Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

How Much Voter Fraud Happened In 2020?


Joe Bryant

How much voter fraud do you think happened in 2020?  

471 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, GordonGekko said:

 

Logical fallacy. Half hearted flailing attempt to reframe the narrative.  Your kung fu is weak.

The 2020 election had more voters than ever before in American political history, more mail in ballots and during the back drop of the pandemic. 2020 does not resemble the 2016 election cycle in the slightest.

Again, if ANY of this was reversed in this election cycle, and Trump had the election advantage, you better believe many of you here would be demanding even further than where Trump is going.

 

I don't care about narratives or kung fu or whatever you are saying.   An actual example of something very similar to what you are suggesting has happened.  And I'd prefer to rely on an analysis of what happened during that example to understand the behavioural responses of various parties than on, judging from your response, nothing but conjecture.

  • Like 5
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never believed that the 2016 election process was flawed.  There was widespread Russian interference through hacking and disinformation, but the vote counting process itself, comprised of 50 separate and unique processes, worked just fine.  It explains why Hillary conceded so quickly despite running away with the popular vote.   

For four years now, Trump has been the only one openly challenging the vote counting process through his bluster, false innuendo, and lies.  His legal strategy now appears to be focused on encouraging individual electors to break from their sworn obligation based upon his false and repeatedly rejected claims put forward by his band of legal sycophants and nincompoops.  It's not working.  Just stop with the nonsense and admit you lost Donald.  It's time for the adults to take over.

  • Like 7
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sea Duck said:

BREAKING NEWS: AG Bill Barr tells Associated Press that the justice department has not found any evidence of widespread voting fraud.

https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-elections-william-barr-b1f1488796c9a98c4b1a9061a6c7f49d

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EoLvHFIXIAMl1lL?format=jpg&name=small

  • Laughing 4
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GordonGekko said:

 

https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1333745145628426242

 

Scott Adams@ScottAdamsSays

If we can't audit our nation's vote-counting software because the company claims it is proprietary information, I'm totally cool with that. But obviously the election has to be thrown out in whole for that very reason. I see no room for compromise on this point.

Who agreed to a no-audit deal with an election software company? Name ANYTHING you have ever heard that is dumber. Literally anything. You can't

4:09 AM · Dec 1, 2020·Twitter Web App

You don't need to audit the machines when you have the actual paper ballots to audit and re-count. They did that in Georgia and come up with largely the same result.

However, I agree that all election software should be open-source for transparency.

Edited by tymarsas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Mookie said:

 His legal strategy now appears to be focused on encouraging individual electors to break from their sworn obligation ....

 

https://www.nytimes.com/article/electors-vote.html

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/trump-needs-three-consecutive-hail-mary-passes/617063/

 

"The Constitution gives state legislatures the power to determine the “manner” in which electors are appointed to the Electoral College, the body of 538 people who formally choose the president. Every state has already done that, by specifying in its laws that the winner of the statewide popular vote is entitled to the state’s presidential electors (Maine and Nebraska apportion some electors by congressional district).

The Electoral Count Act, a 19th-century law, sets up the mechanism for how that takes place. It directs governors to certify both the election results and a slate of presidential electors to represent the will of the people. In general practice, governors certify electors chosen by the party of the presidential candidate who won their state.

The Electoral Count Act also says that in the event of “failed elections,” in which voters have not made a choice for president, state legislatures are empowered to step in and appoint electors. The 1887 law is ambiguous about what constitutes a “failed” election. But the law does contain a deadline for states to certify elections: the “safe harbor” date, which this year is Dec. 8. Electors chosen before that date cannot be challenged by Congress.

A flurry of lawsuits filed by the Trump campaign, most of which have been defeated in court, appear aimed at slowing down states’ certification timelines and possibly providing a pretext to declare a “failed” election."

 

*****

 

People can argue what constitutes a "failed election", again, there are no shortage of lefty attorneys on FBGs. But I doubt you'll see many, if any, discuss this SINCE THERE IS A VERY VERY VERY SLIM, BUT STILL CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID PATHWAY, FOR TRUMP TO PREVAIL IN THIS ELECTION.

Trying to leverage assumed current electors is NOT the same as the selection of DIFFERENT electors.

This blind narrative that Donald J Trump is going to set the Constitution on fire to get his way just does not hold water just because the current woke MSM only shovels their dirt in one direction.

 

“You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.”

― Daniel Patrick Moynihan

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like The Purge, Joe needs to allow 24 hours where we all can dunk on those who continue to support Trump at an unhealthy level and continue to ridiculously carry his water when its an obvious con to raise money for Trump Co.

It would get it out of our systems in the name of healing.  Its like an itch we can't scratch. A joke we can't laugh at.  It just continues to build...and build...and build. I'm sweating.

Sigh. Oh well. 😓

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sidney Powell up to her old tricks again.  Her lawsuit filed in Wisconsin today apparently names a plaintiff who did not agree to participate.  She did this in one of her earlier lawsuits as well.

Quote

Molly Beck @MollyBeck

Derrick Van Orden, a Republican candidate for Congress who lost to U.S. Rep. Ron Kind on Nov. 3, says his name is being used without permission as a plaintiff in a federal lawsuit to make Trump the winner of Wisconsin's election, despite receiving fewer votes than Biden.

"I learned through social media today that my name was included in a lawsuit without my permission. To be clear, I am not involved in the lawsuit seeking to overturn the election in Wisconsin," @derrickvanorden says.

Van Orden is a Trumper through and through, but denies agreeing to be a named plaintiff (one of two) in this lawsuit.

Wisconsin Complaint

I don't want to be a drama queen about this, but its obviously lying to the Court and is sanctionable conduct.  Its not something that just happens from time to time, like the numerous typos and confusing, meandering, non-standard structure she uses in her pleadings. She named him as a Plaintiff and signed the complaint as "Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs." This is bottom of the barrel low-rent conduct for a lawyer.

