Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House The Trump Presidency

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Trump Presidency
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2723 of 4573 (847317)
01-21-2019 7:51 AM


Trump's Border Patrol Court Convicts Humanitarians
The Trump Border Patrol's inadequate and ultimately fatal efforts handling the humanitarian crisis on our southern border motivated members of No More Deaths to leave water and food in Cabeza Prieta, a protected 860,000-acre (equal to a 36-mile square area) refuge that cannot be entered without permits. They have just been convicted of federal crimes.
The four women testified that as a matter of conscience they could not ignore the significant loss of life in the desert and had to do something. They could be sentenced to as much as six months in federal prison.
See They left food and water for migrants in the desert. Now they might go to prison.
This is Judge Bernardo Velasco who rendered the verdict:
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Grammar.
Edited by Percy, : Grammar, add link.
Edited by Percy, : Add image of judge.
Edited by Percy, : Fix image.

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 2725 of 4573 (847419)
01-22-2019 1:23 PM


Here's What Trump and the Republicans Call a Compromise
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) is intent upon bringing his "compromise" to reopen the government and fund Trump's wall. Here's what each side gets in this "compromise":
Trump and the Republicans get:
  • Funding for the wall
  • Exclusion of the 1.1 million DACA-eligible people who haven't applied yet
  • A 3-year limit on DACA protections for the 700,000 who did apply
  • DACA status cannot be renewed
  • Migrant children can no longer seek asylum at or within our borders. They can only do so from their home countries.
  • A limit on such applications of 50,000/years and grants of just 15,000/year.
  • No review.
  • A reopened government that they're getting blamed for
Democrats get:
  • A few hundred thousand dollars of funding for humanitarian provisions
In a true compromise both sides make concessions, and a true compromise wouldn't involve (as one pundit put it) "the gun of a government shutdown pointed at the country."
If McConnell's bill actually represented the basis for a compromise then there is no need to keep the government shuttered.
--Percy
PS - The bookkeeper in me notices that McConnell's name contains three double letters. I wonder if there's any word that has three consecutive double letters.
Edited by Percy, : Left out a couple items in the list of things Trump and the Republicans get.
Edited by Percy, : Grammar.
Edited by Percy, : Fix rendering.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2726 by Taq, posted 01-22-2019 3:18 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 2727 by Theodoric, posted 01-23-2019 11:41 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2728 of 4573 (847681)
01-25-2019 9:13 AM


Finally A Democrat Speaks Plainly
While the pundits have been describing what Trump is doing in plain language, Democrats in Congress have been remarkably muted and circumspect in thier comments, but Representative Ted Lieu (D-CA) finally spoke plainly:
quote:
The principle at stake here is we cannot allow Donald Trump to use the harm of a government shutdown as a negotiating tactic. We cannot allow any party or any person to take our government as a hostage and extract a ransom.
And, of course, capitulating to Trump's ransom demands would only encourage him to use the tactic again and again.
Source: No one knows how Trump plans to end the shutdown
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 2729 by Theodoric, posted 01-25-2019 10:06 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2733 of 4573 (847755)
01-26-2019 8:25 AM


Why the Deal to Open the Government is a Bad One for America
Yesterday a deal was struck between President Trump and Democrats in Congress to reopen the government until February 15th so that border security can be debated, here's the Fox News article: Trump signs bill ending government shutdown
This is a bad deal for America because Trump is just preparing to take another run at pinning the blame on Democrats for what will be the February 15th government shutdown. Democrats should have insisted that Trump reopen the government, period. No temporary reopening. If there is any doubt that Trump sees the February 15th deadline as another opportunity to get his wall, here is Mr. Trump in his own words:
quote:
As everyone knows I have a very powerful alternative but I'm not going to use it at this time. If we don't get a fair deal from Congress, the government will either shut down on February 15 again, or I will use the powers afforded to me under the laws and the Constitution of the United States to address this emergency. We will have great security.
Most people are in favor of maintaining and improving security along our southern border, but in Trump's mind border security is a wall, and if he doesn't get his wall through negotiations then he will shut down the government again, this time hoping to set the stage for blame landing on the Democrats. Trump has no intention of negotiating in good faith. He will just hold out for his wall.
What we should all want is not a win for Democrats or Republicans or Trump but a win for America. That means a funded government on the one hand, and the normal legislative process on the other where Congress and the executive branch negotiate legislation without threats and hostages.
--Percy

