What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (5 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gucci Fur said:
In other Hillary news, it looks like her Julian Assange problem should be over soon. A "cat burglar" was caught scaling the wall of the Ecuadorian Embassy in the middle of the night.
Click to expand...
What is even more amazing is that it was the same guy to tried to climb Trump Tower.

 
Gucci Fur said:
In other Hillary news, it looks like her Julian Assange problem should be over soon. A "cat burglar" was caught scaling the wall of the Ecuadorian Embassy in the middle of the night.

It is likely a matter of days before Assange is found dead from strangling himself with a dumbbell or shooting himself twice in the head. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/wikileaks/status/767544307003772928

#RIPAssange

#ItsHerTimeSilly
Click to expand...
Which banned poster are you?

 
Nothing will be more interesting than seeing how many Americans can bring themselves to 'check that box' for Donald J. Trump to be his/her President.

That will be more telling than any other stat.

 
Rove! said:
They can't "prove" Hillary directed it, but it was well organized campaign tied to her supporters and dovetailed with the campaign strategy document to paint Obama as not fundamentally "American."  Of course there have been so many things lately that she has denied and and have later been proven true, that, given the synergy, I would guess that the probability that she did direct it as pretty good.
Click to expand...
Let's assume, for a moment, that Hillary indeed directed the original birther emails in April 2008. That means that the following things are true:

1. Hillary is such a genius that she was able to manufacture a major long-lasting controversy simply by creating an alias account and sending out a few emails. She didn't even have to personally get involved with the conspiracy. She was so good that she could direct it from afar while simultaneously disavowing the whole thing publicly.

2. the only people stupid enough to fall for birtherism is Republicans. Hillary may have hoped that Obama's supporters would fall for birtherism, but she quickly realized that most Democrats (Obama supporters and Hillary supporters alike) were too smart to fall for it. It was only dumb Republicans who ended up latching on to it.

Therefore, based solely on the fact that A) Hillary is a genius, and B) Republicans are more gullible than Democrats, I think we must conclude that the existence of birtherism is yet another reason why Hillary is the more suitable candidate for the presidency in 2016.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Sending a message is just talk. Destroying Trump, if it's done correctly, will do a lot more than that.

Destroying Trump correctly means voting out all the down-ticket Republicans who refuse to repudiate Trump (and especially those who endorse him). That would have a huge effect, short-term and long-term, on the political landscape in this country -- and the effect would be beneficial, IMO.
Click to expand...
I am really glad your fantasy football analysis is not as emotion based as your political analysis. That is some top notch fear mongering.

I always use your projections when making lineup decisions. They helped me win a championship last season, so thanks!

 
To all those insisting those 31k emails unilaterally deleted were (as we now know Hillary blatantly lied about), roughly half (14,900) were in fact work related and belong to the American people.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/fbi-uncovered-at-least-14900-more-documents-in-clinton-email-investigation/2016/08/22/36745578-6643-11e6-be4e-23fc4d4d12b4_story.html

This is yet another thing that by itself should disqualify her from the Presidency.  What a shocking degree of out and out lying!!!

Hoping these are released in time to be sorted through before the election!

 
Last edited:
Mr. Ham said:
To all those assisting those 31k emails unilaterally deleted were (as we now know Hillary blatantly lied about), roughly half (14,900) were in fact work related and belong to the American people.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/fbi-uncovered-at-least-14900-more-documents-in-clinton-email-investigation/2016/08/22/36745578-6643-11e6-be4e-23fc4d4d12b4_story.html

This is yet another thing that by itself should disqualify her from the Presidency.  What a shocking degree of out and out lying!!!

Hoping these are released in time to be sorted through before the election!
Click to expand...
I think you're overstepping here a bit.  What it shows is that she's a liar (just like the rest) and "more of the same" going forward and is more evidence towards "but Hillary is different" being complete and utter :bs:  .....yay us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 
Her supporters don't care. She could be caught dealing drugs to children and they wouldn't care. They will still vote for her. She's not the problem. They are. So are Trump supporters. 

 
http://www.newsweek.com/did-colin-powell-advise-hillary-use-private-email-492376


Did Colin Powell Advise Hillary Clinton to Use a Private Email?


