually making the point that those who think that his floor of support will drop based on his speech and/or his behaviour and/or a massive protest are kidding themselves. It is why I state that the march while impressive is actually electorally insignificant. His support will be completely results dependant.
  • jeffbr
    jeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    JC29856 said:

    BS44325 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    Halifax2TheMax said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    ledvedderman said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Jesus H, he just threatened to bring "the feds"?!

    No shit. I wonder what the chain of command is for something like that. Would Rahm or our piece of shit Governor Rauner have to make a request for the feds to step in?
    Yes. The governor has to make the request. Think back to Katrina. Bush couldn't send troops until Governor Blanco made the official request.
    Which bring us to multiple scenarios of agencies and government employees not following our new dictators orders. What follows that, and what are the implications? The system runs on a certain level of faith and trust. Trump is effing with that and he has no clue whatsoever.
    No. It doesn't lead to multiple scenerios. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act detail requirements and limitations for a federal government to intervene.
    You're just referring to what trump said about Chicago. But even in that single scenario, trump will interpret those as giving him permission to send "the feds". He will probably be told no, and then it what hapoens after that matters. You seem to be under the impression that trump is educated on anything about the federal government and is willing to respect the limits placed on it.
    He also has a pen and a phone.
    Yawn. Yup, he's just like Obama. Got it.
    With the big difference being that Trump will not tolerate the carnage that is Chicago.
    I wonder how Unsung feels about federal jack booted thugs occupying his city? Maybe he's okay with it seeing how it'll be predominately minority occupied neighborhoods that'll be occupied?
    would
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    When you google censorship of the media...

    Censorship is the suppression of free speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.

    C'mon Kat...you've censored far more people then Trump ever has. Sure this is a forum with rules to be enforced but federal agencies (which include national parks) also have rules with respect to communications and federal employees are expected to follow those rules. If employees of these agencies disagree with the politics of their leaders then they can resign. One has a right to free speech but they don't have the right to operate outside the rules of this forum or outside of the rules of their employer.
    Kat specifically brought up censorship OF THE MEDIA. Totally different, and EXTREMELY dangerous to everyone's freedom.
    Except nobody was concerned when Obama prosecuted members of the media or disparaged media sources on the right.
    when did he do that? did he refuse to answer their questions at pressers?
    I am not surprised that most of you are unfamiliar with Obama's record on press freedom and the prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers but here's a little taste

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html


    oh please. a biased opinion piece. next.
    Here are some unbiased facts for you

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

    But I wouldn't be surprised if you brush this off as well. Press freedom was under assault and nobody made a peep.
    Didn't you see what happened here? Hysterical post after hysterical post, raid fire, then a topic emerges (obama and media) and the evidence doesn't fit the majority narrative, then everyone went to lunch. Phil Collins drum kit!
    I've mentioned Obama's lack of transparency before, especially relating to the press. Hell, from about 2013 every single photo of Obama in the White House was staged by an official White House photographer. We were provided only with images that were approved. No press pool photographers allowed. Only the whitewashed version of what the Obama administration wanted disseminated. I'm opposed to restricting press access regardless of party in power or occupant of the White House.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    Spiritual_Chaos said:

    JC29856 said:

    BS44325 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    Halifax2TheMax said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    ledvedderman said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Jesus H, he just threatened to bring "the feds"?!

    No shit. I wonder what the chain of command is for something like that. Would Rahm or our piece of shit Governor Rauner have to make a request for the feds to step in?
    Yes. The governor has to make the request. Think back to Katrina. Bush couldn't send troops until Governor Blanco made the official request.
    Which bring us to multiple scenarios of agencies and government employees not following our new dictators orders. What follows that, and what are the implications? The system runs on a certain level of faith and trust. Trump is effing with that and he has no clue whatsoever.
    No. It doesn't lead to multiple scenerios. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act detail requirements and limitations for a federal government to intervene.
    You're just referring to what trump said about Chicago. But even in that single scenario, trump will interpret those as giving him permission to send "the feds". He will probably be told no, and then it what hapoens after that matters. You seem to be under the impression that trump is educated on anything about the federal government and is willing to respect the limits placed on it.
    He also has a pen and a phone.
    Yawn. Yup, he's just like Obama. Got it.
    With the big difference being that Trump will not tolerate the carnage that is Chicago.
    I wonder how Unsung feels about federal jack booted thugs occupying his city? Maybe he's okay with it seeing how it'll be predominately minority occupied neighborhoods that'll be occupied?
    would
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    When you google censorship of the media...

    Censorship is the suppression of free speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.