 

  • Like 7
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, CletiusMaximus said:

Sidney Powell up to her old tricks again.  Her lawsuit filed in Wisconsin today apparently names a plaintiff who did not agree to participate.  She did this in one of her earlier lawsuits as well.

Van Orden is a Trumper through and through, but denies agreeing to be a named plaintiff (one of two) in this lawsuit.

Wisconsin Complaint

I don't want to be a drama queen about this, but its obviously lying to the Court and is sanctionable conduct.  Its not something that just happens from time to time, like the numerous typos and confusing, meandering, non-standard structure she uses in her pleadings. She named him as a Plaintiff and signed the complaint as "Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs." This is bottom of the barrel low-rent conduct for a lawyer.

 

Between this and making up fictional counties, it's really time for some judge to drop the hammer.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, tymarsas said:

You don't need to audit the machines when you have the actual paper ballots to audit and re-count. They did that in Georgia and come up with largely the same result.

However, I agree that all election software should be open-source for transparency.

 

https://billmoyers.com/story/georgias-hand-count-of-2020-ballots-was-no-risk-limiting-audit/

 

Risk-limiting audits, of which there are several varieties, were invented by Philip Stark, a University of California Berkeley statistician. In general, once a county has its inventory of all of its paper ballots, statistics can be used to find and pull ballots to grade the reported results. Typically, a risk-limiting audit will look at enough ballots to achieve a 90 percent confidence level that the totals were accurate. The process is not intended to assess any other issue.

What unfolded in Georgia wasn’t a risk-limiting audit, Stark said, although that was what it was called by top state officials. It was closer to a statewide ballot inventory check, which turned up several thousand uncounted votes. And it was closer to what is called the canvass, which is where local officials reconcile ballots and totals. It was also not a recount, which is a different legal process

 

SR: That’s what I saw. Elections are narratives that unwind step by step. We can follow the chronology forward, but there were lapses. The chain of custody around ballots. The data that’s reported about those ballots.

PS: It’s clear that Georgia’s process has been anything but transparent. Observers have been kept away from the ability to actually verify the counts. Even observers with party credentials couldn’t verify that what’s being input to ARLO [the vendor’s counting software] accurately reflects those counts, or [examine] the inner workings of ARLO—which has had a number of changes in the course of this. ARLO was never designed for this kind of thing.....

 

Maybe this whole thing gives election officials more confidence that they got right answer [from the state’s new vote count scanners], but there’s no reason it should give the public more confidence that they got the right answer because too much of it [this audit] was done out of public view. First and foremost, the public has no reason to believe that election officials have accounted for every ballot–since we already have several examples where they didn’t. Georgia’s canvas [ballot-accounting] procedures aren’t providing the foundation needed for a risk-limiting audit.

 

SR: What should they have done with catching mistakes during the audit? Should they have tried to have fixed discrepancies before they sent their audit data to the state?

PS: There’s all kinds of potential discrepancies that should have been addressed earlier. There’s reconciling the number of registered voters against the number of poll book signatures, against the number of physical pieces of paper [all of the ballots], against the number of tabulated votes. That all should have happened before the audit started. The kinds of stuff that they’re uncovering where somebody forgot to scan a batch of ballots, or somebody didn’t upload a memory card, that all should have been taken care of by processes before RLA started. That’s all part of the standard process of generating an accurate ballot manifest, from which you draw the sample ballots [when conducting a statistical-based risk-limiting audit].

They basically skipped step zero. Instead, the counties evidently are constructing a ballot manifest, which the audit relies on, from what the computers report, rather than from ground truth on the amount of paper ballots there are. Your inventory of ballots should not rely at all on the voting system to tell you how many ballots you have. You should have control over that from external means. You know how many ballots went to a precinct. You know how many came back voted, spoiled or blank. You should be physically counting these things. That baseline shouldn’t be a function of the voting system. It starts with inventory control.

 

******

 

First,  one must definitely audit the voting machines. Stark, who invented the RLA that is REQUIRED by the Georgia legislature in this kind of situation, says so.

Second, there are way too many tech saavy folks, coders and people who work in technology on FBG to try to sell that "you don't need to audit the machines" jibber jabber.  Of course the machines need to be audited to give confidence to the American people on what happened here.

Third, this is the point where some lefties will probably start slamming down the Report Button for my replies being "too long" Never mind if they raise the level of discussion and never mind if they are actually relevant and never mind the constant "Show me a link or it's not true!" low value replies that seem to litter this sub forum. Keep it up and let's see long term how many conservative minded subscribers walk from FBG completely.

Who actually owns Dominion?

Who are the list of investors in the McCarthy Group?

Who profited from turning Georgia's 30 million dollar election system into a failed 107 million dollar one, that Georgia voters were polled as not wanting and doesn't meet Georgia's actual listed standards for a new system, that will need to be replaced by 2024?

Why such fervor against auditing the machines themselves? If you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide.

Why did the Georgia courts, led by Obama appointee Totenberg, legislate from the bench on election rules that violate what the Georgia legislature actually decided on?

Why is SOS Raffensperger using a review system ( not a RLA and not a recount) OUTSIDE of actual Georgia election guidelines?

So yes, these questions don't seem to bother some of you, but then why is there a problem asking them in the first place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

Second, there are way too many tech saavy folks, coders and people who work in technology on FBG to try to sell that "you don't need to audit the machines" jibber jabber.  Of course the machines need to be audited to give confidence to the American people on what happened here.