By Joe Conason [...]
 
Following up on my book, which the Times received in advance of publication, reporter Amy Chozick discovered that Clinton had mentioned her conversation with Powell—as well as an email exchange with him on the same matter—when the FBI interviewed the Democratic presidential nominee during its probe of her private email use at the State Department.

Powell’s office then released a statement saying he “has no recollection of the dinner conversation,” which he has since repeated to other news outlets. While hardly a denial, his response seems designed to cast doubt on the story.

Over the weekend, he told a reporter for the New York Post’s Page Six, “Her people have been trying to pin it on me,” with evident annoyance. “The truth is she was using [her personal email] for a year before I sent her a memo telling her what I did,” he said.

But last June, while reporting on Powell’s advice to Clinton for my book, I contacted his office for comment—and got a very different answer.

His principal assistant, Margaret “Peggy” Cifrino, informed me then via email that their calendar showed that the Albright dinner had occurred in June 2009. While he didn’t recall some details of the dinner because it had occurred seven years ago, according to Cifrino, he remembered what he did and didn’t say to Clinton on the topic in question that evening:


He does recall sharing with Secretary Clinton his use of his email account and how useful it was and transformative for the Department. He knew nothing then or until recently about her private home server and a personal domain, nor, therefore, could he have advised her on that or suggested it. By June I would assume her email system was already set up.



So it is perplexing for him to say he doesn’t remember that dinner conversation at all now, since, according to his own assistant, he remembered at least some of what he said as recently as two months ago.
 
 
squistion said:
http://www.newsweek.com/did-colin-powell-advise-hillary-use-private-email-492376


Did Colin Powell Advise Hillary Clinton to Use a Private Email?


By Joe Conason [...]
 
Following up on my book, which the Times received in advance of publication, reporter Amy Chozick discovered that Clinton had mentioned her conversation with Powell—as well as an email exchange with him on the same matter—when the FBI interviewed the Democratic presidential nominee during its probe of her private email use at the State Department.

Powell’s office then released a statement saying he “has no recollection of the dinner conversation,” which he has since repeated to other news outlets. While hardly a denial, his response seems designed to cast doubt on the story.

Over the weekend, he told a reporter for the New York Post’s Page Six, “Her people have been trying to pin it on me,” with evident annoyance. “The truth is she was using [her personal email] for a year before I sent her a memo telling her what I did,” he said.

But last June, while reporting on Powell’s advice to Clinton for my book, I contacted his office for comment—and got a very different answer.

His principal assistant, Margaret “Peggy” Cifrino, informed me then via email that their calendar showed that the Albright dinner had occurred in June 2009. While he didn’t recall some details of the dinner because it had occurred seven years ago, according to Cifrino, he remembered what he did and didn’t say to Clinton on the topic in question that evening:


He does recall sharing with Secretary Clinton his use of his email account and how useful it was and transformative for the Department. He knew nothing then or until recently about her private home server and a personal domain, nor, therefore, could he have advised her on that or suggested it. By June I would assume her email system was already set up.



So it is perplexing for him to say he doesn’t remember that dinner conversation at all now, since, according to his own assistant, he remembered at least some of what he said as recently as two months ago.
 
Click to expand...
Such crap.  So Grandma Nixon decides she's going to throw out all best practices for national security because Powell said it was more convenient to use AOL?  Do you understand how troubling that is?  It does not work in her favor.  

 
and why is it exactly we are giving SID grief for continuing to talk about emails?? :lmao:   

I still love that she keeps bringing Powell up as if using a private account is the same thing as setting up a server....good shtick :thumbup:    Even if he had said "yeah, I recommend using a personal email account" it has nothing to do with her going well beyond that and setting up a server.  

 
There is a difference between conspiracies and something being the most logical explanation.  In the case of Samuelson, it is almost inconceivable that she wasn't given orders to deleted work related emails.  (You don't accidentally misclassify 15k!!!).  Since this is not abundantly clear, who ordered it?  Did it roll up to Hillary or stop at Mills and Huma.

This is not just "more of the same," it's suggestive of a campaign to destroy government records.  

 
squistion said:
http://www.newsweek.com/did-colin-powell-advise-hillary-use-private-email-492376


Did Colin Powell Advise Hillary Clinton to Use a Private Email?