    C'mon Kat...you've censored far more people then Trump ever has. Sure this is a forum with rules to be enforced but federal agencies (which include national parks) also have rules with respect to communications and federal employees are expected to follow those rules. If employees of these agencies disagree with the politics of their leaders then they can resign. One has a right to free speech but they don't have the right to operate outside the rules of this forum or outside of the rules of their employer.
    Kat specifically brought up censorship OF THE MEDIA. Totally different, and EXTREMELY dangerous to everyone's freedom.
    Except nobody was concerned when Obama prosecuted members of the media or disparaged media sources on the right.
    when did he do that? did he refuse to answer their questions at pressers?
    I am not surprised that most of you are unfamiliar with Obama's record on press freedom and the prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers but here's a little taste

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html


    oh please. a biased opinion piece. next.
    Here are some unbiased facts for you

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

    But I wouldn't be surprised if you brush this off as well. Press freedom was under assault and nobody made a peep.
    Didn't you see what happened here? Hysterical post after hysterical post, raid fire, then a topic emerges (obama and media) and the evidence doesn't fit the majority narrative, then everyone went to lunch. Phil Collins drum kit!
    Read through it. Yeah that's shitty.

    But did Obamas administration ever play the "climate change is a chinese hoax" game?
    Don't think so... I'm not sure what Trumps thoughts are on climate change. As I've stated some believe it to be a hoax, some believe it to be naturally occurring. Me, I don't think there is any doubt that directly and indirectly humans and human consumption affects climate change. If trump and his administration believe it to be a Chinese hoax, then it's up to science, our elected officials and the citizenry to push back.
  • Spiritual_Chaos
    Spiritual_Chaos Posts: 31,518
    JC29856 said:

    As I've stated some believe it to be a hoax, some believe it to be naturally occurring.

    "some"



    So happy to be living in a Country where "believing" something doesn't automatically makes it into an equal option to scientific consensus. As in this case, or Evolution VS Jesus riding dinosaurs.

    America:


    Fucking bullshit. Anyone voting for Trump supports this bullshit.
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • HughFreakingDillon
    HughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 39,608
    JC29856 said:

    BS44325 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    Halifax2TheMax said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    ledvedderman said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Jesus H, he just threatened to bring "the feds"?!

    No shit. I wonder what the chain of command is for something like that. Would Rahm or our piece of shit Governor Rauner have to make a request for the feds to step in?
    Yes. The governor has to make the request. Think back to Katrina. Bush couldn't send troops until Governor Blanco made the official request.
    Which bring us to multiple scenarios of agencies and government employees not following our new dictators orders. What follows that, and what are the implications? The system runs on a certain level of faith and trust. Trump is effing with that and he has no clue whatsoever.
    No. It doesn't lead to multiple scenerios. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act detail requirements and limitations for a federal government to intervene.
    You're just referring to what trump said about Chicago. But even in that single scenario, trump will interpret those as giving him permission to send "the feds". He will probably be told no, and then it what hapoens after that matters. You seem to be under the impression that trump is educated on anything about the federal government and is willing to respect the limits placed on it.
    He also has a pen and a phone.
    Yawn. Yup, he's just like Obama. Got it.
    With the big difference being that Trump will not tolerate the carnage that is Chicago.
    I wonder how Unsung feels about federal jack booted thugs occupying his city? Maybe he's okay with it seeing how it'll be predominately minority occupied neighborhoods that'll be occupied?
    would
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    When you google censorship of the media...

    Censorship is the suppression of free speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.

    C'mon Kat...you've censored far more people then Trump ever has. Sure this is a forum with rules to be enforced but federal agencies (which include national parks) also have rules with respect to communications and federal employees are expected to follow those rules. If employees of these agencies disagree with the politics of their leaders then they can resign. One has a right to free speech but they don't have the right to operate outside the rules of this forum or outside of the rules of their employer.
    Kat specifically brought up censorship OF THE MEDIA. Totally different, and EXTREMELY dangerous to everyone's freedom.
    Except nobody was concerned when Obama prosecuted members of the media or disparaged media sources on the right.
    when did he do that? did he refuse to answer their questions at pressers?
    I am not surprised that most of you are unfamiliar with Obama's record on press freedom and the prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers but here's a little taste

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html


    oh please. a biased opinion piece. next.
    Here are some unbiased facts for you

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

    But I wouldn't be surprised if you brush this off as well. Press freedom was under assault and nobody made a peep.
    Didn't you see what happened here? Hysterical post after hysterical post, raid fire, then a topic emerges (obama and media) and the evidence doesn't fit the majority narrative, then everyone went to lunch. Phil Collins drum kit!
    I reacted to the first thing he posted, which was a clearly biased opinion piece, which is hardly digestible as truth. I've been looking into it a little deeper since then, and yes, it looks as if the original sentiment was true. further analysis is required. I hate that I have to read something, then research the political leanings of the author. nothing is just fucking news anymore. it's news with a slant.
    By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.