If you have the paper ballots then you can audit the results. The machines sole purpose is to count votes. If you can verify that the output (the count) matches the input (the ballots) then you can be confident the machines did their job properly. It is actually quite simple to provide confidence here, it is Trump and his lawyers that are trying to destroy confidence in the election.

"Paper ballots. Paper ballots give you the ability to audit, to go back and check the tape and make sure that you got the count right. And that's really one of the keys to success for a secure 2020 election. 95% of the ballots cast in the 2020 election had a paper record associated with it. Compared to 2016, about 82%."

-- Chris Krebs

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mookie said:

I've never believed that the 2016 election process was flawed.

 

Election Night - SNL  29,306,295 views

•Nov 13, 2016  Saturday Night Live

All (Vanessa Bayer, Aidy Bryant, Beck Bennett, Cecily Strong) but two friends (Dave Chappelle, Chris Rock) are surprised by Donald Trump's victory while watching the election results roll in.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHG0ezLiVGc

 

 

******

 

No one thought Trump could win in 2016. There was no reason for the DNC to cheat because many were arrogant about Trumps chances/base and they had the largest financial warchest in American political history and every poll and pundit had Hillary Clinton winning in a landslide.

No one was going to believe a geriatric 4th rate failed reality TV tinted orange loser with multiple bankruptcies, a history of scandal and zero political experience was going to completely gut two political dynasties ( Clinton and Bush) using a Tier 1 God level troll strategy and make Nate Silver of 538 eat his own hat. But Trump did. And that feat was incredible if you consider that liberals own the MSM, Big Tech, Hollywood and the entire education system. How do you have that much political and financial firepower plus all the special interests linked to the DNC and still lose?

But the DNC had plenty of incentive ( I'm not saying it did or did not happen)  in 2020 because they realized the POTUS cycle this time was going to be a brutal bare knuckle brawl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, tymarsas said:

If you have the paper ballots then you can audit the results. The machines sole purpose is to count votes. If you can verify that the output (the count) matches the input (the ballots) then you can be confident the machines did their job properly. It is actually quite simple to provide confidence here, it is Trump and his lawyers that are trying to destroy confidence in the election.

 

“The most confused you will ever get is when you try to convince your heart and spirit of something your mind knows is a lie.”
― Shannon L. Alder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sea Duck said:

RESPONSE FROM TRUMP LEGAL TEAM:

"With all due respect to the Attorney General, there hasn't been any semblance of a Department of Justice investigation. We have gathered ample evidence of illegal voting in at least six states, which they have not examined. We have many witnesses swearing under oath that they saw crimes being committed in connection with voter fraud. As far as we know, not a single one has been interviewed by the DOJ. The Justice Department also hasn't audited any voting machines or used their subpoena powers to determine the truth.

Nonetheless, we will continue our pursuit of the truth through the judicial system and state legislatures, and continue toward the Constitution's mandate and ensuring that every legal vote is counted and every illegal vote is not. Again, with the greatest respect to the Attorney General, his opinion appears to be without any knowledge or investigation of the substantial irregularities and evidence of systematic fraud."

https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1333862557740888068/photo/1

They have zero "witnesses" "swearing" "under oath."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

 

“The most confused you will ever get is when you try to convince your heart and spirit of something your mind knows is a lie.”
― Shannon L. Alder

 

I forgot to mention that I am one of the "too many tech saavy folks, coders and people who work in technology on FBG". I am pretty sure this quote does not apply to me on this subject.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, tymarsas said:

I forgot to mention that I am one of the "too many tech saavy folks, coders and people who work in technology on FBG". I am pretty sure this quote does not apply to me on this subject.

 

“Perhaps you notice how the denial is so often the preface to the justification.”
― Christopher Hitchens

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Yankee23Fan said:

They have zero "witnesses" "swearing" "under oath."

 

No one wants to pay attention to the logistical and resource disparity at all?

 

The Mueller Investigation had near unlimited subpoena powers :

https://heavy.com/news/2017/05/robert-mueller-special-prosecutor-counsel-what-powers-authority/

Including access to nearly all digital data (Courtesy of the NSA) :

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/exposure-of-nsa-surveillance-draws-attention-to-mueller-remark-about-real-time-email-tracking

Directly employed 19 lawyers, who were assisted by a team of about 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants and other professional/support staff :

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/mueller-investigation-numbers-days-witnesses

Issued more than 2,800 subpoenas and executed close to 500 search warrants :

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/you-paid-22-months-19-lawyers-40-fbi-2800-subpoenas-500-search-warrants-500

It took two years :

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/23/706143881/timeline-of-the-mueller-investigation

Cost (At least/Projected) $32 million dollars  :

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/02/robert-muellers-russia-probe-cost-nearly-32-million-in-total-doj.html

 

Compared to:

 

Sidney Powell produced evidence of fraud in less than 24 days (as opposed to Mueller's 24 months) essentially working by herself :

https://defendingtherepublic.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/COMPLAINT-CJ-PEARSON-V.-KEMP-11.25.2020.pdf

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mied.350905/gov.uscourts.mied.350905.1.3.pdf

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mied.350905/gov.uscourts.mied.350905.1.15.pdf

Summary of proof https://directorblue.blogspot.com/2020/11/infographic-shocking-allegations-of.html?m=1

 

******

 

People can criticize Sydney Powell all they like. She's walked into a situation where she will get death threats the rest of her life. She stands alone, whether you agree or not, and she already had the reputation, resume and money to walk away before all this. She's in her mid 60s, she could just retire and go do scrap booking and rack up Starbucks Rewards Points. And if she has something real, there is now incentive in place to have her clipped and/or go after her family.

People here can cheer for someone like Wayne Chrebet but refuse to acknowledge that it's just as brave, as it is crazy, for Powell to make this kind of stand alone.

Political tribalism is a hell of a drug.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

 

No one wants to pay attention to the logistical and resource disparity at all?