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2757 of 4573 (848455)
02-05-2019 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 2745 by dwise1
02-05-2019 11:09 AM


Re: What I'd Like to See in the State of the Union Address
dwise1 writes:
One thing that we absolutely must not do would be to turn the watching the SOTU into a drinking game, taking a drink each time Trump lies. I would not want to lose anyone to alcohol poisoning.
Everyone who thinks Trump just lied should raise their hand. Those who are wrong would have to take a drink. At the end of the night all the Republicans in the room would be well lubricated.
I won't be watching the SOTU address. I'm thinking of watching the response, but I've watched several in the past and they're always Godawful. You go from a huge chamber of Representatives and Senators and the Supreme Court and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and honored guests and applause (from a little under half the audience) to a quiet, tiny, empty room. Even if Stacy Abrams gives the speech of her life it will likely still fall flat. It could be as bad as when Chuck and Nancy delivered their response to Trump a few weeks ago. If the president gets an audience then so should the person who responds.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2745 by dwise1, posted 02-05-2019 11:09 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(2)
Message 2765 of 4573 (848554)
02-09-2019 9:29 AM


It's Time for Trexit
I enjoyed this NYT editorial, you might too: Republicans Got Us Into This Mess, and They Have to Get Us Out of It
--Percy

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2769 of 4573 (849553)
03-14-2019 8:55 AM
Reply to: Message 2768 by LamarkNewAge
03-14-2019 12:11 AM


Re: Jorge Ramos asked Sanders & Hillary if EVERY child has the right to cross the border.
LamarkNewAge writes:
2016 (or 2015?) UNIVISION DEBATE
Sanders said "I think I can agree to that", then Hillary Clinton said "yes".
That question was asked in the light of the Trump campaign (plus the Central American child migration crisis of 2013- present).
You are a complete mess when it comes to saying anything clear and coherent. What were Sanders and Clinton replying to? Here is a YouTube video of the 2016 Univision debate between Sanders and Clinton. Find the spot where the exchange happens and then repost the video queued up to the correct time:
Now, Democrats say Trump is evil for putting children migrants behind bars.
How would you describe the incarceration of innocent children?
HOLD FUTURE DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATIONS AND THE DEMOCRATIC RANK-AND-FILE TO A CONSISTENT STANDARD.
Consistency would be nice, but you do realize that there are a wide variety of opinions across any major party, Democrats and Republicans included.
Nothing less than the highest standard for children migrants is acceptable.
Well, welcome to the Democratic position. So given that you're holding those responsible for upholding the highest standards for child migrants, how would you characterize Trump's approach?
(Be advised that the only new thing under Trump is PARENTS AND CHILDREN BEING SEPARATED. The detention of children is standard fare.
Federal law places a limit on the incarceration of children, 20 days or something like that. After that they have to be released to relatives or to child services for placement in foster homes.
Hillary Clinton supported the detention of children back in the 2013-2014 period, just after she left her Secretary of State job.
So little of what you say is true that I won't comment on this claim of what Clinton supported, but needless to say I think most people are against the incarceration of children.
To his credit, Sanders spoke, on the floor of the Senate, in opposition of the detentions. He was somewhat consistent from 2013 to 2016.)
If true, good for him.
Today's Democrats say that the issue of children being put behind bars is extreme but will they be consistent when there is a Democratic administration?
Who cares if the Democrats are consistent. Anyone, Democrats or Republicans or Independents or Green Party or whatever, who are in favor of the incarceration of children (beyond that 20 day period or whatever it is) should be opposed.
MY FEAR:
Democrats (during a future Democratic administration) will say, "We opposed the 'excesses' of the Trump administration, which especially included the separation of migrant children from their parents BUT WE CANNOT ALLOW EVERY CHILD IN THE WORLD TO IMMIGRATE TO THIS COUNTRY".
There are five ways a child might emigrate to the US:
  • Legally by visa.
  • Legally by asylum application.
  • Legally by applying from oversees for refugee status.
  • Illegally by overstaying a visa.
  • Illegally by crossing the border.
Most people on both sides of the aisle probably oppose illegal immigration. But one side of the aisle wishes to treat illegal immigrants with dignity and compassion and due process. The other side of the aisle wants to deport them as quickly and expeditiously and cruelly as possible, often giving short shrift to due process.
MY HOPE:
Democratic administrations (and the Democratic party as a whole) will admit that they fired severe attacks on Trump for stopping child-migrants at the border (and irrespective of the separate issue of separating a few thousand parents from children), and the accordant policy of the post-Trump Democratic party will be to honor the spirit, of the Trump-era opposition-party position, that the party of Thomas Jefferson presented then.
What do you think is the proper response to a humanitarian crisis on the border involving children? One idea would be to take Trump's wall money and put it into facilities and staff and courts for humanely handling the large influx of children and families. It would cost far less than the wall.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2768 by LamarkNewAge, posted 03-14-2019 12:11 AM LamarkNewAge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2770 by LamarkNewAge, posted 03-14-2019 9:37 PM Percy has replied
 Message 2772 by LamarkNewAge, posted 03-14-2019 10:18 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 2774 of 4573 (849615)
03-16-2019 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 2770 by LamarkNewAge
03-14-2019 9:37 PM