By Joe Conason [...]
 
Following up on my book, which the Times received in advance of publication, reporter Amy Chozick discovered that Clinton had mentioned her conversation with Powell—as well as an email exchange with him on the same matter—when the FBI interviewed the Democratic presidential nominee during its probe of her private email use at the State Department.

Powell’s office then released a statement saying he “has no recollection of the dinner conversation,” which he has since repeated to other news outlets. While hardly a denial, his response seems designed to cast doubt on the story.

Over the weekend, he told a reporter for the New York Post’s Page Six, “Her people have been trying to pin it on me,” with evident annoyance. “The truth is she was using [her personal email] for a year before I sent her a memo telling her what I did,” he said.

But last June, while reporting on Powell’s advice to Clinton for my book, I contacted his office for comment—and got a very different answer.

His principal assistant, Margaret “Peggy” Cifrino, informed me then via email that their calendar showed that the Albright dinner had occurred in June 2009. While he didn’t recall some details of the dinner because it had occurred seven years ago, according to Cifrino, he remembered what he did and didn’t say to Clinton on the topic in question that evening:


He does recall sharing with Secretary Clinton his use of his email account and how useful it was and transformative for the Department. He knew nothing then or until recently about her private home server and a personal domain, nor, therefore, could he have advised her on that or suggested it. By June I would assume her email system was already set up.



So it is perplexing for him to say he doesn’t remember that dinner conversation at all now, since, according to his own assistant, he remembered at least some of what he said as recently as two months ago.
 
Click to expand...




I don't think you realize that this does not help your gal...

 
Mr. Ham said:
Such crap.  So Grandma Nixon decides she's going to throw out all best practices for national security because Powell said it was more convenient to use AOL?  Do you understand how troubling that is?  It does not work in her favor.  
Click to expand...
Notice you and others ignored what everyone was crowing about the last few days, that Powell supposedly called Clinton a liar (which itself was a misstatement because having "no recollection" of a seven year old conversation is not calling the other party a liar that).

That said, Powell's own office a few month back contradicted Powell's recent statement. As the Time writer notes:

So it is perplexing for him to say he doesn’t remember that dinner conversation at all now, since, according to his own assistant, he remembered at least some of what he said as recently as two months ago.

 
...see Huma's Judicial Watch emails released today, directing big donors through the Clinton Global Inititaive before they can schedule an appointment.  Huma paraphrasing Hillay said Hillary wanted to know "how she felt" before she met with a Saudi who ended up donating $30m.  Apparently she felt pretty good, because she met with him as scheduled by the Foundation -- within 48 hours.

Surprised Hillary didn't release that one.  You'd have thought she would.  

 
squistion said:
Notice you and others ignored what everyone was crowing about the last few days, that Powell supposedly called Clinton a liar (which itself was a misstatement because having "no recollection" of a seven year old conversation is not calling the other party a liar that).

That said, Powell's own office a few month back contradicted Powell's recent statement. As the Time writer notes:

So it is perplexing for him to say he doesn’t remember that dinner conversation at all now, since, according to his own assistant, he remembered at least some of what he said as recently as two months ago.
Click to expand...
Okay, let's say I concede the point.  (Doesn't do anything in Hillary's favor).  How is the following not pay-for-play -- and how is it therefore not illegal?

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/new-abedin-emails-reveal-hillary-clinton-state-department-gave-special-access-top-clinton-foundation-donors/

 
Hillary has been completely honest and up-front about this whole email business from the beginning, so clearly Powell must be lying.  There's just no other reasonable explanation.

Oh by the way, I was being sarcastic.
 
Good day, because the illegal stuff that can't be shrugged away is starting to come out!  And not to steal Norville's argument, but it's those 15k emails that were deleted for a reason that are going to b tricky!  

 
And this is why the whole election sucks.  Hillary can kill a man, and her comeback will always be:  " :shrug:  I'm still better than Trump!"

 
squistion said:
Notice you and others ignored what everyone was crowing about the last few days, that Powell supposedly called Clinton a liar (which itself was a misstatement because having "no recollection" of a seven year old conversation is not calling the other party a liar that).