 

The Mueller Investigation had near unlimited subpoena powers :

https://heavy.com/news/2017/05/robert-mueller-special-prosecutor-counsel-what-powers-authority/

Including access to nearly all digital data (Courtesy of the NSA) :

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/exposure-of-nsa-surveillance-draws-attention-to-mueller-remark-about-real-time-email-tracking

Directly employed 19 lawyers, who were assisted by a team of about 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants and other professional/support staff :

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/mueller-investigation-numbers-days-witnesses

Issued more than 2,800 subpoenas and executed close to 500 search warrants :

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/you-paid-22-months-19-lawyers-40-fbi-2800-subpoenas-500-search-warrants-500

It took two years :

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/23/706143881/timeline-of-the-mueller-investigation

Cost (At least/Projected) $32 million dollars  :

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/02/robert-muellers-russia-probe-cost-nearly-32-million-in-total-doj.html

 

Compared to:

 

Sidney Powell produced evidence of fraud in less than 24 days (as opposed to Mueller's 24 months) essentially working by herself :

https://defendingtherepublic.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/COMPLAINT-CJ-PEARSON-V.-KEMP-11.25.2020.pdf

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mied.350905/gov.uscourts.mied.350905.1.3.pdf

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mied.350905/gov.uscourts.mied.350905.1.15.pdf

Summary of proof https://directorblue.blogspot.com/2020/11/infographic-shocking-allegations-of.html?m=1

 

******

 

People can criticize Sydney Powell all they like. She's walked into a situation where she will get death threats the rest of her life. She stands alone, whether you agree or not, and she already had the reputation, resume and money to walk away before all this. She's in her mid 60s, she could just retire and go do scrap booking and rack up Starbucks Rewards Points. And if she has something real, there is now incentive in place to have her clipped and/or go after her family.

People here can cheer for someone like Wayne Chrebet but refuse to acknowledge that it's just as brave, as it is crazy, for Powell to make this kind of stand alone.

Political tribalism is a hell of a drug.

LOL.  Sydney Powell won't be receiving death threats for the rest of her life.  She'll be forgotten in 12 months, even by folks like you who will be victims of the biggest case of collective amnesia in a few years when reminded of the insanity of the conspiracy theories you supported.  

 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, the rover said:

The Wisconsin suit is just a repeat of what they filed and got bounced on in the court of appeals.   Except this time the lead attorney is asking to invalidate his own vote, since he voted absentee.

I believe there was a politician that was part of the PA suit that not only was arguing that his own vote should be thrown out, but that his election win be thrown out and no legislature be able to be seated (which would have made it impossible for the legislature to appoint the electors like he wanted).

These guys really aren’t the brightest.

There was a time that I thought that most politicians were crooked, but also very smart. Now I’m pretty sure that many are crooked, but also very not smart. 

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CletiusMaximus said:

Sidney Powell up to her old tricks again.  Her lawsuit filed in Wisconsin today apparently names a plaintiff who did not agree to participate.  She did this in one of her earlier lawsuits as well.

Van Orden is a Trumper through and through, but denies agreeing to be a named plaintiff (one of two) in this lawsuit.

Wisconsin Complaint

I don't want to be a drama queen about this, but its obviously lying to the Court and is sanctionable conduct.  Its not something that just happens from time to time, like the numerous typos and confusing, meandering, non-standard structure she uses in her pleadings. She named him as a Plaintiff and signed the complaint as "Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs." This is bottom of the barrel low-rent conduct for a lawyer.

 

The suit also asked for 48 hours of video footage taken inside the TCF Center where votes were tallied. Of course the TCF Center is where votes were tallied in Detroit, which is as we all know, found in the state of Michigan, not Wisconsin.

So I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say that the courts in Wisconsin will decline to order that video to be turned over.

:mellow:

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GroveDiesel said:

I believe there was a politician that was part of the PA suit that not only was arguing that his own vote should be thrown out, but that his election win be thrown out and no legislature be able to be seated (which would have made it impossible for the legislature to appoint the electors like he wanted).

These guys really aren’t the brightest.

There was a time that I thought that most politicians were crooked, but also very smart. Now I’m pretty sure that many are crooked, but also very not smart. 

Yep, I find the antics of guys like Nunez and McCarthy at the national level depressing in a way I hadn't really experienced before. Lots of others too. The only qualifications for office anymore seem to be naked ambition and a willingness to do anything, exploit anyone to get into office and stay there.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, tommyGunZ said:

LOL.  Sydney Powell won't be receiving death threats for the rest of her life.  She'll be forgotten in 12 months, even by folks like you who will be victims of the biggest case of collective amnesia in a few years when reminded of the insanity of the conspiracy theories you supported.  

 

Sydney Powell isn’t some kind of underdog story.  She made a fortune defending Enron execs and then wrote a book alleging, without factual support, that it was a government conspiracy to prosecute these poor victims.  She’s the ultimate mercenary lawyer, only she’s not that good.  
 

Edited by the rover
  • Like 2
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tommyGunZ said:

LOL.  Sydney Powell won't be receiving death threats for the rest of her life.  She'll be forgotten in 12 months, even by folks like you who will be victims of the biggest case of collective amnesia in a few years when reminded of the insanity of the conspiracy theories you supported.  

 

Dude whoever holds the keys to that account deserves the treatment of he who shall not be named.  No replies, no mentions, just ignored until he goes away.  At least stop quoting that clutter.

Edited by the rover
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, the rover said:

Sydney Powell isn’t some kind of underdog story.  She made a fortune defending Enron execs and then wrote a book alleging, without factual support, that it was a government conspiracy to prosecute these poor victims.  She’s the ultimate mercenary lawyer, only she’s not that good.  
 