  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    Kat said:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2USBVaipcA

    Now we're talking
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    JC29856 said:

    BS44325 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    Halifax2TheMax said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    ledvedderman said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Jesus H, he just threatened to bring "the feds"?!

    No shit. I wonder what the chain of command is for something like that. Would Rahm or our piece of shit Governor Rauner have to make a request for the feds to step in?
    Yes. The governor has to make the request. Think back to Katrina. Bush couldn't send troops until Governor Blanco made the official request.
    Which bring us to multiple scenarios of agencies and government employees not following our new dictators orders. What follows that, and what are the implications? The system runs on a certain level of faith and trust. Trump is effing with that and he has no clue whatsoever.
    No. It doesn't lead to multiple scenerios. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act detail requirements and limitations for a federal government to intervene.
    You're just referring to what trump said about Chicago. But even in that single scenario, trump will interpret those as giving him permission to send "the feds". He will probably be told no, and then it what hapoens after that matters. You seem to be under the impression that trump is educated on anything about the federal government and is willing to respect the limits placed on it.
    He also has a pen and a phone.
    Yawn. Yup, he's just like Obama. Got it.
    With the big difference being that Trump will not tolerate the carnage that is Chicago.
    I wonder how Unsung feels about federal jack booted thugs occupying his city? Maybe he's okay with it seeing how it'll be predominately minority occupied neighborhoods that'll be occupied?
    would
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    When you google censorship of the media...

    Censorship is the suppression of free speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.

    C'mon Kat...you've censored far more people then Trump ever has. Sure this is a forum with rules to be enforced but federal agencies (which include national parks) also have rules with respect to communications and federal employees are expected to follow those rules. If employees of these agencies disagree with the politics of their leaders then they can resign. One has a right to free speech but they don't have the right to operate outside the rules of this forum or outside of the rules of their employer.
    Kat specifically brought up censorship OF THE MEDIA. Totally different, and EXTREMELY dangerous to everyone's freedom.
    Except nobody was concerned when Obama prosecuted members of the media or disparaged media sources on the right.
    when did he do that? did he refuse to answer their questions at pressers?
    I am not surprised that most of you are unfamiliar with Obama's record on press freedom and the prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers but here's a little taste

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html


    oh please. a biased opinion piece. next.
    Here are some unbiased facts for you

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

    But I wouldn't be surprised if you brush this off as well. Press freedom was under assault and nobody made a peep.
    Didn't you see what happened here? Hysterical post after hysterical post, raid fire, then a topic emerges (obama and media) and the evidence doesn't fit the majority narrative, then everyone went to lunch. Phil Collins drum kit!
    I reacted to the first thing he posted, which was a clearly biased opinion piece, which is hardly digestible as truth. I've been looking into it a little deeper since then, and yes, it looks as if the original sentiment was true. further analysis is required. I hate that I have to read something, then research the political leanings of the author. nothing is just fucking news anymore. it's news with a slant.
    not directed towards you... you're one of the good guys around here. consistent, level-headed, open-minded, yet not duped by alternative facts.
  • Halifax2TheMax
    Halifax2TheMax Posts: 42,459
    So, did Obama's persecution of the press and prosecuting whistleblowers prevent us from knowing anything? Other than Comet Pizza
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478


    JC29856 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    JC29856 said:

    BS44325 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    Halifax2TheMax said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    ledvedderman said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Jesus H, he just threatened to bring "the feds"?!

    No shit. I wonder what the chain of command is for something like that. Would Rahm or our piece of shit Governor Rauner have to make a request for the feds to step in?
    Yes. The governor has to make the request. Think back to Katrina. Bush couldn't send troops until Governor Blanco made the official request.
    Which bring us to multiple scenarios of agencies and government employees not following our new dictators orders. What follows that, and what are the implications? The system runs on a certain level of faith and trust. Trump is effing with that and he has no clue whatsoever.
    No. It doesn't lead to multiple scenerios. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act detail requirements and limitations for a federal government to intervene.
    You're just referring to what trump said about Chicago. But even in that single scenario, trump will interpret those as giving him permission to send "the feds". He will probably be told no, and then it what hapoens after that matters. You seem to be under the impression that trump is educated on anything about the federal government and is willing to respect the limits placed on it.
    He also has a pen and a phone.
    Yawn. Yup, he's just like Obama. Got it.
    With the big difference being that Trump will not tolerate the carnage that is Chicago.
    I wonder how Unsung feels about federal jack booted thugs occupying his city? Maybe he's okay with it seeing how it'll be predominately minority occupied neighborhoods that'll be occupied?
    would
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    When you google censorship of the media...