That said, Powell's own office a few month back contradicted Powell's recent statement. As the Time writer notes:

So it is perplexing for him to say he doesn’t remember that dinner conversation at all now, since, according to his own assistant, he remembered at least some of what he said as recently as two months ago.
Click to expand...
Genuine question....how is "Powell's office" significantly different than "sources close to Clinton"?

Again, it doesn't really matter to me either way.  Just pointing out the absurd.  Ok...Powell "lied" about remembering a conversation.  For it to matter you have to completely ignore the reality that "private email account" <> "private email server"

 
The Commish said:
Genuine question....how is "Powell's office" significantly different than "sources close to Clinton"?

Again, it doesn't really matter to me either way.  Just pointing out the absurd.  Ok...Powell "lied" about remembering a conversation.  For it to matter you have to completely ignore the reality that "private email account" <> "private email server"
Click to expand...
You're forgetting.  He doesn't want to ignore it.  

 
The Commish said:
Genuine question....how is "Powell's office" significantly different than "sources close to Clinton"?
Click to expand...
Did you bother to read the post?  It was not like some anonymous unnamed source "close to Clinton," Joe Conason spoke specifically to Powell's principal assistant, Margaret “Peggy” Cifrino and what she told him was at odds with Powell's recent statement.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
Did you bother to read the post?  It was not some anonymous unnamed source "close to Clinton," Joe Conason spoke specifically to Powell's principal assistant, Margaret “Peggy” Cifrino and what she told him was at odds with Powell's recent statement.
Click to expand...
So Powell's secretary knows better than Powell what Powell did or did not say?

 
squistion said:
Notice you and others ignored what everyone was crowing about the last few days, that Powell supposedly called Clinton a liar (which itself was a misstatement because having "no recollection" of a seven year old conversation is not calling the other party a liar that).

That said, Powell's own office a few month back contradicted Powell's recent statement. As the Time writer notes:

So it is perplexing for him to say he doesn’t remember that dinner conversation at all now, since, according to his own assistant, he remembered at least some of what he said as recently as two months ago.
Click to expand...
So ridiculous:

- THERE WAS AN INTERVENING SOS between POWELL and Hillary. Condi Rice. The precedent was not what Hillary did.

- Powell was not in a position to authorize anything. He didn't authorize anything. It wasn't authorized. If it wasn't authorized it was illegal.

- Hillary was already using a private email and private server. She said this herself, she created teh server before she becamse SOS and it wasn't even her server, it was the campaign's, then she switched to Bill's (and maybe the Foundation's and/or Teneo's) server.

- Rice and Albright were there - do either of them have any recollection of this discussion? No. Apparently this was done in a round table fun dinner over wine between the ex-SOS's.

- The NYT did not report that Powell advised Hillary to use the server. It reports that Hillary told the FBI that Powell advised her to use private email. Not only are private email and server two different things, so are saying he used private email in certain limited circumstances which were no longer applicable to Hillary vs advising Hillary to do what he had done.

- The rules CHANGED in 2005 when Rice came in. See the above comment about how Hillary violated precedent set by Rice.

- Per your own article:

He does recall sharing with Secretary Clinton his use of his email account and how useful it was and transformative for the Department.
Click to expand...
This gets the no-duh award. This is well documented.

except for classified communications
Click to expand...
UH, HULLO, MCFLY.

which he had sent and received via a State Department computer on his desk.  
Click to expand...
AGAIN Hillary did NOT follow Powell's advice then if it happened.

- And this is by Conason. So you might as well cite Sean Hannity about something Trump did,

 
squistion said:
Did you bother to read the post?  It was not like some anonymous unnamed source "close to Clinton," Joe Conason spoke specifically to Powell's principal assistant, Margaret “Peggy” Cifrino and what she told him was at odds with Powell's recent statement.
Click to expand...
Who specifically said Powell spoke of his personal email use. This is an established fact. That doesn't mean that Powell told her to use personal email or a personal server, nor even if he had that that would have been authorized, because it never was, but ant any rate that aspect is not in Conason's story.