She's getting paid. :shrug:

I think that's her only motivation. Maybe a few more minutes of fame for good measure, which she can leverage into more self serving opportunities.

Edited by Gr00vus
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, tommyGunZ said:

...., even by folks like you who will be victims of the biggest case of collective amnesia in a few years when reminded of the insanity of the conspiracy theories you supported.  

 

 

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000176-0ae5-d692-a977-1effb4f90000

 

"What is more, throwing out those votes would conflict with Pennsylvania election law. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has long “liberally construed” its Election Code “to protect voters’ right to vote,” even when a ballot violates a technical requirement. Shambach v. Bickhart, 845 A.2d 793, 802 (Pa. 2004). “Technicalities should not be used to make the right of the voter insecure.” Appeal of James, 105 A.2d 64, 66 (Pa. 1954) (internal quotation marks omitted). That court recently reiterated: “[T]he Election Code should be liberally construed so as not to deprive, inter alia, electors of their right to elect a candidate of their choice.” Pa. Dem. Party, 238 A.3d at 356. Thus, unless there is evidence of fraud, Pennsylvania law overlooks small ballot glitches and respects the expressed intent of every lawful voter. In re: Canvass of Absentee and Mail-in Ballots, 2020 WL 6875017, at 1 (plurality opinion). In our federalist system, we must respect Pennsylvania’s approach to running elections. We will not make more of ballot technicalities than Pennsylvania itself does....

Not every voter can be expected to follow this process perfectly. Some forget one of the envelopes. Others forget to sign on the dotted line. Some major errors will invalidate a ballot. For instance, counties may not count mail-in ballots that lack secrecy envelopes. Pa. Dem. Party v. Boockvar, 238 A.3d 345, 378–80 (Pa. 2020). But the Election Code says nothing about what should happen if a county notices these errors before election day. Some counties stay silent and do not count the ballots; others contact the voters and give them a chance to correct their errors."

 

****

 

Lots of ad hominem and personal shots taken. Low value posting galore.

It's not just Georgia.  And it's not just Totenberg. The PA Supreme Court is actually legislating from the bench with some of it's rulings. And they did it before the election. You can't backdoor your own legislature to determine actual voting requirements with a gavel. That's overreach, especially given the timeline, which becomes borderline criminal. It's openly partisan to boot. The PA Supreme Court has created a system, based on their justification, that creates all kinds of variables where actual poll workers, who should not be in that position, to make a determination on an individual level to turf some votes versus others. SCOTUS Justice Alito already called BS on this and this is just the PA SC squeezing in their own discretion before the actual Supreme Court can get to them.

A forum full of lawyers are suddenly OK with this? If this was REVERSED and this benefited Trump and not Biden, most of you would be sharpening your pitchforks right now.

 

“From all types of lies, excuses are most easily noticeable.”
― Amit Kalantri

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Capella said:

https://twitter.com/tepidbutterasmr/status/1333862192928731142?s=21
 

this Twitter thread is amazing. Country full of brain worms. 

"Michael Hayes "I don't have much to offer" says he was forcibly removed from a polling location. He didn't see fraud, but "a dog wags it tail" so he knows something happened here. He's very close to saying the n word I think."

:lmao::lmao:

  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CletiusMaximus said:

Do you remember 2000?  It was decided by a few hundred votes in one state, where the Governor was the brother of the GOP candidate and the Secretary of State was a raging partisan ideologue.  Despite the historically close margin and numerous highly questionable circumstances (10's of thousands of voters being de-registered shortly before the election), the state was able to avoid even doing one single re-count due to an injunction issued by the US Supreme Court along party lines.  Al Gore graciously conceded the next day.

"I say to President-elect Bush that what remains of partisan rancor must now be put aside, and may God bless his stewardship of this country. Neither he nor I anticipated this long and difficult road. Certainly neither of us wanted it to happen. Yet it came, and now it has ended, resolved, as it must be resolved, through the honored institutions of our democracy."

Its not that one party is better than the other. The president is a deranged fraud, a criminally psychotic swindler. He and his lunatic supporters and enablers are at fault for all of this.


 

 

Romans 12:17-21 New International Version

17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord. 20 On the contrary:

“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
    if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”

21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

 

******

I don't believe in God. Joe Bryant knows that. I never will. A savage like me is beyond redemption. But I've always said on these forums that even if you don't believe in God, that the Bible is still the best self help book ever written.

Two wrongs don't make a right. They just don't.

If you sell your integrity to try to prove otherwise, it could be Trump or it could be Daffy Duck, then you've lost.

Al Gore should have kept fighting. It's a fundamental misunderstanding of Christianity to think humility and peace simply means surrender.

 

“Rationalization is foreplay with one's conscience.”
― Doug Cooper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please stop quoting whoever has the login for that account these days. He’s quoting a loon like Scott Adams and calling it “raising the level of discourse”. Referring to blatantly cynical and un-American opportunism as “bravery” on the part of Trump’s legal team.
 

Just leave the posts to wither away. There’s a bit of dark humor in how sad and deluded they are, until you remember that they aren’t the real, intellectually honest thoughts of a person who can be engaged and held accountable here among peers—they’re the disingenuous creative writing projects of a bored troll who just wants the reaction their outlandish, abrasive posts usually bring. 
 

At least the old posts from that account had a sort of amusing edge to them, both in the FFA and in the Shark Pool. This is just really elaborate and lazy bait cut together with quotes from the internet like some sort of nutty manifesto. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Sea Duck said:

Michael Flynn has tweeted a call for President Trump to declare martial law and to force the country to hold a new election.

This is of course disgraceful and terrifying, but it all makes sense once you see the donation solicitation within. 
 