    Censorship is the suppression of free speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.

    C'mon Kat...you've censored far more people then Trump ever has. Sure this is a forum with rules to be enforced but federal agencies (which include national parks) also have rules with respect to communications and federal employees are expected to follow those rules. If employees of these agencies disagree with the politics of their leaders then they can resign. One has a right to free speech but they don't have the right to operate outside the rules of this forum or outside of the rules of their employer.
    Kat specifically brought up censorship OF THE MEDIA. Totally different, and EXTREMELY dangerous to everyone's freedom.
    Except nobody was concerned when Obama prosecuted members of the media or disparaged media sources on the right.
    when did he do that? did he refuse to answer their questions at pressers?
    I am not surprised that most of you are unfamiliar with Obama's record on press freedom and the prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers but here's a little taste

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html


    oh please. a biased opinion piece. next.
    Here are some unbiased facts for you

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

    But I wouldn't be surprised if you brush this off as well. Press freedom was under assault and nobody made a peep.
    Didn't you see what happened here? Hysterical post after hysterical post, raid fire, then a topic emerges (obama and media) and the evidence doesn't fit the majority narrative, then everyone went to lunch. Phil Collins drum kit!
    I reacted to the first thing he posted, which was a clearly biased opinion piece, which is hardly digestible as truth. I've been looking into it a little deeper since then, and yes, it looks as if the original sentiment was true. further analysis is required. I hate that I have to read something, then research the political leanings of the author. nothing is just fucking news anymore. it's news with a slant.
    yet not duped by alternative facts.
    This coming from a guy who thinks a random dude on twitter is behind the Trump dossier among other things.

    You are the chief spreader of alternative facts. Always trying to muddy the waters and put doubt on real investigative journalism.

  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,722
    edited January 2017
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    When you google censorship of the media...

    Censorship is the suppression of free speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.

    C'mon Kat...you've censored far more people then Trump ever has. Sure this is a forum with rules to be enforced but federal agencies (which include national parks) also have rules with respect to communications and federal employees are expected to follow those rules. If employees of these agencies disagree with the politics of their leaders then they can resign. One has a right to free speech but they don't have the right to operate outside the rules of this forum or outside of the rules of their employer.
    Kat specifically brought up censorship OF THE MEDIA. Totally different, and EXTREMELY dangerous to everyone's freedom.
    Except nobody was concerned when Obama prosecuted members of the media or disparaged media sources on the right.
    when did he do that? did he refuse to answer their questions at pressers?
    He trashed Fox news for their tactics. I applauded him for that, and it isn't even close to comparable to what Trump is doing. I feel like Professor BS has made the decision to not acknowledge the difference between right and wrong, facts and non-facts, news and fake news, or news vs propaganda.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • dimitrispearljam
    dimitrispearljam Posts: 139,725
    i guess u didmt want yopur taxes goes to obama care..now will go to build the wall in mexico boarders..hahahahah
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • PJPOWER
    PJPOWER Posts: 6,499
    edited January 2017
    Meanwhile, the Dow Jones is at an all time high.
    http://money.cnn.com/data/markets/dow/
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    dignin said:





    JC29856 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    JC29856 said:

    BS44325 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    Halifax2TheMax said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    BS44325 said:

    ledvedderman said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Jesus H, he just threatened to bring "the feds"?!

    No shit. I wonder what the chain of command is for something like that. Would Rahm or our piece of shit Governor Rauner have to make a request for the feds to step in?
    Yes. The governor has to make the request. Think back to Katrina. Bush couldn't send troops until Governor Blanco made the official request.
    Which bring us to multiple scenarios of agencies and government employees not following our new dictators orders. What follows that, and what are the implications? The system runs on a certain level of faith and trust. Trump is effing with that and he has no clue whatsoever.
    No. It doesn't lead to multiple scenerios. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act detail requirements and limitations for a federal government to intervene.
    You're just referring to what trump said about Chicago. But even in that single scenario, trump will interpret those as giving him permission to send "the feds". He will probably be told no, and then it what hapoens after that matters. You seem to be under the impression that trump is educated on anything about the federal government and is willing to respect the limits placed on it.
    He also has a pen and a phone.
    Yawn. Yup, he's just like Obama. Got it.
    With the big difference being that Trump will not tolerate the carnage that is Chicago.
    I wonder how Unsung feels about federal jack booted thugs occupying his city? Maybe he's okay with it seeing how it'll be predominately minority occupied neighborhoods that'll be occupied?
    would
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    BS44325 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    When you google censorship of the media...