 
Baloney Sandwich said:
So Powell's secretary knows better than Powell what Powell did or did not say?
Click to expand...
I see you didn't read the post either. She talked to Powell before responding to Conason. What Powell told her contradicts what he recently said:

His principal assistant, Margaret “Peggy” Cifrino, informed me then via email that their calendar showed that the Albright dinner had occurred in June 2009. While he didn’t recall some details of the dinner because it had occurred seven years ago, according to Cifrino, he remembered what he did and didn’t say to Clinton on the topic in question that evening:


He does recall sharing with Secretary Clinton his use of his email account and how useful it was and transformative for the Department. He knew nothing then or until recently about her private home server and a personal domain, nor, therefore, could he have advised her on that or suggested it. By June I would assume her email system was already set up.


 
squistion said:
I see you didn't read the post either. She talked to Powell before responding to Conason. What Powell told her contradicts what he recently said:

His principal assistant, Margaret “Peggy” Cifrino, informed me then via email that their calendar showed that the Albright dinner had occurred in June 2009. While he didn’t recall some details of the dinner because it had occurred seven years ago, according to Cifrino, he remembered what he did and didn’t say to Clinton on the topic in question that evening:


He does recall sharing with Secretary Clinton his use of his email account and how useful it was and transformative for the Department. He knew nothing then or until recently about her private home server and a personal domain, nor, therefore, could he have advised her on that or suggested it. By June I would assume her email system was already set up.
Click to expand...
Don't you want a president the buck stops with?  This is absurd!

 
squistion said:
I see you didn't read the post either. She talked to Powell before responding to Conason. What Powell told her contradicts what he recently said:

His principal assistant, Margaret “Peggy” Cifrino, informed me then via email that their calendar showed that the Albright dinner had occurred in June 2009. While he didn’t recall some details of the dinner because it had occurred seven years ago, according to Cifrino, he remembered what he did and didn’t say to Clinton on the topic in question that evening:


He does recall sharing with Secretary Clinton his use of his email account and how useful it was and transformative for the Department. He knew nothing then or until recently about her private home server and a personal domain, nor, therefore, could he have advised her on that or suggested it. By June I would assume her email system was already set up.
Click to expand...
Did he publish the email exchange?

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
 He does recall sharing with Secretary Clinton his use of his email account and how useful it was and transformative for the Department.

This gets the no-duh award. This is well documented.
Click to expand...
If it is well documented, then why does Powell now claim that he:

"has no recollection of the dinner conversation" recounted by Hillary Clinton to FBI agents , as documented by journalist Joe Conason in a forthcoming book.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/colin-powell-clinton-email-book-227200

 
squistion said:
If it is well documented, then why does Powell now claim that he:

"has no recollection of the dinner conversation" recounted by Hillary Clinton to FBI agents , as documented by journalist Joe Conason in a forthcoming book.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/colin-powell-clinton-email-book-227200
Click to expand...


The fact that Powell used a private email - in addition to a State.gov email, not on a private server of his own making, never on mobile, not for classified emails - is well documented.

The conversation is a new wrinkle. I would not be surprised the conversation took place. Seems perfectly natural given the setting.

This is also in that link and also the NYT story:

Separately, in a 2009 email exchange that also emerged during the F.B.I. questioning, Mrs. Clinton, who had already decided to use private email, asked Mr. Powell about his email practices when he was the nation’s top diplomat under George W. Bush, according to a person with direct knowledge of Mr. Powell’s appearance in the documents, who would not speak for attribution.
Click to expand...


That is interesting because that wasn't in Hillary's produced documents, and Hillary did not have any emails from before March 18, 2009. Now, where oh where do you think that email memo is?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
The fact that Powell used a private email - in addition to a State.gov email, not on a private server of his own making, never on mobile, not for classified emails - is well documented.

The conversation is a new wrinkle. I would not be surprised the conversation took place. Seems perfectly natural given the setting.
Click to expand...
If it is well documented then why does Powell claim to have "no recollection" of the conversation? That is the crux of your claim a few days back that Hillary called him a liar, which she didn't if what his personal assistant told Conason two months ago was true.

 
squistion said:
Did you bother to read the post?  It was not like some anonymous unnamed source "close to Clinton," Joe Conason spoke specifically to Powell's principal assistant, Margaret “Peggy” Cifrino and what she told him was at odds with Powell's recent statement.
Click to expand...
I did read it....will you answer my question?