Re: Jorge Ramos asked Sanders & Hillary if EVERY child has the right to cross the border.
LamarkNewAge writes:
The issue is about giving the undocumented/illegal immigrants the right to avoid deportation and to stay.
That's just an issue you made up. The actual issue is that we should provide legal constitutional due process to those applying for asylum or refugee status, or to those who are in the country illegally.
(children seem to be the group Democrats show willingness to defend to various degrees)
I'll ignore the things you make up. What people should care about regardless of party affiliation is treating people properly and decently and with due process, no matter where they are from throughout the world. My political support will in part depend upon the degree to which these beliefs are shared.
( The right to NOT be walled off by a border check is another issue. Democrats are on the record calling walls "racist", and we all know walls are just a symbol of borders)
Pelosi called Trump's wall racist, because Trump's racism toward non-whites from south of the border is why he wants to build it.
Here is the Univision transcript.
Transcript: Univision News Democratic Debate on March 9, 2016 | Noticias Univision Poltica | Univision
This March 2016 Univision debate was in the shadow of Hillary Clinton's 2014 comments (the quotes are easy to find) supporting swift deportation of children.
If the quotes are easy to find then go find them. Supporting what you say with evidence doesn't mean saying, "The evidence is easy to find, go find it." It means finding the evidence and presenting it.
But why do you and Trump and so many Republicans have this obsession with Clinton, and with Obama, too? It's like you need some kind of bogeyman to rile up the base. "Lock...her...up." "Build...the...wall."
quote:
Search only for hillary clinton said deport children
<...useless search results full of dead links...>
First, your links are useless because they're just plain text, and they are all incorrect because they end with "..."
Second, it's not our job to follow your links and dig out the parts that support your claims. That's your job.
Third, when I do the identical search as you I do not get the same results. Searches are colored by your search history, and we have different search histories. Even if you do the identical search today that you did yesterday you won't necessarily get the same list of links, because your search history is different, and because the Internet landscape is constantly changing.
Fourth, the comments you're talking about are from 2015, not 2014.
Fifth, nobody cares what Clinton said four years ago.
Put "Obama deported Children" into google and see lots of mainstream media articles enlightening the evidence of large numbers of deportations and comparisons to Trump.
I was against Obama's deportation policies then, and I'm still against them. I think many people feel the same way.
quote:
Politics & Policy
Why Trump Deports Fewer Immigrants Than Obama
Sanctuary states and cities are slowing the expulsions.
By Francis Wilkinson
May 15, 2018, 10:12 AM CDT
It's a testament to President Donald Trump's capacity for malice that his deportation policy has terrified more while...
<...and on and on and on...>
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
From the Forum Guidelines:
  1. Avoid lengthy cut-n-pastes. Introduce the point in your own words and provide a link to your source as a reference. If your source is not on-line you may contact the Site Administrator to have it made available on-line.
I'm not reading your incredibly long excerpt. Please make your point and provide a link to your reference as supporting evidence.
But everybody already knows deportations were higher under Obama than Trump. So what? A great many people are opposed to harsh or uncompassionate or non-due-process detentions and deportations, no matter who is responsible. This country's principles define it as a beacon of freedom and a refuge for the world's downtrodden. Slamming shut the doors while mistreating those who slip through is not who we are.
Democrats will be in power again, and we will see if "walls are racist" (or "The Wall is racist") will be matched with sincerity in policymaking. Walls are just a symbol of borders. Will Democrats seriously challenge borders?
Again, no one meant all walls are racist. It's Trump's walls that are racist because he wants to build them not because they're the best border security solution but because they're a symbol of that racism for his base.
Is a fence less racist than a wall (Google: "wall verses a fence")?
You're obviously getting your statements of what Democrats believe from Republicans. What Democrats want, what most reasonable people want, is appropriate border security for each stretch of border. Wherever we need walls we should build walls. We do not need walls along the Rio Grande because the river is already a barrier. Trump won't say that's where he's building his wall, but it's about the only place he can build it because the rest of the border where there's no river already mostly has wall or fence. When congresspeople visit the border to investigate where the wall will go for themselves do you know where they mostly go? Texas, because that's where the Rio Grande is. The river does kind of peter out in far western Texas where a wall is probably necessary.
Think this through for yourself. Do we really need a wall in addition to a river? Does it make any sense to wall ourselves off from our own river?
Then, will Democrats backtrack on the rights of children?
(will there be "open borders" of sorts for children?)
I, and I hope many others, will oppose all inhumane and antihumanitarian treatment of people at the border, including children.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2770 by LamarkNewAge, posted 03-14-2019 9:37 PM LamarkNewAge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2776 by LamarkNewAge, posted 03-16-2019 1:18 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 2777 by LamarkNewAge, posted 03-16-2019 3:33 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 2775 of 4573 (849616)
03-16-2019 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 2772 by LamarkNewAge
03-14-2019 10:18 PM