Also... “Freedom never kneels except before God”? Did these people ever read the Constitution they swear they revere? I googled this thinking it was an established phrase that the extreme right must throw around, but no, it seems Flynn came up with this himself for this tweet. Idiocy. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

Scott Adams is awesome. If you're on Twitter, you should follow him.  LINK

I know who Scott Adams is. The Dilbert guy is a lunatic and not remotely a worthwhile follow. His tweets are awful and he actively lowers people’s IQ’s every day. (If you mean he’s so ridiculous that he’s worth following for the entertainment value, then I get it even if it’s not my thing. Would bring too much crazy-adjacent content to my feed)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, randall146 said:

We don't need the lefty lawyers of the board to say the Trump legal case, strategy, and execution have all been terrible. Real life conservative lawyers and judges say it too. It's pretty much only insane Trumpy lawyers who think there's any merit at all. 

 

Was it?

If half the country refuses to trust the Dominion/Smartmatic systems and demand some other system, one with actual logistical and financial transparency, up to and including mandatory federal voter ID for future elections, how is that terrible?  If enough controversy is generated where there is an overhaul of election procedural reform across all states, how is that terrible for future elections? If Trump has generated this much "Love Trump/Hate Trump" narrative to get this kind of total voter engagement, which will spill over into future elections, how is that terrible?  More people voting and more people investing in their political voice is terrible? If the DNC/RNC can no longer see Latinos and Asians as these big faceless blocks where they can no longer assume those votes are for free, and these groups advocate for more public policy directed in support of their communities, how is that terrible?

The unintended fallout of all this might not all be as tragic as some of you make it out to be.

 

*****

 

https://www.theatlantavoice.com/articles/election2020-trump-coming-back-to-ga/

 

"Powell’s lawsuit claimed a minimum of 96,600 absentee ballots were requested and counted but were never recorded as being returned to county election boards by the voter."

 

That's purely logistical in nature. Be interesting to see where that goes. Biden allegedly won Georgia by 12-13K votes.  Shoot a bunch of arrows, see what sticks. Biden/Harris would do no different if the situation was reversed. But they'd have the entire FBI and MSM on their side though.

Powell just needs to create enough open persistent political cover for state legislatures to choose different electors.

 

******

 

Fareed Zakaria: This is how Republicans keep their power •Sep 27, 2020

CNN's Fareed Zakaria's discusses President Trump's failure to commit to a peaceful transfer of power if he loses the election in November and how he could use other branches of the government to retain his position.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBgw-eEK30w

 

There's a process, let it play out. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:
1 hour ago, Sea Duck said:

Michael Flynn has tweeted a call for President Trump to declare martial law and to force the country to hold a new election.

This is of course disgraceful and terrifying, but it all makes sense once you see the donation solicitation within. 
 

Also... “Freedom never kneels except before God”? Did these people ever read the Constitution they swear they revere? I googled this thinking it was an established phrase that the extreme right must throw around, but no, it seems Flynn came up with this himself for this tweet. Idiocy. 

Sure, it's an awful quote. But look on the bright side: at least he didn't preface the quote with an inconsequential wall of text copied-and-pasted from another website. 👍

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Please stop quoting whoever has the login for that account these days. He’s quoting a loon like Scott Adams and calling it “raising the level of discourse”. Referring to blatantly cynical and un-American opportunism as “bravery” on the part of Trump’s legal team.
 

Just leave the posts to wither away. There’s a bit of dark humor in how sad and deluded they are, until you remember that they aren’t the real, intellectually honest thoughts of a person who can be engaged and held accountable here among peers—they’re the disingenuous creative writing projects of a bored troll who just wants the reaction their outlandish, abrasive posts usually bring. 
 

At least the old posts from that account had a sort of amusing edge to them, both in the FFA and in the Shark Pool. This is just really elaborate and lazy bait cut together with quotes from the internet like some sort of nutty manifesto. 

Remember lh——s?  Most don’t. No quotes, no responses, no recognition.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Please stop quoting whoever has the login for that account these days. He’s quoting a loon like Scott Adams and calling it “raising the level of discourse”. Referring to blatantly cynical and un-American opportunism as “bravery” on the part of Trump’s legal team.
 

Just leave the posts to wither away. There’s a bit of dark humor in how sad and deluded they are, until you remember that they aren’t the real, intellectually honest thoughts of a person who can be engaged and held accountable here among peers—they’re the disingenuous creative writing projects of a bored troll who just wants the reaction their outlandish, abrasive posts usually bring. 
 

At least the old posts from that account had a sort of amusing edge to them, both in the FFA and in the Shark Pool. This is just really elaborate and lazy bait cut together with quotes from the internet like some sort of nutty manifesto. 

 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-imposing-certain-sanctions-event-foreign-interference-united-states-election/

 

(i) the extent to which any foreign interference that targeted election infrastructure materially affected the security or integrity of that infrastructure, the tabulation of votes, or the timely transmission of election results; and

(ii) if any foreign interference involved activities targeting the infrastructure of, or pertaining to, a political organization, campaign, or candidate, the extent to which such activities materially affected the security or integrity of that infrastructure, including by unauthorized access to, disclosure or threatened disclosure of, or alteration or falsification of, information or data.

 

********

 

https://reformationcharlotte.org/2020/12/01/breaking-investigation-reveals-chinese-govt-has-majority-stake-in-dominion-voting-systems/

 

BREAKING: Investigation Reveals Chinese Govt-Tied Bank Has Majority Stake in Dominion Voting Systems

By Jeff Maples

December 1, 2020

An investigation into the SEC filings of a Swiss bank with close connections to the Communist Chinese government has revealed that the firm that owns Dominion voting systems received $400 million from the bank prior to the U.S. elections.