 
Baloney Sandwich said:
Why would Powell lie? It isn't like he is a Trump supporter or a partisan.  The guy endorsed Obama twice.
Click to expand...
Either he lied or his personal assistant lied when she told Conason she talked to Powell about the dinner conversation. If his personal assistant is just making up things and giving them to a reporter writing a book, then she should fired immediately as, being his representative, it damages his credibility.

 
squistion said:
Either he lied or his personal assistant lied when she told Conason she talked to Powell about the dinner conversation. If his personal assistant is just making up things and giving them to a reporter writing a book, then she should fired immediately as, being his representative, it damages his credibility.
Click to expand...
but no chance Conason lied?

 
squistion said:
Either he lied or his personal assistant lied when she told Conason she talked to Powell about the dinner conversation. If his personal assistant is just making up things and giving them to a reporter writing a book, then she should fired immediately as, being his representative, it damages his credibility.
Click to expand...
Weird how you want to hold people accountable when they lie.  :whistle:

 
squistion said:
I did, Conason didn't just say he talked to someone in Powell's office, he talked to his personal assistant and he identified her by name. This is not the same as an anonymous "source close to Clinton".
Click to expand...
I asked how it was significantly different.  Saying that it was different doesn't answer that question.

 
squistion said:
Either he lied or his personal assistant lied when she told Conason she talked to Powell about the dinner conversation. If his personal assistant is just making up things and giving them to a reporter writing a book, then she should fired immediately as, being his representative, it damages his credibility.
Click to expand...
Wait....YOU think people should be fired for lying?  Can't make this #### up :lol:   

 
squistion said:
If it is well documented then why does Powell claim to have "no recollection" of the conversation? That is the crux of your claim a few days back that Hillary called him a liar, which she didn't if what his personal assistant told Conason two months ago was true.
Click to expand...
I wasn't talking about the conversation at the SOS dinner.

The fact that he used a private email is well documented. The dinner conversation is a totally different issue.

I will go back and look at the prior post about Hillary claiming Powell was a liar, I don't want to continue to confuse the issue for you.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Sinn Fein said:
In a statement Friday morning, Powell's office said: "General Powell has no recollection of the dinner conversation. He did write former Secretary Clinton an email memo describing his use of his personal AOL email account for unclassified messages and how it vastly improved communications within the State Department. At the time there was no equivalent system within the Department. He used a secure State computer on his desk to manage classified information."
Click to expand...
Lord. So no it never happened. The smart thing for Hillary is to not call Powell a liar when asked about this, and don't complain about interview notes being released, just move on.
Click to expand...


squistion said:
why does Powell claim to have "no recollection" of the conversation? That is the crux of your claim a few days back that Hillary called him a liar, which she didn't if what his personal assistant told Conason two months ago was true.
Click to expand...
This should be really simple:

- I don't think the fact of the dinner conversation - 4-5 old SOS's sitting around telling war stories over wine 7 years ago - is as important as what was said at the dinner conversation. Ok maybe there was a dinner conversation - but Powell did not remember what was said and apparently there is also a memo where he documented his views on the subject. Where is that? Why are we talking about a dinner convo 7 years ago when there is a freakin' MEMO which Hillary has not turned over?

- I think my point holds true - why is Hillary in this :pokey: with Powell about whether they had a conversation or what they said at it? It's still not smart to call him a liar if that is what she is doing.

- This is kind of a classic Clinton debate. We're talking about whether a dinner conversation took place and what matters is that Hillary's server wasn't authorized, her email was never authorized for classified communications, and it never should have been on mobile. And it violated precedent set by the outgoing SOS. There is literally nothing Powell could have said - even in Hillary's version - which could have changed any of that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Doesn't sound like the Clinton people thought Colin Powell would fire back like this.  :lmao:   Good lord the Clintons are slime balls.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

mr. furley
Long Island serial killer suspect in custody
Replies
34
Views
2K
Dezbelief
Dezbelief
krista4
In this thread I rank my favorite Beatles songs: 204-1.
138 139 140
Replies
7K
Views
258K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
Back
Top