Re: Jorge Ramos asked Sanders & Hillary if EVERY child has the right to cross the border.
You are as confused as ever.
LamarkNewAge writes:
I was accurately quoted by Percy:
quote:
Hillary Clinton supported the detention of children back in the 2013-2014 period, just after she left her Secretary of State job.
I did say that.
Here was the Percy reply:
quote:
So little of what you say is true that I won't comment on this claim of what Clinton supported, but needless to say I think most people are against the incarceration of children.
I must hold you accountable Percy: Immigration experts have no idea what Hillary is talking about
<...extremely long excerpt from that link not included here...>
You are a mess. You claim that "Clinton supported the detention of children back in the 2013-2014 period," then you support that with a quote from an article two years later in 2016 about deportation that doesn't mention detention once.
You have no real policy Percy.
I'm for the same things I stated in my previous post: I'm for compassionate humanitarian treatment of all immigrants that follows due process.
You just want to attack my generally accurate accounting of Democratic party evolution.
I don't know if it's accurate or not, just that you're unable to support what you say. You just completely bollocks up your claim that Clinton favored detention by excerpting from an article that never mentioned detention.
Why are you trying to provide an accounting of the Democratic party evolution on immigration in the The Trump Presidency thread? Are you going someplace relevant with this? Maybe you need to find a different thread to do this.
Beto of El Paso says "walls are racist", right?
I don't know - does he? You provide no support for your claim.
(nevermind the fact that he has not said he will take down the El Paso fence)
El Paso is in far western Texas where the Rio Grande peters out. I would think they'd need a wall or fence or some kind of border security strategy there.
So will he apply that worldview to borders and border checks generally?
How would I know?
(I hope Democrats do)
I hope everyone's in favor of border security.
Immigration is not a "problem" that needs a solution, IN MY OPINION.
The country is sorely in need of immigration reform, but I have a feeling that you really meant border security, not immigration.
But Democrats keep using the loaded comment that "We have other ways to solve the problem" or "Walls don't solve the problem". They use anti-immigration setups by referring to immigration as a problem.
When you quote somebody actually saying something in an actual context instead of making up quotes out of the blue, then I'll comment.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2772 by LamarkNewAge, posted 03-14-2019 10:18 PM LamarkNewAge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2778 by LamarkNewAge, posted 03-16-2019 3:47 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2789 of 4573 (849906)
03-25-2019 12:39 PM