    Censorship is the suppression of free speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.

    C'mon Kat...you've censored far more people then Trump ever has. Sure this is a forum with rules to be enforced but federal agencies (which include national parks) also have rules with respect to communications and federal employees are expected to follow those rules. If employees of these agencies disagree with the politics of their leaders then they can resign. One has a right to free speech but they don't have the right to operate outside the rules of this forum or outside of the rules of their employer.
    Kat specifically brought up censorship OF THE MEDIA. Totally different, and EXTREMELY dangerous to everyone's freedom.
    Except nobody was concerned when Obama prosecuted members of the media or disparaged media sources on the right.
    when did he do that? did he refuse to answer their questions at pressers?
    I am not surprised that most of you are unfamiliar with Obama's record on press freedom and the prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers but here's a little taste

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html


    oh please. a biased opinion piece. next.
    Here are some unbiased facts for you

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Department_of_Justice_investigations_of_reporters

    But I wouldn't be surprised if you brush this off as well. Press freedom was under assault and nobody made a peep.
    Didn't you see what happened here? Hysterical post after hysterical post, raid fire, then a topic emerges (obama and media) and the evidence doesn't fit the majority narrative, then everyone went to lunch. Phil Collins drum kit!
    I reacted to the first thing he posted, which was a clearly biased opinion piece, which is hardly digestible as truth. I've been looking into it a little deeper since then, and yes, it looks as if the original sentiment was true. further analysis is required. I hate that I have to read something, then research the political leanings of the author. nothing is just fucking news anymore. it's news with a slant.
    yet not duped by alternative facts.
    This coming from a guy who thinks a random dude on twitter is behind the Trump dossier among other things.

    You are the chief spreader of alternative facts. Always trying to muddy the waters and put doubt on real investigative journalism.

    https://twitter.com/trsprudence?lang=en
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    PJPOWER said:

    Meanwhile, the Dow is at an all time high.
    http://money.cnn.com/data/markets/dow/

    It was all because of The Don.

    Good fiscal govern-ship for the last 8 years has nothing to do with it.

    I seem to remember Bush 2 taking over a robust economy. I can't remember how that turned out.

    I think I'm with you guys, lets give The Don a chance to fuck this up.
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    The true, correct story of what happened at Donald Trump’s inauguration

    Nothing that has ever happened or will ever happen was as great as Donald Trump’s inauguration.

    The crowd was magnificent and huge, bigger than any crowd had ever been before! It stretched all the way to the moon. The Pope, who was there, confirmed it.

    “Thanks for being here, Pope,” Donald Trump told him.

    “Are you kidding? You’re my best friend,” the Pope said. “I wouldn’t miss your big day for anything!” He gave Donald Trump a big high-five.

    [Did you attend the inauguration or a protest? Tell us what you plan to do next.]

    Everyone in the world had come there at great expense. They sold all their possessions — their homes, their “Hamilton” tickets, which were worthless to them — to raise money to come and see this great sight. They could not believe that a perfect being such as Donald Trump even existed. They thought that he was a myth or a legend or a decades-long series of fabrications.

    But then they saw him, and their doubts fell away.

    The media was there, too, and they were very sorry. “Donald,” the newscasters said, “we were mean to you. We used to laugh and call you names. We were no better than all of the other reindeer. How can you ever forgive us?”

    “Forgive you?” Donald Trump asked. “I’ve already forgotten.” He smiled a big, beautiful smile. That was just who Donald Trump was: forgiving, like Jesus, but blond.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2017/01/24/the-true-correct-story-of-what-happened-at-donald-trumps-inauguration/?utm_term=.c9ebf7bcdf0a
  • PJPOWER
    PJPOWER Posts: 6,499
    edited January 2017
    dignin said:

    PJPOWER said:

    Meanwhile, the Dow is at an all time high.
    http://money.cnn.com/data/markets/dow/

    It was all because of The Don.

    Good fiscal govern-ship for the last 8 years has nothing to do with it.

    I seem to remember Bush 2 taking over a robust economy. I can't remember how that turned out.

    I think I'm with you guys, lets give The Don a chance to fuck this up.
    You should probably give him a little credit for this...
    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/dow-cracks-20000-milestone-intraday-for-the-first-time-2017-01-25
    Or
    https://www.google.com/amp/www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-markets-20170125-story,amp.html?client=safari

    I'll give Obama credit for keeping it low so that people were able to buy cheap...hope you didn't miss the boat!
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
This discussion has been closed.

Categories