“On Oct 8, 2020, Staple Street Capital filed SEC Form D offerings and sales amount of $400,000,000 with the Sales Compensation Recipient identified as UBS Securities,” states the investigation, which also notes that another payment of $200,000,000 was received in December 2014.

“UBS Securities is a Swiss investment bank which owns 24.99% of UBS Securities Co LTD, a Chinese Investment Bank. The remaining 75% of UBS Securities CO LTD is owned by the Chinese government.”

The recipient of the $400 million in stock, according to the SEC filings, as UBS Securities LLC located in New York City. UBS Securities LLC is a subsidiary of the Chinese-owned UBS Securities Co. LTD.

The ownership of UBS Securities Co. LTD is broken down as follows:

Beijing Guoxiang (33%)

UBS (24.99%)

Guangdong Comm. Group [zh] (14.01%)

China Guodian (14%)

COFCO Group (14%)

The other four owners of UBS Securities are all Chinese government front groups, including Beijing Guoxiang, a state-owned asset, Guangdong Comm. Group, a 100% stakeholder is the Guangdong Provincial Government, China Guodian, a state-owned enterprise administered for the SASAC for the state Council, and COFCO Group, a state-owned enterprise under the direct supervision of the SASAC.

“Staple Street Capital LLC on Oct 5, 2020, filed a public stock offering with the SEC with the broker UBS Securities,” said Alan Tomalty, “a Chinese Communist company with connection to UBS Switzerland as part investors. Staple Street Capital have controlling interest in Dominion Voting Systems.”

 

******

Simpler breakdown:

An institutional investment fund named Staple Street Capital III, newly incorporated in 2020, made an offering of their shares, valued at $400 million dollars.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1827586/000182758620000001/xslFormDX01/primary_doc.xml

SSC used a brokerage firm called UBS Securities LLC as the underwriter for the offering, which also has an office in the building across the street (1285 Avenue of the Americas, New York City)

https://www.buyoutsinsider.com/ex-carlyle-cerberus-execs-shop-staple-street-holds-one-and-done-close-on-fund-iii/

An investment firm called Staple Street Capital was founded in 2009 (same directors). They bought into Dominion in 2018.

https://www.globalbankingandfinance.com/dominion-voting-systems-acquired-by-its-management-team-and-staple-street-capital/

UBS Securities LLC is a subsidiary of UBS, a major Swiss investment bank. Both used an intermediary, UBS Securities Co Ltd, which is a joint venture between UBS (25%) and various Chinese government-level investment organizations ( 75%) -- Beijing Municipal Government, Guangdong Provincial Government, China Guodian and COFCO ( The latter two are subsidiaries of the Chinese national government via SASAC).

Dominion was bought in 2018 ( SSC / undisclosed stake & sum.)  In October 2020, that same firm (different corporation but same board of directors) received a $400 million cash infusion from a Chinese-controlled bank.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-imposing-certain-sanctions-event-foreign-interference-united-states-election/

 

(i) the extent to which any foreign interference that targeted election infrastructure materially affected the security or integrity of that infrastructure, the tabulation of votes, or the timely transmission of election results; and

(ii) if any foreign interference involved activities targeting the infrastructure of, or pertaining to, a political organization, campaign, or candidate, the extent to which such activities materially affected the security or integrity of that infrastructure, including by unauthorized access to, disclosure or threatened disclosure of, or alteration or falsification of, information or data.

 

********

 

https://reformationcharlotte.org/2020/12/01/breaking-investigation-reveals-chinese-govt-has-majority-stake-in-dominion-voting-systems/

 

BREAKING: Investigation Reveals Chinese Govt-Tied Bank Has Majority Stake in Dominion Voting Systems

By Jeff Maples

December 1, 2020

An investigation into the SEC filings of a Swiss bank with close connections to the Communist Chinese government has revealed that the firm that owns Dominion voting systems received $400 million from the bank prior to the U.S. elections.

“On Oct 8, 2020, Staple Street Capital filed SEC Form D offerings and sales amount of $400,000,000 with the Sales Compensation Recipient identified as UBS Securities,” states the investigation, which also notes that another payment of $200,000,000 was received in December 2014.

“UBS Securities is a Swiss investment bank which owns 24.99% of UBS Securities Co LTD, a Chinese Investment Bank. The remaining 75% of UBS Securities CO LTD is owned by the Chinese government.”

The recipient of the $400 million in stock, according to the SEC filings, as UBS Securities LLC located in New York City. UBS Securities LLC is a subsidiary of the Chinese-owned UBS Securities Co. LTD.

The ownership of UBS Securities Co. LTD is broken down as follows:

Beijing Guoxiang (33%)

UBS (24.99%)

Guangdong Comm. Group [zh] (14.01%)

China Guodian (14%)

COFCO Group (14%)

The other four owners of UBS Securities are all Chinese government front groups, including Beijing Guoxiang, a state-owned asset, Guangdong Comm. Group, a 100% stakeholder is the Guangdong Provincial Government, China Guodian, a state-owned enterprise administered for the SASAC for the state Council, and COFCO Group, a state-owned enterprise under the direct supervision of the SASAC.

“Staple Street Capital LLC on Oct 5, 2020, filed a public stock offering with the SEC with the broker UBS Securities,” said Alan Tomalty, “a Chinese Communist company with connection to UBS Switzerland as part investors. Staple Street Capital have controlling interest in Dominion Voting Systems.”