The Barr Letter on the Mueller Report
The letter from Attorney General William P. Barr to ranking members of Congress summarizing the findings of the Mueller report can be found here: Barr Letter on the Mueller Report
Here is a very short summary of Barr letter content:
  1. The Mueller report concludes that Russia did interfere in the 2016 presidential election, both through a disinformation campaign by their Internet Research Agency, and though hacking of Democratic computers and emails by "Russian government actors."
  2. The Mueller report further concludes that there was no collusion by the Trump campaign with Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.
  3. The Mueller report drew no conclusions concerning obstruction of justice, stating that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
  4. Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein "have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense." How they concluded that in a mere two days is not explained.
  5. Barr's "goal and intent" is to make as much of the Mueller report public as possible.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 2790 by 1.61803, posted 03-25-2019 12:54 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 2794 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-26-2019 12:11 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2800 of 4573 (849964)
03-27-2019 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 2798 by Phat
03-27-2019 11:57 AM


Re: The Barr Letter on the Mueller Report
See Message 213 and Message 2257.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2798 by Phat, posted 03-27-2019 11:57 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2803 by Phat, posted 03-28-2019 2:51 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2801 of 4573 (849992)
03-28-2019 9:03 AM


Trump Resumes Efforts to Eliminate Obamacare
This has been widely reported in the news, here's an initial report from the New York Times from a few days ago: Trump Officials Argue Courts Should Entirely Reject the Affordable Care Act. The most significant impacts would be:
  • Preexisting conditions would no longer be covered.
  • Millions would lose their health care insurance.
  • Prescription coverage for the elderly under Medicare would become more expensive
Many aspects of the Affordable Care Act are less well known and would also be eliminated.
While there have been Republican health care proposals in the past (by Senators Lindsay Graham and Bill Cassidy in 2017 for one), nothing specific has yet been proposed for what might replace the Affordable Care Act.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 2802 by Tanypteryx, posted 03-28-2019 12:18 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2804 of 4573 (850271)
04-05-2019 8:36 AM


New Questions Raised About Barr Appointment
William Barr's appointment as Attorney General of the United States has just been called into further question by recently revealed information that on the day Barr submitted his 19-page memo arguing that a sitting president could never be guilty of obstruction of justice unless he purposefully destroyed evidence, the Department of Justice invited Barr to lunch with senior DoJ officials, to take place a couple weeks later.
Because this lunch discussion had not come to light at the time of Barr's confirmation hearing before the Senate, no questions were asked about it, but it calls into further question Barr's impartiality and the appropriateness of his appointment, especially in light of his recent hasty clearing of Trump of any obstruction of justice charges a mere five weeks after his appointment. More bluntly, Trump appointed the man who mere weeks later declared him innocent.
Source: Barr invited to meet DoJ officials on day he submitted memo critical of Mueller
--Percy

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2805 of 4573 (850274)
04-05-2019 9:00 AM


Another Shoe is About to Drop in the Russian Collusion Case
Julian Assange cannot leave well enough alone. Safely ensconced in the Ecuadorian Embassy to avoid arrest by Swedish authorities on charges of sexual misconduct, Assange thumbed his nose at his hosts by leaking papers that implicate Ecuadorian president Lenin Moreno in corrupt practices, causing a political firestorm for Moreno at home. Recent news is that Assange could be evicted from the Ecuadorian Embassy in hours to days.
If this comes to pass then Assange will be arrested by British authorities for violating his bail conditions after his arrest for the aforementioned Swedish charges. Once Assange is in British hands he will be vulnerable to extradition to the United States (Sweden ceased pursuing the sexual misconduct charges because of the passage of so many years) for publishing stolen government documents relating to the wars in the Middle East.
But once in the US Assange could also be served subpoenas for issues relating to the Russia probe, if only the Russia probe still existed. This means he will instead be subpoenaed to testify before various House committees about his role in the theft and release of emails from the DNC and from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta in an attempt to establish whether Trump and Russia were merely fellow travelers or actual co-conspirators.
Because of this possibility, I think it likely that Trump will order the DoJ not to request extradition of Assange to the United States.
Source: WikiLeaks founder Assange 'to be expelled' from Ecuador embassy
--Percy

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2811 of 4573 (850357)
04-06-2019 5:38 PM
Reply to: Message 2807 by NosyNed
04-06-2019 12:44 PM


Re: dementia or something
NosyNed writes:
I can even understand someone like here shouting "fake news" about a lot of things.
I've been asking for evidence of fake news for some time now and Faith has not presented any. Assuming we are actually talking about news and not op-ed pieces, what news do you think Faith is talking about?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2807 by NosyNed, posted 04-06-2019 12:44 PM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2812 by NosyNed, posted 04-06-2019 6:28 PM Percy has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024