 

******

Simpler breakdown:

An institutional investment fund named Staple Street Capital III, newly incorporated in 2020, made an offering of their shares, valued at $400 million dollars.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1827586/000182758620000001/xslFormDX01/primary_doc.xml

SSC used a brokerage firm called UBS Securities LLC as the underwriter for the offering, which also has an office in the building across the street (1285 Avenue of the Americas, New York City)

https://www.buyoutsinsider.com/ex-carlyle-cerberus-execs-shop-staple-street-holds-one-and-done-close-on-fund-iii/

An investment firm called Staple Street Capital was founded in 2009 (same directors). They bought into Dominion in 2018.

https://www.globalbankingandfinance.com/dominion-voting-systems-acquired-by-its-management-team-and-staple-street-capital/

UBS Securities LLC is a subsidiary of UBS, a major Swiss investment bank. Both used an intermediary, UBS Securities Co Ltd, which is a joint venture between UBS (25%) and various Chinese government-level investment organizations ( 75%) -- Beijing Municipal Government, Guangdong Provincial Government, China Guodian and COFCO ( The latter two are subsidiaries of the Chinese national government via SASAC).

Dominion was bought in 2018 ( SSC / undisclosed stake & sum.)  In October 2020, that same firm (different corporation but same board of directors) received a $400 million cash infusion from a Chinese-controlled bank.

 

https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/reform/resplans/plans/ubs-165-1807.pdf

Here is a copy of UBS Group AG's Resolution Plan in 2018, filed with the FDIC.  On page 3, you can see their org chart.   On it, it states that UBS Securities LLC is jointly owned by UBS Americas Holding LLC (32%) and UBS Americas Inc. (68%).  It has nothing to do with UBS Securities Co Ltd other than it's parent being a part owner of that Chinese entity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-imposing-certain-sanctions-event-foreign-interference-united-states-election/

 

(i) the extent to which any foreign interference that targeted election infrastructure materially affected the security or integrity of that infrastructure, the tabulation of votes, or the timely transmission of election results; and

(ii) if any foreign interference involved activities targeting the infrastructure of, or pertaining to, a political organization, campaign, or candidate, the extent to which such activities materially affected the security or integrity of that infrastructure, including by unauthorized access to, disclosure or threatened disclosure of, or alteration or falsification of, information or data.

 

********

 

https://reformationcharlotte.org/2020/12/01/breaking-investigation-reveals-chinese-govt-has-majority-stake-in-dominion-voting-systems/

 

BREAKING: Investigation Reveals Chinese Govt-Tied Bank Has Majority Stake in Dominion Voting Systems

By Jeff Maples

December 1, 2020

An investigation into the SEC filings of a Swiss bank with close connections to the Communist Chinese government has revealed that the firm that owns Dominion voting systems received $400 million from the bank prior to the U.S. elections.

“On Oct 8, 2020, Staple Street Capital filed SEC Form D offerings and sales amount of $400,000,000 with the Sales Compensation Recipient identified as UBS Securities,” states the investigation, which also notes that another payment of $200,000,000 was received in December 2014.

“UBS Securities is a Swiss investment bank which owns 24.99% of UBS Securities Co LTD, a Chinese Investment Bank. The remaining 75% of UBS Securities CO LTD is owned by the Chinese government.”

The recipient of the $400 million in stock, according to the SEC filings, as UBS Securities LLC located in New York City. UBS Securities LLC is a subsidiary of the Chinese-owned UBS Securities Co. LTD.

The ownership of UBS Securities Co. LTD is broken down as follows:

Beijing Guoxiang (33%)

UBS (24.99%)

Guangdong Comm. Group [zh] (14.01%)

China Guodian (14%)

COFCO Group (14%)

The other four owners of UBS Securities are all Chinese government front groups, including Beijing Guoxiang, a state-owned asset, Guangdong Comm. Group, a 100% stakeholder is the Guangdong Provincial Government, China Guodian, a state-owned enterprise administered for the SASAC for the state Council, and COFCO Group, a state-owned enterprise under the direct supervision of the SASAC.

“Staple Street Capital LLC on Oct 5, 2020, filed a public stock offering with the SEC with the broker UBS Securities,” said Alan Tomalty, “a Chinese Communist company with connection to UBS Switzerland as part investors. Staple Street Capital have controlling interest in Dominion Voting Systems.”

 

******

Simpler breakdown:

An institutional investment fund named Staple Street Capital III, newly incorporated in 2020, made an offering of their shares, valued at $400 million dollars.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1827586/000182758620000001/xslFormDX01/primary_doc.xml

SSC used a brokerage firm called UBS Securities LLC as the underwriter for the offering, which also has an office in the building across the street (1285 Avenue of the Americas, New York City)

https://www.buyoutsinsider.com/ex-carlyle-cerberus-execs-shop-staple-street-holds-one-and-done-close-on-fund-iii/

An investment firm called Staple Street Capital was founded in 2009 (same directors). They bought into Dominion in 2018.

https://www.globalbankingandfinance.com/dominion-voting-systems-acquired-by-its-management-team-and-staple-street-capital/

UBS Securities LLC is a subsidiary of UBS, a major Swiss investment bank. Both used an intermediary, UBS Securities Co Ltd, which is a joint venture between UBS (25%) and various Chinese government-level investment organizations ( 75%) -- Beijing Municipal Government, Guangdong Provincial Government, China Guodian and COFCO ( The latter two are subsidiaries of the Chinese national government via SASAC).

Dominion was bought in 2018 ( SSC / undisclosed stake & sum.)  In October 2020, that same firm (different corporation but same board of directors) received a $400 million cash infusion from a Chinese-controlled bank.

 

Also, as I'm reading over your post, in Jeff Maples' article, he says "UBS Securities is a Swiss investment bank which owns 24.99% of UBS Securities Co LTD, a Chinese Investment Bank. The remaining 75% of UBS Securities CO LTD is owned by the Chinese government."

And then, following that, says "UBS Securities LLC is a subsidiary of the Chinese-owned UBS Securities Co. LTD."

Well, which is it?  Is it an owner or a subsidiary?   This makes no sense at all.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...